And you think bosses even consider the bioethicist points of view?
That's almost as funny as the implicit claim that research funding is ethically constrained.
Sure, by definition bosses consider a bioethicist's (or other consultants') point of view. They consider it when they hire them and they consider it when they fire them. The employed bioethicist will probably know who paying the bills and what answer the boss wants to hear.
Thus the comment that all research funding is ethically constrained is effectively a tautology. If the research requires funding, it mirror the ethics of the funding.
This new Java script attack does *NOT* by itself compromise data, but simply allow a way to remotely extract the Address Space Layout Randomization that is currently employed by the OS. It does this by employing a javascript timer to measure page table walk times which are induced by executing javascript that accesses carefully selected offset in large objects (an earlier attempt to do this was frustrated by javascript implementations deliberately sabotaging the built-in high precision timer object). Once the specific ASLR pattern is determined for this specific boot of the kernel, other kernel vulnerabilities that involved direct access to aliased cache and/or memory locations that were mitigated by the kernel doing ASLR can now be modified to target the desired addresses on the target.
It's like knowing how to make key to break into a specific car, but if you use it on the wrong car, it triggers the car alarm and not knowing what car the key it works on. If you magically had a way to map the VIN to the car key, you could make a key that works for that car and steal the car. The car dealers have this mapping, so they can make a key for you, but what someone came up with a way to figure out the VIN->KEY mapping over the internet?
Happens all the time... Most modern trolleybuses (e.g, SanFran and Vancouver) have batteries and/or small diesel engines that allow them to operate a short time off-wire (which can also be used to overtake). Even in older system, multiple parallel paths with switches in strategic locations allowed for express service overtake.
Bus companies have a lot of passenger use data that can be used to redo routes...
Although that is theoretically possible, if you've observed the actual process that public bus companies need to go through to change routes (public hearings, legal protests, community outreach, political meddling), and the potential uncertainty on how that affects the farebox recovery rate, you would realize why they don't just change their bus routes to something more efficient even though they have the passenger use data to justify it...
Joe sixpack doesn't give a damn about what makes his car move as long as it's cheap.
As long as there's a way to get a "cool" version to impress their friends. If all electric cars look like a Prius, I'm sure many won't give a damn about them (and no, Joe sixpack can't afford a Tesla Roadster or other electric supercar). Make electric cars like a F150, Mustang or Camero, then nobody will care if they are electric...
They're qualities that are culturally encouraged or culturally disavowed to varying degrees in different parts of the world. What appears to be human nature is highly subject to ones environment.
Apparently it only takes a very short amount of time in an environment to exhibit "human nature" as illustrated by the Milgram and Stanford Prison experiments...
Perhaps it is more accurate to say what appears to be human nature is highly subject to one's societal situation. I probably would not even attribute much to the environment which you grew up in or which you currently live. Probably even less nurture, than simply nature+immediate circumstance. Remember we have quite a bit of so-called "reptilian" brain-functions in our human brains...
No.. other countries only get a handful of h1b slots. I know this because I explored h1b as a means of getting my japanese wife (then girlfriend) into the country.
H1B are not country specific, all H1B applications are divided into pools (based on the advanced degree exceptions among others), If there is enough space under the cap, *all* H1B applications are processed. *ONLY* if the number of H1B applications exceeds the cap, they process applications by a random selection process (aka lottery except for the categories that are unlimited). There is no country quota in the pools. It's the Green Cards that are country specific.
The problem is that Indian staffing companies flood the H1B application process and the cap is hit pretty much every year, so they are pretty much running the lottery all the time, so H1B is a crap shoot... Much more predictable is the K-1 (aka fiance) visa route.
However, if your japanese girlfriend somehow managed to get an H1B (by qualifying for an unlimited exception, or winning the lottery). She can file for adjustment of status and apply for a green card immediately after she got her H1B. She would likely have had no problem getting an employment-based green card in a couple of years if an employer sponsored her. This experience would be unlike a person from India who even if they got a H1B would be limited by the 7% cap for green cards and would probably struggle to get a green card before their H1B visa expired in 7 years...
