Heh... Nice term. Meshes in nicely with the "shareseller" value term I came up with.
With securities in this day and age, you're looking to sell to the bigger fool than you- trying to ultimately find the bagholder for your stuff so you can cash out while the getting's good.
The problem is... There's been no dividends. You have to sell the shares to get value out of the stock. It's only worth the paper the certs are printed on while you're holding onto it until you find a bagholder that's willing to pay the price you're selling it for.
The only real way to make money on the IPO would be at the start of the spike and attempt to ride the shareseller price up to almost the peak and sell at that theshold- you don't want to become a bagholder on the thing.
Does it produce anything of merit or value past being somethig akin to TV 2.0 for the masses that have Internet?
No?
About like most of the other "social" networking things- I keep wondering how they are making money...because it's not paid for by regular advertising and it's not paid for by Web 1.0 style advertising- and it sure as hell isn't paid for by it's users. "Dot-Bomb 2.0" is what I've been thinking about this.
If you think that anyone is going to willingly own up to liability when the system fails (and even the pro-grade stuff can do that...) I've got some nice oceanside property on the middle of the Florida coast to sell you.
You should ditch the "Republican"/"Democrat" line of thought. Flip sides of the coin, really. As for a "diehard 'R'" holding onto their mainstream-sensationalized beliefs, I think you'll find the other party's participants are quite more guilty of that than the 'R''s...
For this aspect of things, that would be an accurate statement. They're responsible for a lot of state sponsored attacks on our digital infrastructure.
A company by the name of Digital Pockets had come up with the very thing that we're discussing. Linux based. Used OSGi and java plug-ins to provide "applications". They joined forces with another company, Coollogic, to come up with an embedded version of that original base. This was back around 2001-2002 timeframe. How do I know this? I was the CTO of Coollogic at the time. It didn't come together because of lack of funding available and there wasn't any customers willing to shell out $1500 for such a system at the time past a few rich people down in Houston (DP's test market...).
You're still going to see $500-1000 for the price on this system unless you hunker down lower than C# will probably allow them to be in system profile.
The best you had with things before Z-Wave, UPB or Insteon was LonWorks PLC. Expensive stuff really intended for office buildings- but you could do all those sorts of things you can now do with the first three and a lot cheaper.
I suppose it would be an "okay" thing- but we're discussing Microsoft trying to jam their notions onto platforms better suited to something like Linux, QNX, etc.
The big deal is more along the lines of energy management. The other "house of the future" stuff is there as a hook to get people to sign off on the rest. My applied for, but never completed (Nothing like running out of money at the wrong time...) patent application was in this space.
No, it will contain four times the energy density, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it'll take four times as long.
Just look at the NiMh turbo chargers (7-15 minute chargers...they've got them out there...) against the 2-4 times capacity batteries that've come up over the years for an instance of how one does not lead to the other.
Heh... Considering that they're still going to be largish (Keep in mind, you're storing 10-40 gallons of volume of that level of energy in a "car" or "truck" on average...)- that's a lot of smaller modules to snap out or one honking big one.
If it's not shipping it's little more than pipe dreams. We've had things like holographic storage promised for decades and little's come of that. We've had other highly promising technologies that could be applied to vastly greener transportation and power, such as solid-oxide fuel cells.
Nothing. If it's not shipping, it's little more than a damned pipe-dream until it gets there. Sure, wes hould be working on it and trying to make it happen- but don't pin your hopes on it until it ships.
Heh... Several major companies are playing these games. I was brought on with one of my past contracting gigs to sort out a mess a year in the making from the client doing similar things with Indian offshoring interests. They "ran out of money" after about four months and let me go with them going right back to the same thing that got them in the mess in the first place- because I'd fixed the mess and they thought they could get three to four devs for my rack rate that way.
Oh, it's a bit more pernicious than that. The best devs are kept to the nation that they're from- just for starters. Then there's the attitude that almost good enough is really identical to correct that pervades the cultures over there. Even with stringent specs, unless you're running something like TI India over there, you're going to have no end to issues and tons of defects because of the issues inherent to offshoring. There will ALWAYS be loads of things that're ill-advised in the process of doing any endeavor where you're inclined to offshore it.
