Whatever. Your argument is no different than builders who build homes on speculation. They create jobs through investment (including in themselves) in the hope of making a profit. If they didn't think there would be a buyer, they wouldn't build. Take the buyer out of the equation and there's no more jobs, and no way to keep producing homes. So customers create jobs.
If that was the case, then she should be allowed to leave it at the company when she's not at work. This was a change of working conditions for all staff, not just her, and they were instructed to download the app to THEIR phones, and she discussed the legality of it with her co-workers and her boss Stubbs, who said "so what?"
An employer cannot ask an employee to do something illegal, or give up their statutory rights.
The complaint (the pdf in the second link of the story) outlines the laws she alleges were broken. An interesting read.
She also asked for a jury trial, which in civil cases only requires 9 of 12 jurors to agree with her. If the jury decides that the allegations are more likely than not to be true, the company (and the 15 John Does and named defendants) are going to pay. People should always have the option to decide whether they want their private life known, and to who.
There are certain off-work things that an employer should know about - witness the guy who intentionally flew the airliner into the mountain and killed all on board - when it can affect their on-the-clock performance. But there's no reason to track someone 24-7 unless you're paying them 24-7. And in this case, they didn't need to track her at all - they had her on-the-job performance metrics. They only tracked her because they could - even though she told them it was illegal, and her boss told her basically "so what?"
What she could have done was uninstall the app while leaving work, then reinstalling it upon arriving. She'd still be able to receive calls, texts, and emails.
Then again, after reading the court filing, the company will probably lose - she's asking for a jury trial, and I can't think of any reasonable person who would find the company's actions acceptable. Being a civil suit, she doesn't even have to convince a majority - just 9 of the 12 jurors.
But you still need the customers - if nobody wants your product (say men's platform shoes, women's peasant dresses, and ultra-wide bell bottoms for both from the '60s), it won't matter how low you get the cost of production, because not enough people are going to want to buy it to make it worth getting out of bed in the morning.
You're welcome. I have a copy floating around here in a sci-fi anthology that I think I paid between $2 and $5 since it was "old stock". Worth every penny.
I guess it goes with the history of each company - Amazon pretty much got their start with books, so they are more aware of the need to keep on top of such things; Google is first and foremost an advertising company, looking to diversify their revenue streams. They could certainly do it, but right now it's obviously not a priority for them.
Other people have claimed the stats provided are useless if we don't have their failures as well. Missing the Nepal earthquake is one of those failures, since Nepal is also covered by the same satellites that they get their data from.
Plates can move because they are lubricated by superheated steam (which is why all the plates on Venus are locked in place). This is why tracking ground water levels is a good predictor. It's also why fracking increases earthquakes in the surrounding area. One way to monitor this from space is to look for small changes in local gravity caused by the "steam bubble" that slightly moves the ground up or down prior to the big energy release. They missed it. Totally. How many others of lesser magnitude did they miss? That's the test.
So, my (maybe too subtle) point was that without more complete data it's not all that great - like predicting an earthquake in California.
It's also pretty useless in most instances, since nobody's going to evacuate an area for a month or more based on a warning - again, about as useful as predicting an earthquake every week in California. Predict within a couple of days and the utility goes up. But predicting with an uncertainty of a month or more is about as useful to most people as a weather forecast that says it's going to rain some time in the next couple of months. Whether you're harvesting crops or deciding to bring along an umbrella, predictions with an accuracy of weeks or months are useless.
I just sold a house. The price difference is less than the mortgage interest and other costs over 10 years. So. I just got kicked in the teeth by CGT, a tax which they promised to kill when the GST came in.
You didn't "just get kicked in the teeth" - a house is not an ATM. You didn't include the value of living in the place for 10 years, plus depreciation. Would you be claiming that it was wrong that you had to sell your 10-year-old car for less than you paid for it + interest and other costs for years.
You bought during an obvious bubble and thought prices would never go down so you would basically have a place to live for free. So sad, too bad, reality bites - and it has really sharp teeth.
Windows 10 makes the user-configuration toggle optional. On a PC, Microsoft allows manufacturers to choose whether or not a user can disable Secure Boot.
So just choose a manufacturer and model that lets you disable secure boot.
I can see that math isn't your strong suit. Five bits of data listed, and you only see four.
