Turning the plane upside down doesn't generate any G's. Barrel roll, not loop.
Dancin Santa
Re:Nothing much has changed
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
So how much should they be paid? It doesn't have to be a specific number, just some method of determining an acceptable compensation level.
Here's mine: whatever the market will bear.
As far as the difference in rate of growth of compensation, how many "workers" continued up the corporate ladder to management positions and saw their paychecks adjusted accordingly? New 'average workers' are entering the workforce all the time to replace the upwardly-moving workers, do you have the numbers that show the growth of compensation across all levels of employment, not just the bottom and the top?
Thanks,
Dancin Santa
Re:Nothing much has changed
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
Sure, except that Company B down the street is willing to pay 'company growth'+100%+50% signing bonus to acquire your CEO. All of a sudden, your CEO is worth a whole lot more than the company's previous year growth.
You can realistically write the same story for the top software engineers at any particular company. They are probably worth a whole lot more than they are paid currently.
Basically, the value of a CEO is not 'previous year's growth', it is some multiple of that.
Re:But Jimmy Hoffa is missing
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
Steve Jobs? I'm sure you could think of some other people you'd like to have disappear'd way before Jobs... *cough*Gates*cough*Ellison*hack*McNealy*harumph*
Dancin Santa
And this is the latent prejudice that is behind much of the unionization movement. What is not revealed is that though some companies are laying off like it's going out of style, those same laid off workers are being snatched up by companies who can't hire fast enough.
Dancin Santa
Re:Nothing much has changed
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
Between 1990 and 1998, overall inflation was about 22.5 percent.
Average worker (non-executive) pay increased by about 28 percent (minus inflation, natch).
CEO compensation...rose about 481 percent.
So you're saying that the people who make decisions that affect an entire organization shouldn't be paid as much as they are? Considering that a large number of companies actually go out of business every year because of stupid mistakes of the CEO, what would you say a reasonable compensation package should total for a CEO who keeps a company humming along nicely?
Training
This is a pretty good reason, but what amount of training is necessary? Training engineers to do a job beyond what they were hired to do is not in the company's best interest, that's why they don't offer it in many places. However, most companies will offer training on the existing or newly implemented systems, and those skills are transferable.
Establishing standards for software development
Like anyone really wants this...;-)
Protecting benefits
IANAL, but wouldn't the company have to compensate you at whatever amount they signed to on your employment contract?
Forced overtime and the H1-B visa
Forced overtime and H1-B visas are two separate issues.
Forced overtime is an integral part of software development. This isn't highrise construction we're talking about here where a single contractor will be responsible for a single structure. Software is on the most highly competitive industries today. If your company averages 40 hours a week of productivity per employee, it's going to get eaten by the company that averages 45 hours a week of productivity. Schedules are short because they have to be. Unless you are an Open Source company (or even if you are) you are hampered only by your own ability to produce. Unions will do nothing to alleviate forced overtime.
H1-Bs are a terrible visa system, but frankly the only one that the U.S. has got. It would be better to have a visa that allowed job title changes, longer "out of work" periods (it's 10 days currently), and easier transition to permanent resident status (green card). However, the unions seem to be focused on getting rid of foreign workers altogether in an effort to "save American jobs", rather than supporting foreign workers' right to employment in a global economy.
As an outed Karma Whore, I'll flesh out the conjecture that I made previously all the while sounding like an authority.;-)
FT pays Jabber.com to gain a stake in their business. Jabber.com is not especially known for their money-making abilities and gladly accepts the funding. FT then orders Jabber.com to fork the Jabber tree and create a new incompatible version of the messaging system (maybe not using XML but some other system, I don't know). Let's call this new system Rebbaj. Development continues on Jabber in the open, but FT keeps a close watch to make sure that no Rebbaj code slips through to Jabber.
Jabber.com continues to bleed money and FT continues to prop it up. Eventually FT stops funding Jabber.com and begins hiring talent away leaving a crippled Jabber.com. Jabber.com declares bankruptcy and all unchecked-in Jabber source code is turned over to Jabber.org. Meanwhile FT now controls Rebbaj which no one except a group of engineers internal to Jabber.com knew existed. FT is then able to freely call Rebbaj their own (after all, they own 23% of the company) and distribute it under whatever license they see fit.
Do you have some secret agenda? Do you work for AOL?
