Facebook didn't simply set out to make tweaks and see how users responded; they setup a controlled experiment on subjects without their consent; a practice that appears to violate ethical and possibly legal guidelines for behavioral research. I agree it could push them to continue to do such research and not reveal it; but when it inevitably leaks that they are doing that it will create a PR nightmare. Facebook could have simply asked people to opt in to the study and provide the standard information regarding the study and this would be a non-issue. For those looking for info on humane research protection guidelines in the US google Office of Human Research Protection.
Lower prices "leave a trail of blood in our balance sheet" according to Bernhard Guenther, CFO at RWE, Germany's biggest power producer
Sounds to me like "our production costs are so close to our competition's retail price, we're having trouble staying in business, pity us!"
No, this is not something for me to pity, and it most certainly isn't my problem to help you solve. You need to innovate and improve efficiency of your business, or close your doors. We don't do the "buggy whip" thing anymore. And your existence isn't critical enough to justufy subsdies/handouts. Innovate or die. (quietly if possible)
While I agree in principle, you can't simply have generators shutdown and not supply power to meet demand. If they simply shut off plants, the grid be damned, people would be screaming about blackouts and brownouts. Many of their competitors are heavily subsidized as well, and their generation not (yet) reliable enough to base load and ensure grid stability. While it's easy to say fu and your business model when it comes to power generation it isn't that simple. Just as California after the deregulated.
At times when the renewables production spikes, the electricity is "sold" at negative prices - i.e. whoever takes it, gets paid.
Why would suppliers provide electricity at negative prices?
Generally the time prices are negative is small, so it is cheaper to pay to take it than try to cycle a plant to keep prices higher. A baseload plant is not easily ramp up and down, especially when demand changes faster than their ramping ability, so they simply base load and pay to take to excess capacity.
Penalties include up to ten years in prison, or a fine of up to $1,000 and two and a half years in jail.
If you're going to bother at all, don't just quote the penalty, quote the whole statute. It clearly states that intent to use the tools for a criminal purpose is required for prosecution. This is the case in many states, and what it means is that you're free to carry around locksmithing tools as long as you aren't engaged in any criminal activity that would be aided by using those tools.
In other words, you'll incur an additional count if you possess lockpicks (or a sledge hammer, for that matter) while breaking into a house, and you might get charged if you have lockpicks while walking around wearing a ski mask and carrying a canvas sack with dollar signs on it, but other than that you're good to go.
Hey, this is/. Don't go stating facts to back up your argument. OB OP - in many states intent is required; of course in some sates you can basically get a buiness license and call yourself a locksmith.
This right here is why we should be teaching basic programming or scripting in middle school. Show young students how to automate simple tasks and they'll apply it to nearly every field that exists."
And far too many of them will think they know what they are doing and screw things up.
Sounds like someone who embodies the Three Virtues of a programmer: Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris. Well done!
I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!
It wasn't what he did but the results he achieved that earned him a medal. He saw a problem, applied a fix an made life easier for himself and his unit. Just because it was a relatively simple coding effort is immaterial.
In addition, what is simple to one person isn't to another; it all depends on one's experience.
Exactly. He doesn't need to do squat. He's implicitly selling the idea that he will be using all those secrets to help out his clients, but it's a flim-flam; he doesn't actually have to do it.
I wouldn't call it film-flam nor implicitly selling the idea that he will be using all those secrets. He brings an executive understanding of the types of threats and how to explain them in a way senior leaders can understand and offer a team that can help address the threats a company may face. His company can address them without ever revealing any secrets he learned during his stint at NSA.
And he was the head of the NSA, an administrator...what's the chance he knows much in the way of recent technical details anyway?
His technical skills are largely irrelevant, that's his staff's role. Being head of NSA, on the other hand, gives him credibility that can open the door to senior executives who can authorize spending the kind of money he charges. In addition, he can explain things in a way they can understand and motivates them to take action. If needed, he can bring in a techie for a dog and pony show; however no matter how skillful the techie is his or her chances of getting to a CEO / CIO are significantly less than the former head of the NSA. He has a credibility that the techie doesn't.
If availability is all thats required why can't a League of Legends team be coed? Just because team siren was awful doesn't mean that female players can't or won't play League of Legends professionally and/or on competitive teams at a high level. Considering how much effort has been put into making female players into placekickers in college football, in league of legends the admittance of female players should be a trivial non-issue.