Apparently this PewDie bro used to make money making Rape jokes videos, but apparently Maker Studios (Disney) was okay with that because of "money". Now, as a "joke", this bro paid random people to $5 (on fiver) to record themselves holding antisemitic signs and felt remorse...
So, by using fiver to point out that anyone will do anything for money, but probably later regret it, he pointed out to Disney their course of action...
However, it seems I misjudged the H-1B program specifically-- the truth is that I thought it was an alternative path for immigration (which, based on your comment, it seems not to be).
Actually H-1B can be a defacto alternative path for immigration. It is one of a few *dual-intent* visas that allow you to simultaneously be a guest worker, and apply for a green card (which gives you resident alien status). The problem specifically for India and China is the lack of available green-card slots at the end of the H-1B 6-year tunnel as employment based green-cards from a specific country are limited to 7% of the max total. Basically no other countries come close to the limit, so they are the only which are actually impacted in the ability to convert an H-1B to a Green Card, so H-1B is effectively a path for immigration for many high tech workers *NOT* from India or China.
The H1-B *gotcha* is that if the employee only qualifies for EB3 green card status (employment based preference level, basically a Bachelor's degree only) the employer needs to sponsor the green card and that is where the staffing companies can withhold this support and effectively make H-1B into indentured service. If the employee only qualifies for EB3 level preference and they are immigrating from India or China, well, the 7%/country bottleneck will make it unlikely for them to get a green card before their 6-year H1-B expires without lots of support from their employer and if they used up say 3 of 6 years, it's mighty unattractive to an alternate employer to hire them away so they are effectively stuck...
On the other hand, if the employee qualifies for EB1 or EB2 (basically extraordinary ability, PhD, masters+5years, or executive preference level), they can probably self-sponsor (and often companies will sponsor them anyways as a good will measure) and these are not the stereotypical low-wage H1-Bs and are ahead of the queue for those seeking green cards from a country with only EB3 preference.
To move from a place with a support structure takes a huge leap of faith, and it really helps if you trust that the company that you are moving for will keep you around for long enough to get your feet into the new place. There isn't that much trust or support out there any more.
This is why people really only move to places where the eco-system supports it (e.g., Silicon Valley, Austin, Beltway, etc). That way if your company bails on you, there are other options (you trust the location, not the company).
Unfortunately these goto places have gotten so expensive that it doesn't appear to meet the cost-performance trade-off for many millennials, but I think that is mostly a problem because of fear. I'm not saying that the risk is lower (it's probably higher than average risk right at this moment, but probably not historically so), but given a long enough time horizon, the benefit is probably still there.
My guess is that many millennials have both developed a shortened time-scale for risk-tolerance (e.g., want to "make-it" before they are 30) and simultaneously have developed more tribal instincts about unfamiliar locations (e.g., is it possible to make friends and a family with those who are locals because "they" are not "us"). I blame social networking for both of these issues. Even if we keep it local to the USA, tribalism is rampant. People used to want to discover the USA (e.g., roadtrip) and discover themselves in the process, now it's "fly-over-country" and I am defined by my peers. It's just a shame.
AFAIK, the costs sustained from moving for work is technically an income adjustment. There is no need to itemize this as a deduction to receive it and can also reduce your income to a level to allow you to qualify for other deductions which may be phased out at higher income levels.
Hopefully this time they don't bail out the banks and and the idiots who bought mcmansions.
And how do you imagine that would work out? If everyone's bank accounts suddenly evaporate, your savings will be gone. And your employer's bank accounts will disappear. And your employer's customers' bank accounts will disappear. And then you have riots in the streets.
I suppose the houses that escape the fires will be cheaper, assuming anyone has money to buy them. You won't be able to get a loan because the banks will be gone, and you'll have no savings, so it's not clear where that money will come from.. And it's not clear what currency anyone will be accepting.