No secret agenda, I just don't think putting faith into FT as a benevolent Open Source contributor is such an easy thing to do.
The goal of Jabber is to create an open (and better) standard for IM instead of having multible standards as we have now.
I agree. But what is FT's goal? Beyond what their press release says?
I believe that is the most important news article of the year. It ranks behind the development of Viagra on the all-time list, but it's definitely up there.
And I thought all those 'suction powered' devices were a scam...
Moglen added that Microsoft is threatened by the power of free software: "Microsoft, which used to say all the time that the software business was ruthlessly competitive, is now matched against a competitor whose model of production and distribution is so much better that Microsoft stands no chance of prevailing in the long run."
Really, community development hasn't been proven to be better than closed development.
Also, doesn't Eben Moglen sound like the name of a character from a D&D-based novel?
This article shows that those with an inordinate amount of time to spend on a product are the only ones who can truly 'give back' to the Open Source community. The technical detail and aptitude shown in the article is pretty deep, but who could have come up with so good a report? Only someone paid to develop the product.
The more Linux moves towards a fully functioning OS with all the bells and whistles, the less its source remains accessible to the common hacker. It takes time to work on something as intricate as a runtime linker, and it is unlikely that someone with a job outside a dedicated Linux company would have the time to gainfully produce ideas, concepts, and code for the Linux system.
What made Linux a fun hacker's OS was the ability to wade through code and tweak to your heart's content. With all the growth that Linux has achieved, that is no longer possible.
That's kind of what I got out of the article as well. However, with the wind tunnel experiment, it should be possible to calculate the actual amount of force generated by the Bernoulli effect over the whole area of the wing.
The author seemed to disbelieve that airspeed above and below the wing differed. I'm surely not as qualified as he to quibble, but without more information it's hard to come to any sort of conclusion.
- Because current messaging is getting old. SMS is excellent for simple messaging between phones but thats about it
So they want a replacement for messaging. Makes sense.
- Because they want to be able to deliver other applications over IM
Sounds like a good idea, but how much functionality are you looking for? And realistically, how much functionality can you provide over IM?
- Because there doesn't yet exist an IM solution that will work on every device, and Jabber just might be the one to do that
So might any other piece of code. There's nothing special about Jabber that makes it particularly easier to port any more than any other IM software.
- Because its an Open Standard so it is more likely that third parties will devlop applications for it which FT can rebrand without the expense of developing apps themselves
First, it's doubtful that 3rd parties will develop anything for Jabber just because it is Open. Second, FT doesn't gain anything by donating money to Jabber, at least anything they couldn't have usurped without paying.
- And probably a bunch more reasons that I haven't mentioned
Because you're pulling these reasons out of your ass?
This is only conjecture, but this may be a preliminary move by FT to shut up the Jabber community when FT eventually decides to take the source and shut it away. They can always dangle the carrot of more funding and threaten to pull it away if anyone objects to their movements.
Really, it should be easy to verify if air is moving faster over the top of the wing than the bottom with a simple experiment.
1) Get a wing
2) Stick it in a wind tunnel
3) Attach airspeed measurement devices on the top and bottom (these have names, I'm sure)
4) Start the wind tunnel and measure the difference in airspeed between the top and bottom of the wing
5) Adjust the angle of attack and see if that makes a difference
The technology already exists to send messages back and forth between mobile devices. Unless FT is looking to build some sort of proprietary version of Jabber, there doesn't seem to be any reason for them to have bought it in the first place.
What about transporters? Isn't anyone working on those? I saw them in Tron and all the Star Trek movies, someone's got to have some good ideas...
Really, keeping the elevator correctly pressurized has got to be a headache. After a few thousand feet we're going to have a whole bunch of dead people being elevated.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember what I said earlier? Uhh... forget it..
Seems I was a little too irrationally exuberant.
Dancin Santa
Turning the plane upside down doesn't generate any G's. Barrel roll, not loop.
Dancin Santa
So how much should they be paid? It doesn't have to be a specific number, just some method of determining an acceptable compensation level.
Here's mine: whatever the market will bear.
As far as the difference in rate of growth of compensation, how many "workers" continued up the corporate ladder to management positions and saw their paychecks adjusted accordingly? New 'average workers' are entering the workforce all the time to replace the upwardly-moving workers, do you have the numbers that show the growth of compensation across all levels of employment, not just the bottom and the top?