Depends on what they want to accomplish. If a school needs a men's sport to keep the balance and save money by eliminating a more expensive one, then a men's team makes sense.
He needs to hire people who have the skills and experience addressing specific vulnerabilities. Ideally those people got that outside of TS work. He is the rainmaker that opens doors.
No, as the series of court rulings have gone, the Fourth Amendment does not protect you from lawful search and seizure (such as a safe or hard drive). The combination to the safe, or encryption key to the drive, is not incriminating evidence and providing it to allow for lawful search and seizure does not violate your rights. They can admit evidence produced by oneself into court (such as two sets of books in one's own handwriting for a case of fraud) and that is not a violation of the Fourth (or Fifth) - just so with information one puts on a hard drive. What they can not compel one to do is testify against oneself (which is the Fifth by the way) nor assume guilt because you do not take the stand (not that a prosecutor won't toe that line with the jury). So, if one can keep all details of a crime in one's head and manage to destroy all other evidence which could be subject to lawful search and seizure - then you've got a shot at being a criminal mastermind.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with the line of thought - but I can certainly follow the logic as well as the precedence.
What would be interesting is if one's pass-code was material evidence with respect to the case - but a possible way around that would be limited immunity or ruling it as inadmissible evidence...It would make for an interesting case study.
INAL, but it seems part of the reasoning hinges on his admitting he had the key, that information was encrypted, and he dealt with the suspects involved; thus his act of decrypting would not reveal anything the prosecution didn't already know about his awareness of the documents. In other words, he said essentially "there is stuff of mine over there" and the court says he must open the door. I wonder if he had not said anything if the decision would go the same way. Ironically, I find it off tha a lawyer wouldn't "lawyer up." Everyone I know in law enforcement says "always lawyer up" and that "the first thing the smart crooks say is 'I want my lawyer...'"
Really? I don't find the legitimate ones bad at all. Much better than the SAT for testing raw, innate intelligence.
.
Except MENSA accepts SAT and GMAT as qualifying exams. I would guess Mensa members fall into two broad categories, those who have self esteem issues and need to tell people they are members as if they makes them somehow special or better and all the rest. Unfortunately the former are the most visible and give all members a bad name.
Is there a point to this post, exactly? I mean, I get the capacity variation is both a real concern and a common kind of FUD regarding solar, but this data point isn't about that.
It's not really FUD if it is a legitimate concern, which it is. There needs to be a way to store excess production for solar to be a viable base load source of power; without that it simply isn't a reliable enough source of power if you plan to meet a significant percentage of demand with solar.
It's about how rapidly a changeover in energy production to sustainable can occur. Germany was one of the world's biggest nuclear energy producers(France being the leader of that pack), and they've gone from that to one of the biggest solar producers in only a year or so.
It's clear a country with Germany's power demand can shift their source of power if they are willing to commit enough money to doing so; the question is "Is it sustainable over the long run and what are the fallout from such as switch on the broader economy?"
With a really large economy, without losing much GDP. The point that's being demonstrated is that a power infrastructure changeover can be done without sacrificing being a first world nation along the way.
I would say the jury is still out on the impact on GDP until the real costs of solar have filtered throughout the economy. I am not saying it isn't a wise move; but the actual impact and capabilities of solar as a base laid are still uncertain.
Given that videogaming is cheaper than just about anything except pick-up frisbee on the quad, (maybe $4K over the course of undergrad if the school is buying the hardware and keeping it fresh, and likely substantially less insurance exposure than any more active sport), if the Title IX metric is monetary, they'll need to free up very little extra funding for parity on the women's sports side. If the metric is participation, what a handy excuse to axe some comparatively expensive and not terribly popular men's sport...
IIRC, monetary parity is not required, equal support is. So if you pay to send the men's BB team on a trip you need to pay for the women's team trips as well; although they may cost less.
This will likely have mostly male applicants, and put pressure on the school to attract and spend more on females in other areas. They'll either have to shut down other male dominated sports, or find more funding to balance the equation for the women.
Nopt necessarily. Numeric parity is not required, availability is acceptable as well provided all other criteria are met. It could also be an attempt to increase mail participation since Title IX cuts both ways.
