So in one part of your sentence, you say they're cutting dead wood (something Tim never alludes to, nor do I in my alternative), and then you say the economy is a "great excuse", which is the whole point of both Tim's statement, and mine.
I tend to agree with you, up to a point some layoffs are weeding the garden, so to speak -- but there's also a LOT of really stupid stuff going on right now, in the name of "preserving capital" at companies.
What they want is to have cash in the bank at the end of bad quarters. Why they want that is that it will make their stock look better on paper (especially tech companies that don't pay dividends).
They just won't come out and say it, because they know it will make them look greedy. Why? Because their bonuses are based on stock performance, not anything that makes sense in an economic slowdown. Tie the bonus to a seriously thought-about set of things where stock performance is only ONE part of the equation (and include sales, profit margin -- if any, numbers of products created/killed, etc... something more wide that covers overall performance of the company), and things will change.
Incentives. Use the wrong ones (even at the CxO level), get the wrong results.
How many companies are already cutting TOO deep?
I know of one who dropped a 22 year employee with more knowledge about certain things they REALLY need knowledge of, so they could "outsource" that department.
That's not smart cuts, or weeding -- that's just stupid.
The number of jobs goes up and down with the number of people who are spending, living, and ignoring the media's claims that the world is coming to an end.
Right now, people want to believe things are bad. The pendulum will swing the other way when they get tired of that song-and-dance...
Heh... I remember getting calls after I was hit in a post-dot-bomb layoff, asking "Have you seen what people are posting about the company at FC?"
Not knowing what FC was, I enjoyed reading the rants. But then again, I always thought they were stupid, in the end.
Stupid of the people (then looking for work) to post things like that in public, and stupid of the people still working there to even care what was being said.
Most of them were about the company's culture, which was based on the personalities of the owners, their professional backgrounds, and stuff like that...
Those guys sold the company a few years later for 3.5 million, and are on to working on their next company. The people who complained? Who knows -- but I bet they've haven't been as successful.
Why post to places like that? Get a life, get on to the next job, and move on. And I say that after being jobless for a year after that place. I was depressed, angry, all the classic stages of loss... and then I got on with life.
People will get on with life after this "global slowdown" too.
I say, the sooner the better. Kickstart it... move on, and don't wallow in it. Go do something useful today.
The hemmoraging will stop when people start forgetting that they've been told (by someone else, usually the media) that the economy is "bad" and go back to buying and selling things at higher levels than they are right now.
Go do what you're going to do: The economy will take care of itself, if you're working toward useful endeavors.
Tim says at TFA: "The layoffs, which were spread across the company, were part of an overall reorganization to create more focus on some new opportunities, as well as a response to today's very tough economic climate."
Cut the crap, Tim. Why can't CEO's just say it:
"We laid of 30 people to save money so we don't lose the whole company. Sales are down, profits are impacted. If we don't lay off, we will die."
Be real. It'd garner a lot more respect from the people you NEED supporting you.
Great point. There are plenty of us out here who do not have Engineering degrees or who haven't passed any PE boards, that can do many of the things Engineers can, at cheaper pay. Sometimes you need the formal education, sometimes you just need skill and a little job-hunting luck. References after that first job also help.
The title is diluted because customers often feel better if you call someone an Engineer, and as long as their needs are met by that person, they don't care if the person has a BSEE or whatever.
The only way you'll see having the BSEE as a requirement, is the day software development and networks have government regulation (building codes, like in Civil Engineering).
Until then, get used to there being people called "Engineers" who don't deserve the title. I know I don't.
I've always been a sysadmin with excellent troubleshooting skills, and my current title shows that -- but it's been "Sr. Engineer" before. They put the title on me, not the other way around.
Okay, so you agree he has no power to make any of the changes he promised. Thank you.
What point are you trying to make in the rest of the message? You asked a question you seem to know the answer to -- enlighten us: What changes did Bush make? Bush, not the Legislative Branch.
Let's get a list. Then let's put it up with the list Obama makes over the next four years, and see if they're equally evil. They probably will be. These guys that want to be President are twisted -- all of them. We just don't want the job ourselves, so we let them have their 4 year play-dates in the White House.