I just wish the fools in this country could see that they're wasting 25-75% more money, at minimum, when they do this sort of thing because it takes anywhere from 1-2 people with my skillset to up to 6 to typically sort out many of these train-wrecks. Oftentimes, you don't even see the disaster with it all until 6-12 months out from release of the software or other products.
Some business schools teach the Lean approach. The problem lies in that you're better off in a privately owned company doing that than if you're in a publicly traded one in the current environment for the very reasons you attribute to the current behavior. It takes a businessman with nerves of steel to defy the short-term thinking these days because of it.
No... Wrong answer from start to finish. You can still have issues with tight specs, paying well, etc.
Prime example: Bindeez/AquaDots. In this instance the toy manufacturer had explicitly specified 1,5-pentanediol as the plasticizer, a relatively safe, non-toxic, chemical. The Shenzen based offshore manufacturer substituted 1,4-butanediol, a much cheaper plasticizer compound that has similar characteristics, but is **NOT** safe or non-toxic. 1,4-butanediol converts to GHB in the gut through the enzymatic processes there. GHB is a dangerous date-rape drug. Why did they subsitute it? Because 1,4-butanediol is VASTLY cheaper than 1,5-pentanediol and they didn't connect the dots (no pun intended) that they were making a bad choice- and they did it to increase their margins, didn't think anyone would notice the change, and quite simply DID NOT CARE.
What you're saying may be the case, but this was one of those "high-end" bunches that DID that. Sorry, not buying your line for a moment because it still happens often and there's little concern by the people over there running the businesses over the sorts of impacts of decisions like this. Not even with companies like Foxconn.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh... Nice term. Meshes in nicely with the "shareseller" value term I came up with.
With securities in this day and age, you're looking to sell to the bigger fool than you- trying to ultimately find the bagholder for your stuff so you can cash out while the getting's good.
The problem is... There's been no dividends. You have to sell the shares to get value out of the stock. It's only worth the paper the certs are printed on while you're holding onto it until you find a bagholder that's willing to pay the price you're selling it for.
The only real way to make money on the IPO would be at the start of the spike and attempt to ride the shareseller price up to almost the peak and sell at that theshold- you don't want to become a bagholder on the thing.
Profitable?
Does it produce anything of merit or value past being somethig akin to TV 2.0 for the masses that have Internet?
No?
About like most of the other "social" networking things- I keep wondering how they are making money...because it's not paid for by regular advertising and it's not paid for by Web 1.0 style advertising- and it sure as hell isn't paid for by it's users. "Dot-Bomb 2.0" is what I've been thinking about this.
I thought "Dot-Bomb 2.0"...yeah, bubble.
If you think that anyone is going to willingly own up to liability when the system fails (and even the pro-grade stuff can do that...) I've got some nice oceanside property on the middle of the Florida coast to sell you.
The Judge is wrong.
Past jurisprudence (and a lot of it, mind...) has held that things that are purely functional are **NOT** Copyrightable.
This includes:
Build Scripts in general.
Header Files.
It's appealable and is VERY likely to be overturned on appeal.
You should ditch the "Republican"/"Democrat" line of thought. Flip sides of the coin, really. As for a "diehard 'R'" holding onto their mainstream-sensationalized beliefs, I think you'll find the other party's participants are quite more guilty of that than the 'R''s...
For this aspect of things, that would be an accurate statement. They're responsible for a lot of state sponsored attacks on our digital infrastructure.
It's old hat.
A company by the name of Digital Pockets had come up with the very thing that we're discussing. Linux based. Used OSGi and java plug-ins to provide "applications". They joined forces with another company, Coollogic, to come up with an embedded version of that original base. This was back around 2001-2002 timeframe. How do I know this? I was the CTO of Coollogic at the time. It didn't come together because of lack of funding available and there wasn't any customers willing to shell out $1500 for such a system at the time past a few rich people down in Houston (DP's test market...).
You're still going to see $500-1000 for the price on this system unless you hunker down lower than C# will probably allow them to be in system profile.
Gives new meaning to the Blue Screen of Death, doesn't it? >:-D
It's Microsoft trying to do things so as to seem "relevant" to the market so their share price can stay more elevated than it ought to be.