Of course, being Alabama, they will promptly arrest and jail the Chinese managers who come over to check on the plant unless they can prove they are in Alabama legally.
its Alabama not Arizona
I know. Arizona arrests you for looking Hispanic, Alabama, so far, for driving while German. In the name of equal opportunity they may extend that welcome to the Chinese as well.
It makes perfect sense. After enough time of disparaging the factory life, Americans are finally realizing that it beats the alternative.
I can make sense of it at an intellectual level, it's just my gut reaction to go "WTF" -- it's a bit counter-intuitive.
The news is welcome, I just wish American companies would start making things in USA again. I know we can do it. I suppose in time, we will.
Once you factor in productivity and transportation costs, amongst others, the cost gaps narrows and possibly even closes. They're not doing a 1 for 1 replacement of workers so hiring fewer, but more expensive and more productive US workers, begins to make sense. In addition, there can be political considerations as well.
Of course, being Alabama, they will promptly arrest and jail the Chinese managers who come over to check on the plant unless they can prove they are in Alabama legally.
Specific practices like driver using phone while driving, or curb parking time limits can certainly be regulated. But not the basic fact of people exchanging money for information. Dislike it all you want, but people have freedom to do as they want.
They aren't making the exchange of info illegal. You can still say "For $30 I'll tell you where a perking spot is.." it's the "and I'll hold it for you until you arrive..." that is illegal. I think the city is justified in this position.
Well if you were to mine for gold, vs bit coins what is the difference.
Gold is just a piece of medal, while has some nice properties to it, its value is that it is a rare element.
Actually, it is not that rare, it's just more expensive to extract at the current value so much is left unextracted. It's value is that people accept it as a liquid store of value; so they are willing to exchange cash for gold.
Bitcoin is reaching the cost / value crossover; its volatility and lack of liquidity raise questions about it's value and wetehr people will accept it as a store of value.
I suspect that many scammer Kickstarters have a mass of pledges just as fake as yours--only not intended for humor, but rather "self-giving" to create buzz and give the impression of legitimacy. I doubt very seriously that most of that $500,000 they've raised on this particular campaign is real.
But this does raise a real point.
What about the cut KS takes? That could dwarf any real funds they get if they have too many fake pledges. A better approach is to keep adding early adopter deals and then unleash the fake ones at the end when you need to make your target. That limits your loses to KS' cut and still gets you the real funds.
Kickstarter needs some basic donor protections and means of reporting scams. Otherwise they'll just devolve in a feeding ground for con men and no one will take any project posted there seriously.
Which is why I wonder if the model is sustainable. Either they take steps to police projects, which may open them up to liability if they miss one; or they become a sewer of cons and fade away.
I use FedEx over UPS anytime I can. Unfortunately, sometimes things get sent by whoever the seller decides to use and that can mean needing to keep an eye out for a UPS truck.
Understand. I was actually making a comic reference to:
Point 2 will bring it back to point 1. Not as a direct point of sale, but as a brand awareness tool.
When you see an add for a drink, it is not ment that you imediatly go to the store and buy that drink. It is that you see the brand in the store and recognize it.
As it is something familiar, you wil be more likely to buy it.
Certainly, but that doesn't mean they will buy advertising placements instead of just using the interactive capabilities.
Data mining and intercepting bad company experiences and "making good" on them. For example, we had something delivered via UPS. The driver left it on our front step, didn't ring the doorbell, and just left. It sat out there for hours before we realized it was there. The package could have easily been stolen during that time and neither UPS nor I would have known until it was much too late. We complained on Twitter and UPS contacted us in an attempt to find out what went wrong and how they could improve their policies.
I think this is the real usefulness for companies on social media. Spot bad experiences, help minimize bad PR by helping those customers, and minimize future bad PR by fixing those problems before more customers are affected.
Should have used FedEx.
Seriously, I agree with you. The ability to learn about and fix problems can be a powerful tool to build customer good well and retention. Social media can supply a vast amount of near real time feedback on who you are perceived as well as alert you to bad (and good) customer experiences.
1.) Social media advertising isn't as effective as advertisers hoped.
2.) Social media can be mined for data about your products, what people think of them, and overall opinions about your company. It is also a tool for engaging with customers.