Cyprus set the template for the bail-in. Basically, they can freeze all "cash-equivalent" assets for weeks and when unfrozen, everything above the FDIC** insurance limit takes a haircut (40% in the case of Cyprus)... This event basically put everyone on notice to have a contingency plan for this. If your employer doesn't have a contingency for this, they are stupid. If you are carrying cash-equivalent assets above the FDIC/SIPC limit, you are either too rich to care, or have stupidly invested your money.
The theory of the bail-in, is that it forces "rich" folks to take appropriate risks with their money and not burden the state with being the backstop for deposit insurance to those that should be able to manage the risk. Some people don't seem to understand that in order to work at all, it requires the *pause* (frozen-assets), otherwise these events just precipitates a bank run.
Historically, in order to avoid major FDIC insurance impact of liquidation, the FDIC has shopped the bank assets to other banks (so-called purchase and assumption agreements), but has needed to kick in a sweetener to cover the over FDIC limit deposits. Now the FDIC can simply convert over-limit FDIC deposits into bank-shares which eliminates the need for them to kick in the sweetener. Unfortunately, the rules are ambiguous an allow them to convert *any deposits* into bank-shares if it is deemed necessary if it "mitigates the potential for serious adverse effects to the financial system.”
**of course in Cyprus, the insurance limit was defined by the EU...
If a hacker didn't have XOFF = Ctrl-S (XON = Ctrl-Q), wired into their synapses, you pretty much wouldn't be able to keep up with a 2400 baud modem (1200, was just on the limit)
The US will probably need all that tax-payers money elsewhere to build the wall to Mexico, so why not use the European Galileo Satelite Navigation instead - which already provides for much better spatial resolution?
At least they flagged a potential reliability problem with GPS *before* they were launched. ESA is still trying to figure out what the reliability problem with their clocks might be...
...sloppy utility that doesn't quite match its description...
What started out as a useful utility has descended down such a hell hole that I had to uninstall it... Removing it from the Playstore would be the next logical step.
A lot of people do commute 100 miles to San Francisco, every work day.
If those people have UBI, why would so many of them commute 100 miles to SF every work day? The only function UBI might possibly have is to remove some people from the demand pool that is driving up the cost of real-estate. For those that choose to continue to play housing roulette, very little will change, for those that leave, they leave the SF bay area completely...
The truth is most people could leave the SF bay rat race today even w/o UBI (and make a great living elsewhere), but empirically they don't so I don't think UBI will change the SF housing situation much except for one way. I suspect since entry and mid level workers won't commute to fill those non-tech jobs that make SF actually SF it will only serve to accelerate the gentrification that might just reduce some of the demand by making the city less interesting, but is that actually something positive? I'm skeptical.
Unless the company were private, in which case there wouldn't technically be 'shareholders'. Seriously, if they want a company focused more on those 'global issues', they should keep the company private, and make it clear to their customers that their goal is not so much to sell a product or service, but to raise money for their pet issues w/o going into the red doing it
You can actually have a non-private company that does that. The company merely has to incorporate as a "B" or Benefit corporation. However, Facebook was constituted under more traditional "C" corporation rules which means the board, under fiduciary rules, must only consider the impact on the share holders, not some other beneficial goal.
Not all share holders are created equal. Their are millions of owners of FB stock, but thier are a handful that together control a majority..
True. But only those handfuls which include Mark and Priscilla control a majority since they control 51% of the voting shares. This is what this whole thing is about...
Corporations should focus on their employees and their customers, not shareholders.
This can be read as "businesses should focus on their employees and their customers, not their owners".
Now, explain why, exactly, someone should buy part of a business if they're not going to get some benefit from doing so....
Shareholders shouldn't get anything more than a share of profits relative to their share of shares. Just because you've put a bit of money in a company (alongside thousands to millions of other people) doesn't mean you should get a say in anything. If you don't like what the company is doing take your shares out. Fair enough shareholder meetings where they put their views to the company are a good thing but the company shouldn't be beholden to anything.