The more important thing is, you do not value your privacy. Other people do. It is no one's business who I saw on vacation. I may have met a KGB agent, or I may have met my mistress, or I may have talked to a "spiritual advisor", or I may have just basked in the solitude of the wilderness. And - it's no one's business.
It's not a question of "valuing your privacy" so much as "who gives a fart?" Stuff you want private you don't share. 3 people can keep a secret if 2 of them are dead.
Or just don't do anything you would want your kids to read on the front page of the New York Times, which is always good advice to follow.
The alternative is to do the same thing as the protagonist in John Varley's "Press ENTER . .." You'll have your privacy, but you'll pay too much of a price.
Now you're just being willfully obtuse. You can produce as many XT clones as you want, demand will not increase with supply. Also, there were plenty of Windows tablets before the iPad,They didn't sell well because they were too expensive at the time, not because they weren't being produced.
That is SO wrong. No matter how many buggy whips or PC-XT clones or CRT monitors you produce, you won't increase demand. Even if you sold the CRT monitors for 1 cent plus shipping, nobody would buy them because they would still be more expensive electricity-wise than a flat screen. Even more so for a 60" CRT TV.
Which ignores the fact that the only reason those investors are actually willing to buy the stock and listen to the 'dog and pony shows' is if the company actually has a product and customers.
First, plenty of start-ups have no customers and no completed product. Second, you your admission, also reiterated further on:
CowPattie Computer that is trying to market "pGadgets" to compete, but has zero sales and no customers, guess which I'm going to invest in
If you have no customers, you have zero sales. So, customers create the jobs. Not ideas. Not companies.
And many don't bring their own tools. So, let's make the situation analogous to the original question - employee working on employer's nickle using employers tools and supplies - the improvement to the hammer is a direct offshoot of and directly related to his employment, the employer owns it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo was making money on advertising in 1995, Google didn't even exist as a business until 1998.
Whatever. Your argument is no different than builders who build homes on speculation. They create jobs through investment (including in themselves) in the hope of making a profit. If they didn't think there would be a buyer, they wouldn't build. Take the buyer out of the equation and there's no more jobs, and no way to keep producing homes. So customers create jobs.
Stubits replied that she should tolerate the illegal intrusion....
.... And?! I need closure on that anecdote!
It's an implied threat to get fired if you don't.
If that was the case, then she should be allowed to leave it at the company when she's not at work. This was a change of working conditions for all staff, not just her, and they were instructed to download the app to THEIR phones, and she discussed the legality of it with her co-workers and her boss Stubbs, who said "so what?"
An employer cannot ask an employee to do something illegal, or give up their statutory rights.
That is NOT what the article, or the civil complaint say. Even then, they don't have a right to track you 24/7. Read the complaint.
The complaint (the pdf in the second link of the story) outlines the laws she alleges were broken. An interesting read.
She also asked for a jury trial, which in civil cases only requires 9 of 12 jurors to agree with her. If the jury decides that the allegations are more likely than not to be true, the company (and the 15 John Does and named defendants) are going to pay. People should always have the option to decide whether they want their private life known, and to who.
There are certain off-work things that an employer should know about - witness the guy who intentionally flew the airliner into the mountain and killed all on board - when it can affect their on-the-clock performance. But there's no reason to track someone 24-7 unless you're paying them 24-7. And in this case, they didn't need to track her at all - they had her on-the-job performance metrics. They only tracked her because they could - even though she told them it was illegal, and her boss told her basically "so what?"
It was her phone. Why would she do that?
What she could have done was uninstall the app while leaving work, then reinstalling it upon arriving. She'd still be able to receive calls, texts, and emails.
Then again, after reading the court filing, the company will probably lose - she's asking for a jury trial, and I can't think of any reasonable person who would find the company's actions acceptable. Being a civil suit, she doesn't even have to convince a majority - just 9 of the 12 jurors.
But you still need the customers - if nobody wants your product (say men's platform shoes, women's peasant dresses, and ultra-wide bell bottoms for both from the '60s), it won't matter how low you get the cost of production, because not enough people are going to want to buy it to make it worth getting out of bed in the morning.
You're welcome. I have a copy floating around here in a sci-fi anthology that I think I paid between $2 and $5 since it was "old stock". Worth every penny.