Thanks,
Dancin Santa
Sure, except that Company B down the street is willing to pay 'company growth'+100%+50% signing bonus to acquire your CEO. All of a sudden, your CEO is worth a whole lot more than the company's previous year growth.
You can realistically write the same story for the top software engineers at any particular company. They are probably worth a whole lot more than they are paid currently.
Basically, the value of a CEO is not 'previous year's growth', it is some multiple of that.
Dancin Santa
Is that you, Bill Gates?
Dancin Santa
Steve Jobs? I'm sure you could think of some other people you'd like to have disappear'd way before Jobs... *cough*Gates*cough*Ellison*hack*McNealy*harumph*
Dancin Santa
And this is the latent prejudice that is behind much of the unionization movement. What is not revealed is that though some companies are laying off like it's going out of style, those same laid off workers are being snatched up by companies who can't hire fast enough.
Dancin Santa
Between 1990 and 1998, overall inflation was about 22.5 percent.
Average worker (non-executive) pay increased by about 28 percent (minus inflation, natch).
CEO compensation...rose about 481 percent.
So you're saying that the people who make decisions that affect an entire organization shouldn't be paid as much as they are? Considering that a large number of companies actually go out of business every year because of stupid mistakes of the CEO, what would you say a reasonable compensation package should total for a CEO who keeps a company humming along nicely?
Dancin Santa
The issues that are on their minds:
;-)
Training
This is a pretty good reason, but what amount of training is necessary? Training engineers to do a job beyond what they were hired to do is not in the company's best interest, that's why they don't offer it in many places. However, most companies will offer training on the existing or newly implemented systems, and those skills are transferable.
Establishing standards for software development
Like anyone really wants this...
Protecting benefits
IANAL, but wouldn't the company have to compensate you at whatever amount they signed to on your employment contract?
Forced overtime and the H1-B visa
Forced overtime and H1-B visas are two separate issues.
Forced overtime is an integral part of software development. This isn't highrise construction we're talking about here where a single contractor will be responsible for a single structure. Software is on the most highly competitive industries today. If your company averages 40 hours a week of productivity per employee, it's going to get eaten by the company that averages 45 hours a week of productivity. Schedules are short because they have to be. Unless you are an Open Source company (or even if you are) you are hampered only by your own ability to produce. Unions will do nothing to alleviate forced overtime.
H1-Bs are a terrible visa system, but frankly the only one that the U.S. has got. It would be better to have a visa that allowed job title changes, longer "out of work" periods (it's 10 days currently), and easier transition to permanent resident status (green card). However, the unions seem to be focused on getting rid of foreign workers altogether in an effort to "save American jobs", rather than supporting foreign workers' right to employment in a global economy.
Anyway, that's just my karma whore opinion.
Dancin Santa
As an outed Karma Whore, I'll flesh out the conjecture that I made previously all the while sounding like an authority. ;-)
FT pays Jabber.com to gain a stake in their business. Jabber.com is not especially known for their money-making abilities and gladly accepts the funding. FT then orders Jabber.com to fork the Jabber tree and create a new incompatible version of the messaging system (maybe not using XML but some other system, I don't know). Let's call this new system Rebbaj. Development continues on Jabber in the open, but FT keeps a close watch to make sure that no Rebbaj code slips through to Jabber.
Jabber.com continues to bleed money and FT continues to prop it up. Eventually FT stops funding Jabber.com and begins hiring talent away leaving a crippled Jabber.com. Jabber.com declares bankruptcy and all unchecked-in Jabber source code is turned over to Jabber.org. Meanwhile FT now controls Rebbaj which no one except a group of engineers internal to Jabber.com knew existed. FT is then able to freely call Rebbaj their own (after all, they own 23% of the company) and distribute it under whatever license they see fit.
Do you have some secret agenda? Do you work for AOL?
No secret agenda, I just don't think putting faith into FT as a benevolent Open Source contributor is such an easy thing to do.
The goal of Jabber is to create an open (and better) standard for IM instead of having multible standards as we have now.
I agree. But what is FT's goal? Beyond what their press release says?
Dancin Santa
Was that Karma whorish enough?
I believe that is the most important news article of the year. It ranks behind the development of Viagra on the all-time list, but it's definitely up there.