For companies that don't issue dividends (like Facebook), they don't distribute a share of their profits to their shareholders, so the only way an "investor" can profit from money invested in shares is to trade their shares to someone else to generate a return. Also in most states (including Delaware where most US corporations are domiciled), have the requirement that controlling shareholders and boards of directors have a specific fiduciary duty to minority shareholders (e.g., has to act for the benefit of the minority shareholders). Clearly Mr Zuckerberg hold a position that would be considered a conflict of interest in this matter so if he does anything to make the share price go down, but somehow he "profits", it might be considered breaching the fiduciary duty.
As a theoretical example, say if Facebook were to issue a special stock dividend of non-voting shares (in lieu of money) to all registered shareholders, they might dilute they *say* they have in shareholder governance and make the stock potentially worth less to other people, but allow Zuckerberg to donate non-voting shares to various charities w/o losing the majority of votes. You might say by this action, Zuckerberg profits and the other share holders might suffer a bit relatively to Mr Zuckerberg... Wait, didn't that just actually happen?
Presumably, the next step is an ai that works to find the perfect algorithm to beat all others. You'll have different AI's trying to outsmart each other. It will be like the Rock Paper Scissor AI programs that people have written that can consistently beat humans in what one would think should be random (but in fact isn't).
They already have robo-investors that do that. It's the basis behind most high-frequency trading platforms (to outwit other high-frequency trading platforms). The problem with scaling this stuff down for the ordinary joes, is there's little to prevent the people who make the algorithms from frontrunning the trades on the side. In fact many people thought that is what Madoff was doing before it was discovered he didn't actually executes trades at all use the money as a ponzi scheme...
This. Farmers understand the concept of seeds, and tilling a field, if they expect a usable harvest. Why can't CEOs understand that if you eat your seed grain, come harvest time, there isn't anything usable in the fields.
China and India are already competing. Having domestic workers changes nothing on this front, other than the fact that it will get people in the US coming back to STEM majors as opposed to going to other vocations (no such thing as filling the barn with clueless H-1Bs in law, accounting, trades, construction, and other items.)
What will no H-1B abuse bring? A benefit to everyone in the US as a whole, as opposed to the money just being sent back to India to family and never seen again.
While I might agree in principle with your thoughts, your example highlights the problem. Farmers might understand the concept of seeds, but the competitive market issues mean most farmers aren't buying normal seeds, but getting on the treadmill with stuff like sterile Monsanto crops which have all the features for a more cost effective production of their product. Of course the eco system suffers with this monoculture approach (as does the Tech-mono-culture desire to hire H1b to reduce cost approach), but nobody has shown the way out of this death sprial.
Sure, like the organic farmers, there are companies that hire-locally and attempt to sell a high-value product to justify the production cost increase, but as many studies have shown, if everyone farmed organic (using existing technology), the world would starve. I don't have evidence on this, but I'm thinking the Tech in the US market probably isn't big enough to sustain all the Tech workers we currently have (we rely on importing labor to export tech products/services). Of course the "dream" is to stop importing labor, but still manage to export all the tech/services, but game theory tells us that this is an unstable equilibrium and you can only keep it up as long as your fellow players cooperate (by not having the tech expertise themselves and/or importing it from us).
Slashdot Mirror
And you think bosses even consider the bioethicist points of view?
That's almost as funny as the implicit claim that research funding is ethically constrained.
Sure, by definition bosses consider a bioethicist's (or other consultants') point of view. They consider it when they hire them and they consider it when they fire them. The employed bioethicist will probably know who paying the bills and what answer the boss wants to hear.
Thus the comment that all research funding is ethically constrained is effectively a tautology. If the research requires funding, it mirror the ethics of the funding.