Point 2 is much more useful to companies that 1; which means the real money in Twitter et. al. is data mining, not advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook didn't simply set out to make tweaks and see how users responded; they setup a controlled experiment on subjects without their consent; a practice that appears to violate ethical and possibly legal guidelines for behavioral research. I agree it could push them to continue to do such research and not reveal it; but when it inevitably leaks that they are doing that it will create a PR nightmare. Facebook could have simply asked people to opt in to the study and provide the standard information regarding the study and this would be a non-issue. For those looking for info on humane research protection guidelines in the US google Office of Human Research Protection.
I think the real story here is that someone in Atlanta figured out how to use a computer. :P
Nah, it's MARTA. If the did figure out how to use a computer they'd just use to figure how to make the service suck even more.
Sounds to me like "our production costs are so close to our competition's retail price, we're having trouble staying in business, pity us!"
No, this is not something for me to pity, and it most certainly isn't my problem to help you solve. You need to innovate and improve efficiency of your business, or close your doors. We don't do the "buggy whip" thing anymore. And your existence isn't critical enough to justufy subsdies/handouts. Innovate or die. (quietly if possible)
While I agree in principle, you can't simply have generators shutdown and not supply power to meet demand. If they simply shut off plants, the grid be damned, people would be screaming about blackouts and brownouts. Many of their competitors are heavily subsidized as well, and their generation not (yet) reliable enough to base load and ensure grid stability. While it's easy to say fu and your business model when it comes to power generation it isn't that simple. Just as California after the deregulated.
At times when the renewables production spikes, the electricity is "sold" at negative prices - i.e. whoever takes it, gets paid.
Why would suppliers provide electricity at negative prices?
Generally the time prices are negative is small, so it is cheaper to pay to take it than try to cycle a plant to keep prices higher. A baseload plant is not easily ramp up and down, especially when demand changes faster than their ramping ability, so they simply base load and pay to take to excess capacity.
Penalties include up to ten years in prison, or a fine of up to $1,000 and two and a half years in jail.
If you're going to bother at all, don't just quote the penalty, quote the whole statute. It clearly states that intent to use the tools for a criminal purpose is required for prosecution. This is the case in many states, and what it means is that you're free to carry around locksmithing tools as long as you aren't engaged in any criminal activity that would be aided by using those tools.
In other words, you'll incur an additional count if you possess lockpicks (or a sledge hammer, for that matter) while breaking into a house, and you might get charged if you have lockpicks while walking around wearing a ski mask and carrying a canvas sack with dollar signs on it, but other than that you're good to go.
Hey, this is /. Don't go stating facts to back up your argument. OB OP - in many states intent is required; of course in some sates you can basically get a buiness license and call yourself a locksmith.
This right here is why we should be teaching basic programming or scripting in middle school. Show young students how to automate simple tasks and they'll apply it to nearly every field that exists."
And far too many of them will think they know what they are doing and screw things up.
Sounds like someone who embodies the Three Virtues of a programmer: Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris. Well done!
I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!
It wasn't what he did but the results he achieved that earned him a medal. He saw a problem, applied a fix an made life easier for himself and his unit. Just because it was a relatively simple coding effort is immaterial.
In addition, what is simple to one person isn't to another; it all depends on one's experience.
Exactly. He doesn't need to do squat. He's implicitly selling the idea that he will be using all those secrets to help out his clients, but it's a flim-flam; he doesn't actually have to do it.
I wouldn't call it film-flam nor implicitly selling the idea that he will be using all those secrets. He brings an executive understanding of the types of threats and how to explain them in a way senior leaders can understand and offer a team that can help address the threats a company may face. His company can address them without ever revealing any secrets he learned during his stint at NSA.
And he was the head of the NSA, an administrator...what's the chance he knows much in the way of recent technical details anyway?
His technical skills are largely irrelevant, that's his staff's role. Being head of NSA, on the other hand, gives him credibility that can open the door to senior executives who can authorize spending the kind of money he charges. In addition, he can explain things in a way they can understand and motivates them to take action. If needed, he can bring in a techie for a dog and pony show; however no matter how skillful the techie is his or her chances of getting to a CEO / CIO are significantly less than the former head of the NSA. He has a credibility that the techie doesn't.
If availability is all thats required why can't a League of Legends team be coed? Just because team siren was awful doesn't mean that female players can't or won't play League of Legends professionally and/or on competitive teams at a high level. Considering how much effort has been put into making female players into placekickers in college football, in league of legends the admittance of female players should be a trivial non-issue.