Some have more character than others and stick to their words and promises, even if unpopular, and some are populists. But all are corrupt in some way or another... it's built into the system via Lobbyists and the amount of money needed to run a national campaign.
You seem hopeful that Obama will make some kind of "better" changes, so let's hear which ones he'll do. Give us that list too.
Saying "why won't he?" is just pandering to the "hopeful" with no solid reasoning or direction. And I think that's what we're going to see for four years... no solid direction. The Democratic Party can't get itself any more organized around a specific set of Party GOALS than the Repbulicans can. They're just another "big tent" with a leftist leaning agenda, but they don't agree with each other either.
Obviously he won't go back on any of his campaign promises, because he's a man of character, right? Or is he a populist and he'll wait to say he "fixed" something (like the economy) after it's already rebounding on its normal cycle in 2 years?
One of my favorites was his "anyone making less than 250,000 a year will not pay any new taxes"... ahhh, yes... but he also won't ask the Legislature to RENEW the tax cuts currently in effect, right? So net result -- I'll certainly pay more in taxes. Why? I'm a DINK. Two professionals without children in this country pay BIG taxes. Check it out sometime if you like. If AMT isn't indexed to inflation somehow, I'm gonna get hammered. That's how Obama will pay for the things he wants the LEGISLATURE to do. (And now it's up to Hillary and Ted Kennedy to decide who REALLY gets to put their name on the legislation, since they're already fighting over it.)
Obama's words in the campaign were (to me), just a sleazy way to promise things he can't deliver, and right at that weasel worded statement -- and then the continuous repitition of it, I knew the Republicans had lost. They focused their repetition on facts and statements about their own character. Obama based his repetitive statements on a fairy tale... a land where no one pays taxes, but free things are handed to all. (Healthcare.)
I knew he had the popular vote, but what bothered me the most about that was that his campaign is not being fully genuine with the people less intelligent than himself and his careful writers in promises like the tax thing, in fact they were downright condescending pretending that he wasn't effectively saying, "your taxes will go up, but not because of a RAISE in taxes -- we'll just let the cuts expire, so you can't blame us!".
For an intellectual so highly regarded to do that openly and the public to buy it, either we're all idiots... or we're all following the same silly trend humans always follow -- pick the guy who promises you more, and don't vet the statement. Just try to hold him to it later, but you know you can't.
So.. all of that to me, is a huge lack of character, and we'll hear more of it. We're already hearing it with his words about his involvement in Chicago politics.
Anyone as intelligent as this guy is touted to be, who says they don't know anything about what goes on in Chicago politics, is lying. That or he's really a complete idiot. It's on the news every night there.
But... as I said, I have my doubts about that intelligence. Stamina, yes. Determination, yes. Charisma, oodles of it. Nice voice that works well on T
Or, if he does, he'll be doing it via the same abuses of Executive authority that the Democrats complain the Republicans have done the last eight years.
Vote out the incumbents in Congress. That's where "Change You Can Believe In" comes from, not the Executive Branch.
(Unless you're only concerned about the ideological stuff headed for the Supreme Court after Obama's finished appointing two Justices. That part, he can change. But the day to day Washington horse-shit comes from Lobbyists paying off your "home-town" politicians. Get a clue and educate people in your area to vote appropriately.)
Ever notice how well the politicians know this. Any commercial for a President is all about things the President CAN'T DO in our government, thus they always have a way out... same with commercials for Congress, they promise things only the President can do, and bitch about each other's voting records.
Time to kick 'em out and stop the broken record from skipping. But... half of the population now "has hope" about Obama's false promises, so it won't happen.
Things will have to get much worse before the Citizens finally clean up Washington, D.C. and take their money (and thus their power) back to their local States and/or themselves.
They do it because they know just how much "propping up" he needs.
It's easy to lead in "community service" in poor neighborhoods where you're handing out someone else's money.
It's not so easy to lead when roughly half the entire country doesn't want to listen to you. We'll see how he does.
So far, he's appointed much of the Clinton's Cabinet, and a few dolts who he should dump, but politically can't afford to.