This new Java script attack does *NOT* by itself compromise data, but simply allow a way to remotely extract the Address Space Layout Randomization that is currently employed by the OS. It does this by employing a javascript timer to measure page table walk times which are induced by executing javascript that accesses carefully selected offset in large objects (an earlier attempt to do this was frustrated by javascript implementations deliberately sabotaging the built-in high precision timer object). Once the specific ASLR pattern is determined for this specific boot of the kernel, other kernel vulnerabilities that involved direct access to aliased cache and/or memory locations that were mitigated by the kernel doing ASLR can now be modified to target the desired addresses on the target.
It's like knowing how to make key to break into a specific car, but if you use it on the wrong car, it triggers the car alarm and not knowing what car the key it works on. If you magically had a way to map the VIN to the car key, you could make a key that works for that car and steal the car. The car dealers have this mapping, so they can make a key for you, but what someone came up with a way to figure out the VIN->KEY mapping over the internet?
trolleybuses can't overtake one another,
Happens all the time... Most modern trolleybuses (e.g, SanFran and Vancouver) have batteries and/or small diesel engines that allow them to operate a short time off-wire (which can also be used to overtake). Even in older system, multiple parallel paths with switches in strategic locations allowed for express service overtake.
or take alternate routes during road closures.
Okay, that part is true...
Bus companies have a lot of passenger use data that can be used to redo routes...
Although that is theoretically possible, if you've observed the actual process that public bus companies need to go through to change routes (public hearings, legal protests, community outreach, political meddling), and the potential uncertainty on how that affects the farebox recovery rate, you would realize why they don't just change their bus routes to something more efficient even though they have the passenger use data to justify it...
Joe sixpack doesn't give a damn about what makes his car move as long as it's cheap.
As long as there's a way to get a "cool" version to impress their friends. If all electric cars look like a Prius, I'm sure many won't give a damn about them (and no, Joe sixpack can't afford a Tesla Roadster or other electric supercar). Make electric cars like a F150, Mustang or Camero, then nobody will care if they are electric...
They're qualities that are culturally encouraged or culturally disavowed to varying degrees in different parts of the world. What appears to be human nature is highly subject to ones environment.
Apparently it only takes a very short amount of time in an environment to exhibit "human nature" as illustrated by the Milgram and Stanford Prison experiments...
Perhaps it is more accurate to say what appears to be human nature is highly subject to one's societal situation. I probably would not even attribute much to the environment which you grew up in or which you currently live. Probably even less nurture, than simply nature+immediate circumstance. Remember we have quite a bit of so-called "reptilian" brain-functions in our human brains...
No.. other countries only get a handful of h1b slots. I know this because I explored h1b as a means of getting my japanese wife (then girlfriend) into the country.
H1B are not country specific, all H1B applications are divided into pools (based on the advanced degree exceptions among others), If there is enough space under the cap, *all* H1B applications are processed. *ONLY* if the number of H1B applications exceeds the cap, they process applications by a random selection process (aka lottery except for the categories that are unlimited). There is no country quota in the pools. It's the Green Cards that are country specific.
The problem is that Indian staffing companies flood the H1B application process and the cap is hit pretty much every year, so they are pretty much running the lottery all the time, so H1B is a crap shoot... Much more predictable is the K-1 (aka fiance) visa route.
However, if your japanese girlfriend somehow managed to get an H1B (by qualifying for an unlimited exception, or winning the lottery). She can file for adjustment of status and apply for a green card immediately after she got her H1B. She would likely have had no problem getting an employment-based green card in a couple of years if an employer sponsored her. This experience would be unlike a person from India who even if they got a H1B would be limited by the 7% cap for green cards and would probably struggle to get a green card before their H1B visa expired in 7 years...
Apparently this PewDie bro used to make money making Rape jokes videos, but apparently Maker Studios (Disney) was okay with that because of "money".
Now, as a "joke", this bro paid random people to $5 (on fiver) to record themselves holding antisemitic signs and felt remorse...