S'alright :-)
I guess it goes with the history of each company - Amazon pretty much got their start with books, so they are more aware of the need to keep on top of such things; Google is first and foremost an advertising company, looking to diversify their revenue streams. They could certainly do it, but right now it's obviously not a priority for them.
Other people have claimed the stats provided are useless if we don't have their failures as well. Missing the Nepal earthquake is one of those failures, since Nepal is also covered by the same satellites that they get their data from.
Plates can move because they are lubricated by superheated steam (which is why all the plates on Venus are locked in place). This is why tracking ground water levels is a good predictor. It's also why fracking increases earthquakes in the surrounding area. One way to monitor this from space is to look for small changes in local gravity caused by the "steam bubble" that slightly moves the ground up or down prior to the big energy release. They missed it. Totally. How many others of lesser magnitude did they miss? That's the test.
So, my (maybe too subtle) point was that without more complete data it's not all that great - like predicting an earthquake in California.
It's also pretty useless in most instances, since nobody's going to evacuate an area for a month or more based on a warning - again, about as useful as predicting an earthquake every week in California. Predict within a couple of days and the utility goes up. But predicting with an uncertainty of a month or more is about as useful to most people as a weather forecast that says it's going to rain some time in the next couple of months. Whether you're harvesting crops or deciding to bring along an umbrella, predictions with an accuracy of weeks or months are useless.
Hey, it works for many in the church biz ...
I just sold a house. The price difference is less than the mortgage interest and other costs over 10 years. So. I just got kicked in the teeth by CGT, a tax which they promised to kill when the GST came in.
You didn't "just get kicked in the teeth" - a house is not an ATM. You didn't include the value of living in the place for 10 years, plus depreciation. Would you be claiming that it was wrong that you had to sell your 10-year-old car for less than you paid for it + interest and other costs for years.
You bought during an obvious bubble and thought prices would never go down so you would basically have a place to live for free. So sad, too bad, reality bites - and it has really sharp teeth.
Windows 10 makes the user-configuration toggle optional. On a PC, Microsoft allows manufacturers to choose whether or not a user can disable Secure Boot.
So just choose a manufacturer and model that lets you disable secure boot.
Too bad they didn't figure out that the shuttle was way more expensive per kilo to orbit than the Saturn V.
In Putin's Russia... ?
Putin is doing his best to make it one and the same again.
One man's PC is another man's server. After all, even a dirt-cheap computer today can run rings around the early supercomputers.
I can see that math isn't your strong suit. Five bits of data listed, and you only see four.
The more important thing is, you do not value your privacy. Other people do. It is no one's business who I saw on vacation. I may have met a KGB agent, or I may have met my mistress, or I may have talked to a "spiritual advisor", or I may have just basked in the solitude of the wilderness. And - it's no one's business.
It's not a question of "valuing your privacy" so much as "who gives a fart?" Stuff you want private you don't share. 3 people can keep a secret if 2 of them are dead.
Or just don't do anything you would want your kids to read on the front page of the New York Times, which is always good advice to follow.
The alternative is to do the same thing as the protagonist in John Varley's "Press ENTER . . ." You'll have your privacy, but you'll pay too much of a price.
Now you're just being willfully obtuse. You can produce as many XT clones as you want, demand will not increase with supply. Also, there were plenty of Windows tablets before the iPad,They didn't sell well because they were too expensive at the time, not because they weren't being produced.
Don't be silly - others were already making money with web directories and search.
Wrong, demand is a consequence of production.
That is SO wrong. No matter how many buggy whips or PC-XT clones or CRT monitors you produce, you won't increase demand. Even if you sold the CRT monitors for 1 cent plus shipping, nobody would buy them because they would still be more expensive electricity-wise than a flat screen. Even more so for a 60" CRT TV.
Which ignores the fact that the only reason those investors are actually willing to buy the stock and listen to the 'dog and pony shows' is if the company actually has a product and customers.
First, plenty of start-ups have no customers and no completed product. Second, you your admission, also reiterated further on:
CowPattie Computer that is trying to market "pGadgets" to compete, but has zero sales and no customers, guess which I'm going to invest in
If you have no customers, you have zero sales. So, customers create the jobs. Not ideas. Not companies.
And many don't bring their own tools. So, let's make the situation analogous to the original question - employee working on employer's nickle using employers tools and supplies - the improvement to the hammer is a direct offshoot of and directly related to his employment, the employer owns it.