Depends on what they want to accomplish. If a school needs a men's sport to keep the balance and save money by eliminating a more expensive one, then a men's team makes sense.
He needs to hire people who have the skills and experience addressing specific vulnerabilities. Ideally those people got that outside of TS work. He is the rainmaker that opens doors.
No, as the series of court rulings have gone, the Fourth Amendment does not protect you from lawful search and seizure (such as a safe or hard drive). The combination to the safe, or encryption key to the drive, is not incriminating evidence and providing it to allow for lawful search and seizure does not violate your rights. They can admit evidence produced by oneself into court (such as two sets of books in one's own handwriting for a case of fraud) and that is not a violation of the Fourth (or Fifth) - just so with information one puts on a hard drive. What they can not compel one to do is testify against oneself (which is the Fifth by the way) nor assume guilt because you do not take the stand (not that a prosecutor won't toe that line with the jury). So, if one can keep all details of a crime in one's head and manage to destroy all other evidence which could be subject to lawful search and seizure - then you've got a shot at being a criminal mastermind.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with the line of thought - but I can certainly follow the logic as well as the precedence.
What would be interesting is if one's pass-code was material evidence with respect to the case - but a possible way around that would be limited immunity or ruling it as inadmissible evidence...It would make for an interesting case study.
INAL, but it seems part of the reasoning hinges on his admitting he had the key, that information was encrypted, and he dealt with the suspects involved; thus his act of decrypting would not reveal anything the prosecution didn't already know about his awareness of the documents. In other words, he said essentially "there is stuff of mine over there" and the court says he must open the door. I wonder if he had not said anything if the decision would go the same way. Ironically, I find it off tha a lawyer wouldn't "lawyer up." Everyone I know in law enforcement says "always lawyer up" and that "the first thing the smart crooks say is 'I want my lawyer...'"
Really? I don't find the legitimate ones bad at all. Much better than the SAT for testing raw, innate intelligence.
.
Except MENSA accepts SAT and GMAT as qualifying exams. I would guess Mensa members fall into two broad categories, those who have self esteem issues and need to tell people they are members as if they makes them somehow special or better and all the rest. Unfortunately the former are the most visible and give all members a bad name.
it is made by Patek.
Is there a point to this post, exactly? I mean, I get the capacity variation is both a real concern and a common kind of FUD regarding solar, but this data point isn't about that.
It's not really FUD if it is a legitimate concern, which it is. There needs to be a way to store excess production for solar to be a viable base load source of power; without that it simply isn't a reliable enough source of power if you plan to meet a significant percentage of demand with solar.
It's about how rapidly a changeover in energy production to sustainable can occur. Germany was one of the world's biggest nuclear energy producers(France being the leader of that pack), and they've gone from that to one of the biggest solar producers in only a year or so.
It's clear a country with Germany's power demand can shift their source of power if they are willing to commit enough money to doing so; the question is "Is it sustainable over the long run and what are the fallout from such as switch on the broader economy?"
With a really large economy, without losing much GDP. The point that's being demonstrated is that a power infrastructure changeover can be done without sacrificing being a first world nation along the way.
I would say the jury is still out on the impact on GDP until the real costs of solar have filtered throughout the economy. I am not saying it isn't a wise move; but the actual impact and capabilities of solar as a base laid are still uncertain.
Given that videogaming is cheaper than just about anything except pick-up frisbee on the quad, (maybe $4K over the course of undergrad if the school is buying the hardware and keeping it fresh, and likely substantially less insurance exposure than any more active sport), if the Title IX metric is monetary, they'll need to free up very little extra funding for parity on the women's sports side. If the metric is participation, what a handy excuse to axe some comparatively expensive and not terribly popular men's sport...
IIRC, monetary parity is not required, equal support is. So if you pay to send the men's BB team on a trip you need to pay for the women's team trips as well; although they may cost less.
This will likely have mostly male applicants, and put pressure on the school to attract and spend more on females in other areas. They'll either have to shut down other male dominated sports, or find more funding to balance the equation for the women.
Nopt necessarily. Numeric parity is not required, availability is acceptable as well provided all other criteria are met. It could also be an attempt to increase mail participation since Title IX cuts both ways.