So, by using fiver to point out that anyone will do anything for money, but probably later regret it, he pointed out to Disney their course of action...
I just can't feel sorry for the bro ;^)
However, it seems I misjudged the H-1B program specifically-- the truth is that I thought it was an alternative path for immigration (which, based on your comment, it seems not to be).
Actually H-1B can be a defacto alternative path for immigration. It is one of a few *dual-intent* visas that allow you to simultaneously be a guest worker, and apply for a green card (which gives you resident alien status). The problem specifically for India and China is the lack of available green-card slots at the end of the H-1B 6-year tunnel as employment based green-cards from a specific country are limited to 7% of the max total. Basically no other countries come close to the limit, so they are the only which are actually impacted in the ability to convert an H-1B to a Green Card, so H-1B is effectively a path for immigration for many high tech workers *NOT* from India or China.
The H1-B *gotcha* is that if the employee only qualifies for EB3 green card status (employment based preference level, basically a Bachelor's degree only) the employer needs to sponsor the green card and that is where the staffing companies can withhold this support and effectively make H-1B into indentured service. If the employee only qualifies for EB3 level preference and they are immigrating from India or China, well, the 7%/country bottleneck will make it unlikely for them to get a green card before their 6-year H1-B expires without lots of support from their employer and if they used up say 3 of 6 years, it's mighty unattractive to an alternate employer to hire them away so they are effectively stuck...
On the other hand, if the employee qualifies for EB1 or EB2 (basically extraordinary ability, PhD, masters+5years, or executive preference level), they can probably self-sponsor (and often companies will sponsor them anyways as a good will measure) and these are not the stereotypical low-wage H1-Bs and are ahead of the queue for those seeking green cards from a country with only EB3 preference.
To move from a place with a support structure takes a huge leap of faith, and it really helps if you trust that the company that you are moving for will keep you around for long enough to get your feet into the new place. There isn't that much trust or support out there any more.
This is why people really only move to places where the eco-system supports it (e.g., Silicon Valley, Austin, Beltway, etc). That way if your company bails on you, there are other options (you trust the location, not the company).
Unfortunately these goto places have gotten so expensive that it doesn't appear to meet the cost-performance trade-off for many millennials, but I think that is mostly a problem because of fear. I'm not saying that the risk is lower (it's probably higher than average risk right at this moment, but probably not historically so), but given a long enough time horizon, the benefit is probably still there.
My guess is that many millennials have both developed a shortened time-scale for risk-tolerance (e.g., want to "make-it" before they are 30) and simultaneously have developed more tribal instincts about unfamiliar locations (e.g., is it possible to make friends and a family with those who are locals because "they" are not "us"). I blame social networking for both of these issues. Even if we keep it local to the USA, tribalism is rampant. People used to want to discover the USA (e.g., roadtrip) and discover themselves in the process, now it's "fly-over-country" and I am defined by my peers. It's just a shame.
Moving for work is tax deductible.
AFAIK, the costs sustained from moving for work is technically an income adjustment. There is no need to itemize this as a deduction to receive it and can also reduce your income to a level to allow you to qualify for other deductions which may be phased out at higher income levels.
Hopefully this time they don't bail out the banks and and the idiots who bought mcmansions.
And how do you imagine that would work out? If everyone's bank accounts suddenly evaporate, your savings will be gone. And your employer's bank accounts will disappear. And your employer's customers' bank accounts will disappear. And then you have riots in the streets.
I suppose the houses that escape the fires will be cheaper, assuming anyone has money to buy them. You won't be able to get a loan because the banks will be gone, and you'll have no savings, so it's not clear where that money will come from.. And it's not clear what currency anyone will be accepting.
Cyprus set the template for the bail-in. Basically, they can freeze all "cash-equivalent" assets for weeks and when unfrozen, everything above the FDIC** insurance limit takes a haircut (40% in the case of Cyprus)... This event basically put everyone on notice to have a contingency plan for this. If your employer doesn't have a contingency for this, they are stupid. If you are carrying cash-equivalent assets above the FDIC/SIPC limit, you are either too rich to care, or have stupidly invested your money.