Count how many "uh's" come out of his mouth when he's answering a serious question. Most of his answers sound no better than Bush, if you take away that his voice is a more pleasing baritone, and that Bush stumbles on vocabulary. The quality of the answers is similar.
Wishy-washy, can't make a real decision without advisors... you know, Washington politics as usual. Just a different Party line to cow-tow to.
This guy's no leader, he's just a rallying point for those on the opposite side of the last President.
Obama has no "problem" at NASA. He's not even the President yet, Timothy -- you moron. If he wants to change things at NASA when he *is* President, he can.
What a stupid political stunt of a Slashdot posting. Not too surprised it came from "Timm-ah", though.
I put in "radio" as a search, and I got this back:
----------- You searched for: radio Did you mean radio as in...
radio (music devices) two-way radio (communications tools) radio broadcaster (broadcaster) radio (art) radio (appliances)
No photos matched your search criteria. -----------
Why have someone REFINE their search criteria when there's nothing found under the BROADER scope?
Even stranger, typing in "two-way radio" just gives the answer that there's nothing. Why not ask the user to broaden their scope... IF there's something labeled a "radio" -- which in this case there's not, but just to point out the logical user interface flaws go both ways.
Usability... and having the interface make sense logically, are important.
The difference is... if the server is coded correctly it can still ANSWER for the other things in that zone while it's IXFR'ing the changes.
People looking for that record have to wait 9 seconds, people asking for the other records, don't have to wait.
IF the server is coded correctly, of course.
Add to this the fact that not all DNS servers are as well-connected as you have there, especially back when IXFR was added -- and you now see what the problems really were.
Here, let me summarize that giant run-on paragraph for you into Marketing-speak:
Clearwire: Because hard work is its own reward. Our investors and partners are only impressed with our hard work. (Not accomplishing things that make money.)
Learn to hit return/enter once in a while, try out that cute little "Preview" button if you're unsure, and slow down a bit. The speed at which you posted that obviously affected the QUALITY of your work. Hope you're not doing the same thing at the office. Lay off the Red Bull or something.
Burnout man cometh! Been there, done that -- "Customer focused" company doing "great new things" in the late 90's just prior to the tech capital market's self-destruction. Company's still around, owners made 4 million, none of us who worked 60 hour weeks got to stay long enough to make anything other than 3 year's salary. Company had printed their Red Herring and was attempting to IPO when the IPO market fell out. Wouldn't have mattered if they'd created the next Apple or HP, the IPO market was done for a month after they tried. Stock options were as worthless as toilet paper, since they weren't even printed on paper -- just electronic confirmations and a list in HR and Legal of who would own what.
You know what "partnering with blue chip investors" means? They are even more keen on making a high percentage return on investment than cheap investors who are dabbling in high-risk small companies. Money now, means pay up later.
Here's a tip of the hat to Clearwire - let's hope they can do what they've hyped.
The company is losing subscribers, not going bankrupt. There's a big difference. XM/Sirus isn't going anywhere.
Mix in a poor economy and people not spending money on things that are frivolous and not necessary for their own survival, like Satellite Radio -- and you get, deflation of both the economy and gosh... the companies that make up the economy. Normal 7 year business cycle.
But going back to the bigger picture: The view of companies is that they must have CONTINUOUS GROWTH, or they're failing. This is flawed.
Let's explain why: A company that has just enough growth to cover inflation who has a 75% profit margin, is a wildly PROFITABLE company. But Wall Street will still hand their asses to them in the stock price if there's not GROWTH.
This has been going on for a long time, and makes little long-term business sense. Companies push beyond the point where their customers are happy with the service, making the quality drop off to maintain GROWTH when they could just hold at a high quality level and maintain PROFITABILITY.
I haven't looked at XM/Sirius... are they profitable, or are they leveraged (borrowing money) heavily to operate. Any company heavily leveraged with no cash on hand in this market, is definitely going to have their asses handed to them. Welcome to business risk analysis 101. The CEO's don't want to blame themselves because they need those uber-egos to be able to demand the insane paychecks they pull down. No BUSINESS ORIENTED Board of Directors should ever pay those guys as much as they do in the first place... but they do, because they're often other CEO's (peers) of the guy whom they're paying.