Of course, being Alabama, they will promptly arrest and jail the Chinese managers who come over to check on the plant unless they can prove they are in Alabama legally.
its Alabama not Arizona
I know. Arizona arrests you for looking Hispanic, Alabama, so far, for driving while German. In the name of equal opportunity they may extend that welcome to the Chinese as well.
It makes perfect sense. After enough time of disparaging the factory life, Americans are finally realizing that it beats the alternative.
I can make sense of it at an intellectual level, it's just my gut reaction to go "WTF" -- it's a bit counter-intuitive.
The news is welcome, I just wish American companies would start making things in USA again. I know we can do it. I suppose in time, we will.
Once you factor in productivity and transportation costs, amongst others, the cost gaps narrows and possibly even closes. They're not doing a 1 for 1 replacement of workers so hiring fewer, but more expensive and more productive US workers, begins to make sense. In addition, there can be political considerations as well.
Of course, being Alabama, they will promptly arrest and jail the Chinese managers who come over to check on the plant unless they can prove they are in Alabama legally.
Specific practices like driver using phone while driving, or curb parking time limits can certainly be regulated. But not the basic fact of people exchanging money for information. Dislike it all you want, but people have freedom to do as they want.
They aren't making the exchange of info illegal. You can still say "For $30 I'll tell you where a perking spot is.." it's the "and I'll hold it for you until you arrive ..." that is illegal. I think the city is justified in this position.
Well if you were to mine for gold, vs bit coins what is the difference.
Gold is just a piece of medal, while has some nice properties to it, its value is that it is a rare element.
Actually, it is not that rare, it's just more expensive to extract at the current value so much is left unextracted. It's value is that people accept it as a liquid store of value; so they are willing to exchange cash for gold.
Bitcoin is reaching the cost / value crossover; its volatility and lack of liquidity raise questions about it's value and wetehr people will accept it as a store of value.
I suspect that many scammer Kickstarters have a mass of pledges just as fake as yours--only not intended for humor, but rather "self-giving" to create buzz and give the impression of legitimacy. I doubt very seriously that most of that $500,000 they've raised on this particular campaign is real.
But this does raise a real point.
What about the cut KS takes? That could dwarf any real funds they get if they have too many fake pledges. A better approach is to keep adding early adopter deals and then unleash the fake ones at the end when you need to make your target. That limits your loses to KS' cut and still gets you the real funds.
Kickstarter needs some basic donor protections and means of reporting scams. Otherwise they'll just devolve in a feeding ground for con men and no one will take any project posted there seriously.
Which is why I wonder if the model is sustainable. Either they take steps to police projects, which may open them up to liability if they miss one; or they become a sewer of cons and fade away.
I use FedEx over UPS anytime I can. Unfortunately, sometimes things get sent by whoever the seller decides to use and that can mean needing to keep an eye out for a UPS truck.
Understand. I was actually making a comic reference to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=148dowDhkVY
Point 2 will bring it back to point 1. Not as a direct point of sale, but as a brand awareness tool. When you see an add for a drink, it is not ment that you imediatly go to the store and buy that drink. It is that you see the brand in the store and recognize it. As it is something familiar, you wil be more likely to buy it.
Certainly, but that doesn't mean they will buy advertising placements instead of just using the interactive capabilities.
Data mining and intercepting bad company experiences and "making good" on them. For example, we had something delivered via UPS. The driver left it on our front step, didn't ring the doorbell, and just left. It sat out there for hours before we realized it was there. The package could have easily been stolen during that time and neither UPS nor I would have known until it was much too late. We complained on Twitter and UPS contacted us in an attempt to find out what went wrong and how they could improve their policies.
I think this is the real usefulness for companies on social media. Spot bad experiences, help minimize bad PR by helping those customers, and minimize future bad PR by fixing those problems before more customers are affected.
Should have used FedEx.
Seriously, I agree with you. The ability to learn about and fix problems can be a powerful tool to build customer good well and retention. Social media can supply a vast amount of near real time feedback on who you are perceived as well as alert you to bad (and good) customer experiences.
1.) Social media advertising isn't as effective as advertisers hoped.
2.) Social media can be mined for data about your products, what people think of them, and overall opinions about your company. It is also a tool for engaging with customers.
Point 2 is much more useful to companies that 1; which means the real money in Twitter et. al. is data mining, not advertising.