The theory of the bail-in, is that it forces "rich" folks to take appropriate risks with their money and not burden the state with being the backstop for deposit insurance to those that should be able to manage the risk. Some people don't seem to understand that in order to work at all, it requires the *pause* (frozen-assets), otherwise these events just precipitates a bank run.
Historically, in order to avoid major FDIC insurance impact of liquidation, the FDIC has shopped the bank assets to other banks (so-called purchase and assumption agreements), but has needed to kick in a sweetener to cover the over FDIC limit deposits. Now the FDIC can simply convert over-limit FDIC deposits into bank-shares which eliminates the need for them to kick in the sweetener. Unfortunately, the rules are ambiguous an allow them to convert *any deposits* into bank-shares if it is deemed necessary if it "mitigates the potential for serious adverse effects to the financial system.”
**of course in Cyprus, the insurance limit was defined by the EU...
If a hacker didn't have XOFF = Ctrl-S (XON = Ctrl-Q), wired into their synapses, you pretty much wouldn't be able to keep up with a 2400 baud modem (1200, was just on the limit)
The US will probably need all that tax-payers money elsewhere to build the wall to Mexico, so why not use the European Galileo Satelite Navigation instead - which already provides for much better spatial resolution?
At least they flagged a potential reliability problem with GPS *before* they were launched. ESA is still trying to figure out what the reliability problem with their clocks might be...
Unfortunately, (or fortunately) space is hard...
...sloppy utility that doesn't quite match its description...
What started out as a useful utility has descended down such a hell hole that I had to uninstall it... Removing it from the Playstore would be the next logical step.
A lot of people do commute 100 miles to San Francisco, every work day.
If those people have UBI, why would so many of them commute 100 miles to SF every work day? The only function UBI might possibly have is to remove some people from the demand pool that is driving up the cost of real-estate. For those that choose to continue to play housing roulette, very little will change, for those that leave, they leave the SF bay area completely...
The truth is most people could leave the SF bay rat race today even w/o UBI (and make a great living elsewhere), but empirically they don't so I don't think UBI will change the SF housing situation much except for one way. I suspect since entry and mid level workers won't commute to fill those non-tech jobs that make SF actually SF it will only serve to accelerate the gentrification that might just reduce some of the demand by making the city less interesting, but is that actually something positive? I'm skeptical.
Factorial already breaks the rule by using integers less than 4.
Okay, then how about Gamma(x+4/4)...
Unless the company were private, in which case there wouldn't technically be 'shareholders'. Seriously, if they want a company focused more on those 'global issues', they should keep the company private, and make it clear to their customers that their goal is not so much to sell a product or service, but to raise money for their pet issues w/o going into the red doing it
You can actually have a non-private company that does that. The company merely has to incorporate as a "B" or Benefit corporation. However, Facebook was constituted under more traditional "C" corporation rules which means the board, under fiduciary rules, must only consider the impact on the share holders, not some other beneficial goal.
Not all share holders are created equal. Their are millions of owners of FB stock, but thier are a handful that together control a majority..
True. But only those handfuls which include Mark and Priscilla control a majority since they control 51% of the voting shares. This is what this whole thing is about...
This can be read as "businesses should focus on their employees and their customers, not their owners".
Now, explain why, exactly, someone should buy part of a business if they're not going to get some benefit from doing so....
Shareholders shouldn't get anything more than a share of profits relative to their share of shares. Just because you've put a bit of money in a company (alongside thousands to millions of other people) doesn't mean you should get a say in anything. If you don't like what the company is doing take your shares out. Fair enough shareholder meetings where they put their views to the company are a good thing but the company shouldn't be beholden to anything.