You pat my back, I'll pat yours. The normal way of the world. But it's twisted beyond belief right now. Look at the GM, Ford, and Chrysler guys all showing up to their Congressional meeting begging for money, in their corporate jets. I'm a big General Aviation fan, and love when GA aircraft can really do something good for the economy and companies... but I think they could have saved a few bucks and shown up via the other corporate scum suckers, the airlines, and saved a few bucks getting there.
When asked why they did it, you could tell from the looks on their faces that they simply don't even THINK about flying on an airline. It's not even an OPTION in these guy's heads. Blank stares like, "What?" Not even comprehending the question, let alone understanding the political impact of it. As far as being REAL businesspeople goes, these guys are CLUELESS. Did they EVER have a "normal" job in their lives?
I've followed the career of a few high-ranking folks who started out with nothing, and guess what... their businesses are sitting on piles of cash and cutting unneceesary spending to get through the next couple of years. Go figure.
If XM/Sirius is heavily leveraged... maybe it's time for them to die, the people who took risks on them to learn what they signed...
(Do they own bonds, or stock? Who gets paid first? This is all carefully and well documented in business, of course... think of it as a Slashdot homework lesson... who's getting paid if XM/Sirius can't pay the bills... you can do this exercise with ANY company and their public records...)
Then the liquidators come in, and give a different management team a chance to make something of it, and sell them the assets at pennies on the dollar for a new group of people to take the risks.
E-mail causes problems. If you don't archive anything, they say you were "destroying documents", but if you archive everything, all of your company's internal communication is discoverable via a supoena.
In other words, use telephones.
In Apple's case, I think they'd rather pay any fines in court for "forgetting" to archive everything rather than have all their internal communication available to anyone with a lawsuit/beef against them. Archiving their mail would be a strategic fuck-up of grand proportions. And they probably know it.
Here on Slashdot where people regularly talk about ways to safeguard their entire laptop's data from prying eyes via whole-disk encryption, there are actually a few real-world PGP users lurking around, and privacy is important... why is everyone arguing that Apple should have to let anyone read their mail?
That's retarded. Make it easy for the government to ask for copies of corporate mail, and it's a guarantee that they'll also want individual mail. Duh.
Archive nothing. Delete, delete, delete. It's not a "document", it's a damn e-mail. It's non-real-time PRIVATE communication within the company. The only difference between the e-mail and the phone on the desk is that one only works when both parties are sitting at the desks. That world is long-gone, we're often not at the desk, or we're not in the same time zone.
Corporate e-mail doesn't need to be read by anyone. It needs to be considered private communication, just like we'd all like to THINK our personal mail is... but it really isn't... so I guess we give up on personal AND corporate privacy? Sad and dumb.
With enough lawyers and money, that one would be fun to debate in a courtroom.
Or the company could offer to send it to the person via a WHOLE BUNCH of SMS text messages. A very common way to "exchange data" nowadays. LOL!
The GPL is easy to screw with. Societal norms seem to do more to protect it than anything. All it'll take is some people not interested in playing to break it, because it will hold up in most courts, but there are just enough wack-job judges that some district won't uphold it (eventually) and then it has to be appealed to a higher court...
There's no real strength in a license itself, until there's real court cases to back it up. It's still quite "untested" after all these years, which I find interesting, considering lots of companies have stolen code and used it. EFF as "champion" of the GPL is ineffective, so far, and we all alread know half the world ignores RMS as a crackpot.
Slashdot Mirror
So in one part of your sentence, you say they're cutting dead wood (something Tim never alludes to, nor do I in my alternative), and then you say the economy is a "great excuse", which is the whole point of both Tim's statement, and mine.
I tend to agree with you, up to a point some layoffs are weeding the garden, so to speak -- but there's also a LOT of really stupid stuff going on right now, in the name of "preserving capital" at companies.
What they want is to have cash in the bank at the end of bad quarters. Why they want that is that it will make their stock look better on paper (especially tech companies that don't pay dividends).