The best you had with things before Z-Wave, UPB or Insteon was LonWorks PLC. Expensive stuff really intended for office buildings- but you could do all those sorts of things you can now do with the first three and a lot cheaper.
I suppose it would be an "okay" thing- but we're discussing Microsoft trying to jam their notions onto platforms better suited to something like Linux, QNX, etc.
The big deal is more along the lines of energy management. The other "house of the future" stuff is there as a hook to get people to sign off on the rest. My applied for, but never completed (Nothing like running out of money at the wrong time...) patent application was in this space.
It's facts all the same and not slanted... If you're calling it slanted...you need to re-think what that term means to you.
Then you'll pay more for the priviege to be an asshole and surround yourself with your fellow assholes. Simple.
No, it will contain four times the energy density, but it's not a foregone conclusion that it'll take four times as long.
Just look at the NiMh turbo chargers (7-15 minute chargers...they've got them out there...) against the 2-4 times capacity batteries that've come up over the years for an instance of how one does not lead to the other.
Heh... Considering that they're still going to be largish (Keep in mind, you're storing 10-40 gallons of volume of that level of energy in a "car" or "truck" on average...)- that's a lot of smaller modules to snap out or one honking big one.
Heh... I'd shudder to see anything other than one of the possible amped up ultracapacitor technologies doing that. :-D
It's possible. Hell, the ultracapacitor stuff's technically possible. But not a single one of them has made it yet to a commercial product.
If it happens, that is.
If it's not shipping it's little more than pipe dreams. We've had things like holographic storage promised for decades and little's come of that. We've had other highly promising technologies that could be applied to vastly greener transportation and power, such as solid-oxide fuel cells.
Nothing. If it's not shipping, it's little more than a damned pipe-dream until it gets there. Sure, wes hould be working on it and trying to make it happen- but don't pin your hopes on it until it ships.
Heh... Then why do they need to have "TSA" locks?
Heh... Several major companies are playing these games. I was brought on with one of my past contracting gigs to sort out a mess a year in the making from the client doing similar things with Indian offshoring interests. They "ran out of money" after about four months and let me go with them going right back to the same thing that got them in the mess in the first place- because I'd fixed the mess and they thought they could get three to four devs for my rack rate that way.
Oh, it's a bit more pernicious than that. The best devs are kept to the nation that they're from- just for starters. Then there's the attitude that almost good enough is really identical to correct that pervades the cultures over there. Even with stringent specs, unless you're running something like TI India over there, you're going to have no end to issues and tons of defects because of the issues inherent to offshoring. There will ALWAYS be loads of things that're ill-advised in the process of doing any endeavor where you're inclined to offshore it.
I just wish the fools in this country could see that they're wasting 25-75% more money, at minimum, when they do this sort of thing because it takes anywhere from 1-2 people with my skillset to up to 6 to typically sort out many of these train-wrecks. Oftentimes, you don't even see the disaster with it all until 6-12 months out from release of the software or other products.
Some business schools teach the Lean approach. The problem lies in that you're better off in a privately owned company doing that than if you're in a publicly traded one in the current environment for the very reasons you attribute to the current behavior. It takes a businessman with nerves of steel to defy the short-term thinking these days because of it.
No... Wrong answer from start to finish. You can still have issues with tight specs, paying well, etc.
Prime example: Bindeez/AquaDots. In this instance the toy manufacturer had explicitly specified 1,5-pentanediol as the plasticizer, a relatively safe, non-toxic, chemical. The Shenzen based offshore manufacturer substituted 1,4-butanediol, a much cheaper plasticizer compound that has similar characteristics, but is **NOT** safe or non-toxic. 1,4-butanediol converts to GHB in the gut through the enzymatic processes there. GHB is a dangerous date-rape drug. Why did they subsitute it? Because 1,4-butanediol is VASTLY cheaper than 1,5-pentanediol and they didn't connect the dots (no pun intended) that they were making a bad choice- and they did it to increase their margins, didn't think anyone would notice the change, and quite simply DID NOT CARE.
What you're saying may be the case, but this was one of those "high-end" bunches that DID that. Sorry, not buying your line for a moment because it still happens often and there's little concern by the people over there running the businesses over the sorts of impacts of decisions like this. Not even with companies like Foxconn.