Thanks - I'll have to keep an eye out for that. When I do make bread I tend to ferment overnight or use a cold/wet method (the latter gives great results, but is really messy to work with). I've yet to get a french loaf to really taste decent for more than a day or two. I don't use diastatic malt, but perhaps I should some day.
Yup - this is why internet advertising is so reviled.
A newspaper is a page of black and white articles with some black and white ads nearby.
An online newspaper is a page of black and white articles, with some subset of: 1. Full color ads. 2. Ads that contain motion within them. 3. Ads that stay on screen even as you read down the page. 4. Ads that move around within the screen. 5. Ads that actually pop up over top of the article you're trying to read, and you get to try to close them. 6. Ads that do dynamic stuff that is broken on the browser you're using, so you have to resort to hacks like selecting text to try to get the page to scroll it out of the way of the text you're reading. 7. Ads that actually try to force you to watch them by blocking content and enforcing a time delay. 8. Ads that actually give you a quiz on the presented material before letting you see the article. (Yes, I've actually seen this.)
People don't have some kind of revulsion for online ads simply because they're online. People just hate ads that are intrusive. The last time I went to a play there were ads in the playbill, and I didn't care. Before the play started somebody thanked and named a sponsor or two, and I didn't care. Now, if in the middle of Act 1 Bozo the clown jumped in front of me and started waving signs and blowing his horns, then I'd care.
Well, arguably that is no harder than rewriting it all to be multi-threaded.
I think the articles's approach is a good one - it allows procedural code while hiding threading details from the programmer, which means that the programmers task is to properly tag code and not to try to carefully implement locks/etc.
Very true. You can have all the sockets you want in your ssh connection, and they can go whatever direction you want them to go in, but the outside connection is just one TCP connection that starts at the side you generally have the least control over.
Again, the only reason I could see for maybe doing something outside of ssh is if you wanted a realtime transport for screen updates. That is one problem I've seen with NX - if I hit page-down twice on a client-rendered browser like chromium I get to watch the thing paint the whole screen twice as all those screen updates go into one massive FIFO buffer. The thing should just throw away obsoleted information. Of course, to do that you'd probably also need to come up with the NX equivalent of keyframes.
I'm not sure the fermentation strategy actually matters so much. I buy moisture content, but I think a bigger factor is fat content. Whole-grain bread contains more fat, so that will tend to last longer than white bread. Start tossing in butter/oil/etc and the bread will last longer still.
I haven't found fermentation approach to affect the life of my bread much (when comparing the same type of bread), though it certainly can impact the flavor.
Can you have 35 users run 35 instances of a single application consuming roughly only 35x the data memory requirements of that application in this manner?
That was what I was getting at. This seems to be limited to sharing desktops, and I suspect it is limited to one login session per PC at a time, though I'm not certain of that.
Suppose I'm a small business with 15 employees. Most of what we do is on Google Apps. I have 3 quickbooks users who use the app a fair bit of the day, and an inventory app that is win32 only that gets about 10% usage. That is about 5 concurrent users across two apps. Right now if you want to deploy Chrombooks you'd need to deploy 5 PCs that individuals could remote desktop into in order to run those apps, and those PCs would basically have idle CPUs 95% of the time, and individuals need to worry about logging in/out and which PCs are used for which apps and all that nonsense. What any company would want to do is just have one PC serving up those two apps, and individuals would just launch a bookmark or whatever to get a tap that runs that one app without having to worry about where it is running.
If Google wants ChromeOS to take off in the business world they really need a simple solution to this problem, and it isn't exactly a problem that hasn't been solved 14 times already.
Absolutely true - you're likely to make more with a degree than without. The problem is that it likely isn't enough to matter. I suspect you'll find a pretty skewed distribution as well. For every MBA who is pulling down $300k there are hundreds of people working as waiters into their 40s.
Agreed. If somebody has real talent in an STEM field I think that a moderately expensive college education is still worthwhile (think good state college, or relatively inexpensive private science-oriented one). Those with strong talent can likely achieve scholarships to lighten the blow, and even though hiring isn't what it used to be you can still make a decent salary.