They just won't come out and say it, because they know it will make them look greedy. Why? Because their bonuses are based on stock performance, not anything that makes sense in an economic slowdown. Tie the bonus to a seriously thought-about set of things where stock performance is only ONE part of the equation (and include sales, profit margin -- if any, numbers of products created/killed, etc... something more wide that covers overall performance of the company), and things will change.
Incentives. Use the wrong ones (even at the CxO level), get the wrong results.
How many companies are already cutting TOO deep?
I know of one who dropped a 22 year employee with more knowledge about certain things they REALLY need knowledge of, so they could "outsource" that department.
That's not smart cuts, or weeding -- that's just stupid.
The number of jobs goes up and down with the number of people who are spending, living, and ignoring the media's claims that the world is coming to an end.
Right now, people want to believe things are bad. The pendulum will swing the other way when they get tired of that song-and-dance...
Heh... I remember getting calls after I was hit in a post-dot-bomb layoff, asking "Have you seen what people are posting about the company at FC?"
Not knowing what FC was, I enjoyed reading the rants. But then again, I always thought they were stupid, in the end.
Stupid of the people (then looking for work) to post things like that in public, and stupid of the people still working there to even care what was being said.
Most of them were about the company's culture, which was based on the personalities of the owners, their professional backgrounds, and stuff like that...
Those guys sold the company a few years later for 3.5 million, and are on to working on their next company. The people who complained? Who knows -- but I bet they've haven't been as successful.
Why post to places like that? Get a life, get on to the next job, and move on. And I say that after being jobless for a year after that place. I was depressed, angry, all the classic stages of loss... and then I got on with life.
People will get on with life after this "global slowdown" too.
I say, the sooner the better. Kickstart it... move on, and don't wallow in it. Go do something useful today.
The hemmoraging will stop when people start forgetting that they've been told (by someone else, usually the media) that the economy is "bad" and go back to buying and selling things at higher levels than they are right now.
Go do what you're going to do: The economy will take care of itself, if you're working toward useful endeavors.
Tim says at TFA: "The layoffs, which were spread across the company, were part of an overall reorganization to create more focus on some new opportunities, as well as a response to today's very tough economic climate."
Cut the crap, Tim. Why can't CEO's just say it:
"We laid of 30 people to save money so we don't lose the whole company. Sales are down, profits are impacted. If we don't lay off, we will die."
Be real. It'd garner a lot more respect from the people you NEED supporting you.
Great point. There are plenty of us out here who do not have Engineering degrees or who haven't passed any PE boards, that can do many of the things Engineers can, at cheaper pay. Sometimes you need the formal education, sometimes you just need skill and a little job-hunting luck. References after that first job also help.
The title is diluted because customers often feel better if you call someone an Engineer, and as long as their needs are met by that person, they don't care if the person has a BSEE or whatever.
The only way you'll see having the BSEE as a requirement, is the day software development and networks have government regulation (building codes, like in Civil Engineering).
Until then, get used to there being people called "Engineers" who don't deserve the title. I know I don't.
I've always been a sysadmin with excellent troubleshooting skills, and my current title shows that -- but it's been "Sr. Engineer" before. They put the title on me, not the other way around.
Geek Squad.
Okay, so you agree he has no power to make any of the changes he promised. Thank you.
What point are you trying to make in the rest of the message? You asked a question you seem to know the answer to -- enlighten us: What changes did Bush make? Bush, not the Legislative Branch.
Let's get a list. Then let's put it up with the list Obama makes over the next four years, and see if they're equally evil. They probably will be. These guys that want to be President are twisted -- all of them. We just don't want the job ourselves, so we let them have their 4 year play-dates in the White House.
Some have more character than others and stick to their words and promises, even if unpopular, and some are populists. But all are corrupt in some way or another... it's built into the system via Lobbyists and the amount of money needed to run a national campaign.
You seem hopeful that Obama will make some kind of "better" changes, so let's hear which ones he'll do. Give us that list too.
Saying "why won't he?" is just pandering to the "hopeful" with no solid reasoning or direction. And I think that's what we're going to see for four years... no solid direction. The Democratic Party can't get itself any more organized around a specific set of Party GOALS than the Repbulicans can. They're just another "big tent" with a leftist leaning agenda, but they don't agree with each other either.