And I thought all those 'suction powered' devices were a scam...
Dancin Santa
Moglen added that Microsoft is threatened by the power of free software: "Microsoft, which used to say all the time that the software business was ruthlessly competitive, is now matched against a competitor whose model of production and distribution is so much better that Microsoft stands no chance of prevailing in the long run."
Really, community development hasn't been proven to be better than closed development.
Also, doesn't Eben Moglen sound like the name of a character from a D&D-based novel?
Dancin Santa
This article shows that those with an inordinate amount of time to spend on a product are the only ones who can truly 'give back' to the Open Source community. The technical detail and aptitude shown in the article is pretty deep, but who could have come up with so good a report? Only someone paid to develop the product.
The more Linux moves towards a fully functioning OS with all the bells and whistles, the less its source remains accessible to the common hacker. It takes time to work on something as intricate as a runtime linker, and it is unlikely that someone with a job outside a dedicated Linux company would have the time to gainfully produce ideas, concepts, and code for the Linux system.
What made Linux a fun hacker's OS was the ability to wade through code and tweak to your heart's content. With all the growth that Linux has achieved, that is no longer possible.
Dancin Santa
That's kind of what I got out of the article as well. However, with the wind tunnel experiment, it should be possible to calculate the actual amount of force generated by the Bernoulli effect over the whole area of the wing.
The author seemed to disbelieve that airspeed above and below the wing differed. I'm surely not as qualified as he to quibble, but without more information it's hard to come to any sort of conclusion.
It's a very tempting theory, though.
Dancin Santa
- Because current messaging is getting old. SMS is excellent for simple messaging between phones but thats about it
So they want a replacement for messaging. Makes sense.
- Because they want to be able to deliver other applications over IM
Sounds like a good idea, but how much functionality are you looking for? And realistically, how much functionality can you provide over IM?
- Because there doesn't yet exist an IM solution that will work on every device, and Jabber just might be the one to do that
So might any other piece of code. There's nothing special about Jabber that makes it particularly easier to port any more than any other IM software.
- Because its an Open Standard so it is more likely that third parties will devlop applications for it which FT can rebrand without the expense of developing apps themselves
First, it's doubtful that 3rd parties will develop anything for Jabber just because it is Open. Second, FT doesn't gain anything by donating money to Jabber, at least anything they couldn't have usurped without paying.
- And probably a bunch more reasons that I haven't mentioned
Because you're pulling these reasons out of your ass?
This is only conjecture, but this may be a preliminary move by FT to shut up the Jabber community when FT eventually decides to take the source and shut it away. They can always dangle the carrot of more funding and threaten to pull it away if anyone objects to their movements.
Dancin Santa
That makes some sense, but really, minutes are pretty cheap these days.
PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL THEM IF YOU NEED TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM!
*whew*
Dancin Santa
Really, it should be easy to verify if air is moving faster over the top of the wing than the bottom with a simple experiment.
1) Get a wing
2) Stick it in a wind tunnel
3) Attach airspeed measurement devices on the top and bottom (these have names, I'm sure)
4) Start the wind tunnel and measure the difference in airspeed between the top and bottom of the wing
5) Adjust the angle of attack and see if that makes a difference
Otherwise, this is all talk.
Dancin Santa
The technology already exists to send messages back and forth between mobile devices. Unless FT is looking to build some sort of proprietary version of Jabber, there doesn't seem to be any reason for them to have bought it in the first place.
Dancin Santa
What about transporters? Isn't anyone working on those? I saw them in Tron and all the Star Trek movies, someone's got to have some good ideas...
Really, keeping the elevator correctly pressurized has got to be a headache. After a few thousand feet we're going to have a whole bunch of dead people being elevated.
Perhaps they can play Stairway to Heaven...
Dancin Santa
Whoa...
Dancin Santa
It will give you a jump on the emerging .Net framework which bases much of its transactions on SOAP.
Dancin Santa
Win2k has got you all beat by about 1997.4. Though it only beats OSX by MCMXC.
Dancin Santa
There is hope for the future of Linux on Sparc! It's you. Oh, you're not up to the task?
Then all is lost.
No, there is another... *gazing towards the ceiling tiles*
Dancin Santa
It's non-stick and is equipped with space-age technologies to make cleanup a snap.
Dancin Santa
Or MIX. WTF is up with that?
Dancin Santa