For companies that don't issue dividends (like Facebook), they don't distribute a share of their profits to their shareholders, so the only way an "investor" can profit from money invested in shares is to trade their shares to someone else to generate a return. Also in most states (including Delaware where most US corporations are domiciled), have the requirement that controlling shareholders and boards of directors have a specific fiduciary duty to minority shareholders (e.g., has to act for the benefit of the minority shareholders). Clearly Mr Zuckerberg hold a position that would be considered a conflict of interest in this matter so if he does anything to make the share price go down, but somehow he "profits", it might be considered breaching the fiduciary duty.
As a theoretical example, say if Facebook were to issue a special stock dividend of non-voting shares (in lieu of money) to all registered shareholders, they might dilute they *say* they have in shareholder governance and make the stock potentially worth less to other people, but allow Zuckerberg to donate non-voting shares to various charities w/o losing the majority of votes. You might say by this action, Zuckerberg profits and the other share holders might suffer a bit relatively to Mr Zuckerberg... Wait, didn't that just actually happen?
Presumably, the next step is an ai that works to find the perfect algorithm to beat all others. You'll have different AI's trying to outsmart each other. It will be like the Rock Paper Scissor AI programs that people have written that can consistently beat humans in what one would think should be random (but in fact isn't).
They already have robo-investors that do that. It's the basis behind most high-frequency trading platforms (to outwit other high-frequency trading platforms). The problem with scaling this stuff down for the ordinary joes, is there's little to prevent the people who make the algorithms from frontrunning the trades on the side. In fact many people thought that is what Madoff was doing before it was discovered he didn't actually executes trades at all use the money as a ponzi scheme...
This. Farmers understand the concept of seeds, and tilling a field, if they expect a usable harvest. Why can't CEOs understand that if you eat your seed grain, come harvest time, there isn't anything usable in the fields.
China and India are already competing. Having domestic workers changes nothing on this front, other than the fact that it will get people in the US coming back to STEM majors as opposed to going to other vocations (no such thing as filling the barn with clueless H-1Bs in law, accounting, trades, construction, and other items.)
What will no H-1B abuse bring? A benefit to everyone in the US as a whole, as opposed to the money just being sent back to India to family and never seen again.
While I might agree in principle with your thoughts, your example highlights the problem. Farmers might understand the concept of seeds, but the competitive market issues mean most farmers aren't buying normal seeds, but getting on the treadmill with stuff like sterile Monsanto crops which have all the features for a more cost effective production of their product. Of course the eco system suffers with this monoculture approach (as does the Tech-mono-culture desire to hire H1b to reduce cost approach), but nobody has shown the way out of this death sprial.
Sure, like the organic farmers, there are companies that hire-locally and attempt to sell a high-value product to justify the production cost increase, but as many studies have shown, if everyone farmed organic (using existing technology), the world would starve. I don't have evidence on this, but I'm thinking the Tech in the US market probably isn't big enough to sustain all the Tech workers we currently have (we rely on importing labor to export tech products/services). Of course the "dream" is to stop importing labor, but still manage to export all the tech/services, but game theory tells us that this is an unstable equilibrium and you can only keep it up as long as your fellow players cooperate (by not having the tech expertise themselves and/or importing it from us).
Now I have to wonder when the Greatest Nation on Earth is going to do the same.
What you talkin' bout? We never had roaming charges anywhere within the continent. Though it does help that the whole continent is one country.
No roaming charges in Alaska and Hawaii... But most plans have a Mexico and Canada roaming charge (although there are some plans which don't)...
Now I have to wonder when the Greatest Nation on Earth is going to do the same.
Oh. I forgot myself for a moment. It's profit over people. All the people, all the time.
in USA there are no roaming fees for moving across different states
Europe just made another step towards The United States of Europe... ;^)
What's next? A civil war to prevent Brexit?
Youtube is a website.
You aren't the apps guy, are you?
Except that on mobile everything is an "app". Even Youtube (available for free in Google Play and iTunes stores)...