Obviously he won't go back on any of his campaign promises, because he's a man of character, right? Or is he a populist and he'll wait to say he "fixed" something (like the economy) after it's already rebounding on its normal cycle in 2 years?
One of my favorites was his "anyone making less than 250,000 a year will not pay any new taxes"... ahhh, yes... but he also won't ask the Legislature to RENEW the tax cuts currently in effect, right? So net result -- I'll certainly pay more in taxes. Why? I'm a DINK. Two professionals without children in this country pay BIG taxes. Check it out sometime if you like. If AMT isn't indexed to inflation somehow, I'm gonna get hammered. That's how Obama will pay for the things he wants the LEGISLATURE to do. (And now it's up to Hillary and Ted Kennedy to decide who REALLY gets to put their name on the legislation, since they're already fighting over it.)
Obama's words in the campaign were (to me), just a sleazy way to promise things he can't deliver, and right at that weasel worded statement -- and then the continuous repitition of it, I knew the Republicans had lost. They focused their repetition on facts and statements about their own character. Obama based his repetitive statements on a fairy tale... a land where no one pays taxes, but free things are handed to all. (Healthcare.)
I knew he had the popular vote, but what bothered me the most about that was that his campaign is not being fully genuine with the people less intelligent than himself and his careful writers in promises like the tax thing, in fact they were downright condescending pretending that he wasn't effectively saying, "your taxes will go up, but not because of a RAISE in taxes -- we'll just let the cuts expire, so you can't blame us!".
For an intellectual so highly regarded to do that openly and the public to buy it, either we're all idiots... or we're all following the same silly trend humans always follow -- pick the guy who promises you more, and don't vet the statement. Just try to hold him to it later, but you know you can't.
So.. all of that to me, is a huge lack of character, and we'll hear more of it. We're already hearing it with his words about his involvement in Chicago politics.
Anyone as intelligent as this guy is touted to be, who says they don't know anything about what goes on in Chicago politics, is lying. That or he's really a complete idiot. It's on the news every night there.
But... as I said, I have my doubts about that intelligence. Stamina, yes. Determination, yes. Charisma, oodles of it. Nice voice that works well on T
Jumped the shark to go fling poo with the rest of the monkeys and let someone else have a turn on the shark.
Yep. Congratulations to one of the few American companies that still gets how to build a quality product.
This is a nice segway into my thoughts for the Automotive "sector" and their bailout BS:
"Build something better than a Honda."
Maybe they could go visit Apple HQ and see how it's done.
Hmm, let's see here... Civics 101...
As a President, he WON'T make any changes.
Or, if he does, he'll be doing it via the same abuses of Executive authority that the Democrats complain the Republicans have done the last eight years.
Vote out the incumbents in Congress. That's where "Change You Can Believe In" comes from, not the Executive Branch.
(Unless you're only concerned about the ideological stuff headed for the Supreme Court after Obama's finished appointing two Justices. That part, he can change. But the day to day Washington horse-shit comes from Lobbyists paying off your "home-town" politicians. Get a clue and educate people in your area to vote appropriately.)
Ever notice how well the politicians know this. Any commercial for a President is all about things the President CAN'T DO in our government, thus they always have a way out... same with commercials for Congress, they promise things only the President can do, and bitch about each other's voting records.
Time to kick 'em out and stop the broken record from skipping. But... half of the population now "has hope" about Obama's false promises, so it won't happen.
Things will have to get much worse before the Citizens finally clean up Washington, D.C. and take their money (and thus their power) back to their local States and/or themselves.
Unless the power makes that person bat-shit crazy. That's the usual way of things with one guy with too much power.
If he doesn't succumb to it, congratulations. They already bought DoubleClick...
The need to make a profit and not just blow through cash, can make one bat-shit crazy, of course.
... FAIL!
(Again. Yawn.)
They do it because they know just how much "propping up" he needs.
It's easy to lead in "community service" in poor neighborhoods where you're handing out someone else's money.
It's not so easy to lead when roughly half the entire country doesn't want to listen to you. We'll see how he does.
So far, he's appointed much of the Clinton's Cabinet, and a few dolts who he should dump, but politically can't afford to.
Count how many "uh's" come out of his mouth when he's answering a serious question. Most of his answers sound no better than Bush, if you take away that his voice is a more pleasing baritone, and that Bush stumbles on vocabulary. The quality of the answers is similar.
Wishy-washy, can't make a real decision without advisors... you know, Washington politics as usual. Just a different Party line to cow-tow to.
This guy's no leader, he's just a rallying point for those on the opposite side of the last President.
News for nerds, flamebait that matters.
Obama has no "problem" at NASA. He's not even the President yet, Timothy -- you moron. If he wants to change things at NASA when he *is* President, he can.
What a stupid political stunt of a Slashdot posting. Not too surprised it came from "Timm-ah", though.
I put in "radio" as a search, and I got this back:
-----------
You searched for: radio
Did you mean radio as in...
radio (music devices) two-way radio (communications tools) radio broadcaster (broadcaster) radio (art) radio (appliances)
No photos matched your search criteria.
-----------
Why have someone REFINE their search criteria when there's nothing found under the BROADER scope?
Even stranger, typing in "two-way radio" just gives the answer that there's nothing. Why not ask the user to broaden their scope... IF there's something labeled a "radio" -- which in this case there's not, but just to point out the logical user interface flaws go both ways.
Usability... and having the interface make sense logically, are important.
The difference is... if the server is coded correctly it can still ANSWER for the other things in that zone while it's IXFR'ing the changes.
People looking for that record have to wait 9 seconds, people asking for the other records, don't have to wait.
IF the server is coded correctly, of course.
Add to this the fact that not all DNS servers are as well-connected as you have there, especially back when IXFR was added -- and you now see what the problems really were.
Here, let me summarize that giant run-on paragraph for you into Marketing-speak:
Clearwire: Because hard work is its own reward. Our investors and partners are only impressed with our hard work. (Not accomplishing things that make money.)
Learn to hit return/enter once in a while, try out that cute little "Preview" button if you're unsure, and slow down a bit. The speed at which you posted that obviously affected the QUALITY of your work. Hope you're not doing the same thing at the office. Lay off the Red Bull or something.
Burnout man cometh! Been there, done that -- "Customer focused" company doing "great new things" in the late 90's just prior to the tech capital market's self-destruction. Company's still around, owners made 4 million, none of us who worked 60 hour weeks got to stay long enough to make anything other than 3 year's salary. Company had printed their Red Herring and was attempting to IPO when the IPO market fell out. Wouldn't have mattered if they'd created the next Apple or HP, the IPO market was done for a month after they tried. Stock options were as worthless as toilet paper, since they weren't even printed on paper -- just electronic confirmations and a list in HR and Legal of who would own what.
You know what "partnering with blue chip investors" means? They are even more keen on making a high percentage return on investment than cheap investors who are dabbling in high-risk small companies. Money now, means pay up later.
Here's a tip of the hat to Clearwire - let's hope they can do what they've hyped.
I thought he was talking about Siebel.
The company is losing subscribers, not going bankrupt. There's a big difference. XM/Sirus isn't going anywhere.
Mix in a poor economy and people not spending money on things that are frivolous and not necessary for their own survival, like Satellite Radio -- and you get, deflation of both the economy and gosh... the companies that make up the economy. Normal 7 year business cycle.
But going back to the bigger picture: The view of companies is that they must have CONTINUOUS GROWTH, or they're failing. This is flawed.
Let's explain why: A company that has just enough growth to cover inflation who has a 75% profit margin, is a wildly PROFITABLE company. But Wall Street will still hand their asses to them in the stock price if there's not GROWTH.
This has been going on for a long time, and makes little long-term business sense. Companies push beyond the point where their customers are happy with the service, making the quality drop off to maintain GROWTH when they could just hold at a high quality level and maintain PROFITABILITY.
I haven't looked at XM/Sirius... are they profitable, or are they leveraged (borrowing money) heavily to operate. Any company heavily leveraged with no cash on hand in this market, is definitely going to have their asses handed to them. Welcome to business risk analysis 101. The CEO's don't want to blame themselves because they need those uber-egos to be able to demand the insane paychecks they pull down. No BUSINESS ORIENTED Board of Directors should ever pay those guys as much as they do in the first place... but they do, because they're often other CEO's (peers) of the guy whom they're paying.
You pat my back, I'll pat yours. The normal way of the world. But it's twisted beyond belief right now. Look at the GM, Ford, and Chrysler guys all showing up to their Congressional meeting begging for money, in their corporate jets. I'm a big General Aviation fan, and love when GA aircraft can really do something good for the economy and companies... but I think they could have saved a few bucks and shown up via the other corporate scum suckers, the airlines, and saved a few bucks getting there.
When asked why they did it, you could tell from the looks on their faces that they simply don't even THINK about flying on an airline. It's not even an OPTION in these guy's heads. Blank stares like, "What?" Not even comprehending the question, let alone understanding the political impact of it. As far as being REAL businesspeople goes, these guys are CLUELESS. Did they EVER have a "normal" job in their lives?
I've followed the career of a few high-ranking folks who started out with nothing, and guess what... their businesses are sitting on piles of cash and cutting unneceesary spending to get through the next couple of years. Go figure.
If XM/Sirius is heavily leveraged... maybe it's time for them to die, the people who took risks on them to learn what they signed...
(Do they own bonds, or stock? Who gets paid first? This is all carefully and well documented in business, of course... think of it as a Slashdot homework lesson... who's getting paid if XM/Sirius can't pay the bills... you can do this exercise with ANY company and their public records...)
Then the liquidators come in, and give a different management team a chance to make something of it, and sell them the assets at pennies on the dollar for a new group of people to take the risks.
Fun. Capitalism.
It's called: A lease.
Who cares about TFA?
If you carry *ANY* RF transmitting device on your person, you can always be found via traditional RF Direction Finding techniques.
Period. Easy too.
With modern gear and more than one receive site, this is passive, undetectable, and fast.
Worrying about the Feds using this "spoofing" gear to get your cell phone to transmit a little more data to them, really misses the entire point.
Carrying a transmitter means you can be found. End of story, full stop. The Feds have that gear too. Who cares?
E-mail causes problems. If you don't archive anything, they say you were "destroying documents", but if you archive everything, all of your company's internal communication is discoverable via a supoena.
In other words, use telephones.
In Apple's case, I think they'd rather pay any fines in court for "forgetting" to archive everything rather than have all their internal communication available to anyone with a lawsuit/beef against them. Archiving their mail would be a strategic fuck-up of grand proportions. And they probably know it.
Here on Slashdot where people regularly talk about ways to safeguard their entire laptop's data from prying eyes via whole-disk encryption, there are actually a few real-world PGP users lurking around, and privacy is important... why is everyone arguing that Apple should have to let anyone read their mail?
That's retarded. Make it easy for the government to ask for copies of corporate mail, and it's a guarantee that they'll also want individual mail. Duh.
Archive nothing. Delete, delete, delete. It's not a "document", it's a damn e-mail. It's non-real-time PRIVATE communication within the company. The only difference between the e-mail and the phone on the desk is that one only works when both parties are sitting at the desks. That world is long-gone, we're often not at the desk, or we're not in the same time zone.
Corporate e-mail doesn't need to be read by anyone. It needs to be considered private communication, just like we'd all like to THINK our personal mail is... but it really isn't... so I guess we give up on personal AND corporate privacy? Sad and dumb.
With enough lawyers and money, that one would be fun to debate in a courtroom.
Or the company could offer to send it to the person via a WHOLE BUNCH of SMS text messages. A very common way to "exchange data" nowadays. LOL!
The GPL is easy to screw with. Societal norms seem to do more to protect it than anything. All it'll take is some people not interested in playing to break it, because it will hold up in most courts, but there are just enough wack-job judges that some district won't uphold it (eventually) and then it has to be appealed to a higher court...
There's no real strength in a license itself, until there's real court cases to back it up. It's still quite "untested" after all these years, which I find interesting, considering lots of companies have stolen code and used it. EFF as "champion" of the GPL is ineffective, so far, and we all alread know half the world ignores RMS as a crackpot.
Last I read the GPL, you could charge for "reasonable" copying costs. Maybe you've FAILED to read it?