Beyond that, honestly I don't see the point in spending so much for a piece of paper. As the earlier post said, you don't need one to become a barista.
Oh, and if you're even remotely concerned about whether you'll get accepted into college, then don't bother to apply, as I can guarantee that you'll never be accepted into your dream job, whatever that is, unless your dream job is one that doesn't really require the degree in the first place. If you want to know what your chances are in the real world, look at how many colleges are begging you to enroll and offering you deals to entice you. That gives you a decent chance of your prospects in the current economy, whether you want to be an NBA player or a scientist or a musician or whatever. In a world where you can hire a PhD overseas for $20/hr including overhead, there just isn't room for somebody who has a BS with a B average.
However, the article itself is pretty bogus as well - for every Zuckerburg who makes it there are a thousand more who had everything it took but failed and are living off their parent's trust fund. You do have one of those, don't you? If not, then you aren't a Zuckerburg.
Yup, but perchlorate makes oxygen seem tame by comparison.
I'd think that dealing with it in any kind of high concentration would be difficult, which kind of rules out the whole "well, maybe there is an ocean of salt water stabilized by perchlorates under the surface" bit.
It looks like Chrome Remote Desktop requires leaving a desktop running chrome all the time (which is pretty RAM-intensive), and it doesn't support linux either. There are a bazillion solutions for accessing windows remotely, in part because RDP isn't that bad, and Citrix pretty much has the high end locked up.
If Google really wants to sell chromebooks to business what they need is a chrome-based app for viewing applications hosted on windows/linux/OSX PCs, which is lightweight on the server side so that you can run those applications on a server and not just have a PC dedicated for each chromebook. I don't get their strategy - it is obviously an ideal business laptop from a security/maintainability standpoint, so if they just provided a way to run applications that aren't web-based that would probably drive more adoption.
No. That simply forwards X11, and compresses the data stream. NX does a whole lot more - it implements an X server on the client, and an X client on the server, and re-implements the protocol in a manner that involves fewer round trips.
Suppose you trigger an X11 call to move a window or something, and it requires two round trips and sends 10 bytes of data. If you simply compress that you might get it down to a few bytes, but that isn't doing much since bandwidth wasn't your problem. You still have to wait for 4x the link latency for the operation to complete.
All of these solutions try to cut down on the latency problem by running a fake server/client close to the real client/server. Each of these sees a low-latency connection and goes at full speed, and then the software tries to keep the screen as up-to-date as it can within the real-world constraints.
I can't speak for how this solution compares to the various other ones. I can vouch for the fact that getting it to run will be a PITA since they don't seem to distribute source, and I don't run their one chosen distro.
How does xrdp run over high latency connections? Oh, and is it any good with chrome which is brain-dead and uses client-side-rendering as an unchangeable default?
Interesting. Most of the competing solutions just stream the whole thing over ssh. Makes sense - that takes care of both encryption and authentication and is a solved problem. Then they do their magic on top. Unless you want to use a UDP-based solution you'd be hard-pressed to do better.
Sounds good to me. If government did this, maybe they would have fewer problems, too.
Absolutely. The whole problem is that past governors hired people cheap on the promise that they'd be paid money in the future (a pension). Now we're in the future and we don't have the money to pay up.
If the previous governors had to pay everything up-front then there could not be any debts left for later.
Debt-based government spending makes little sense unless you're really desperate, as in times of war (and I mean REAL war - as in your country might not be around in five years if you don't pull out all the stops - think WWII, not Iraq). It might make sense for things like infrastructure since it allows you to do things like build a bridge and fund it with future tolls on the bridge, which makes the bridge "free" to the public - taxes don't pay for it, and anybody who doesn't like the idea of building the bridge is free to not drive on it and therefore never pay a toll. The nature of funding would be made clear to those footing the bill, and they could weigh the risk accordingly. That doesn't leave an obligation to future generations.
Well, if you stick it in a hot oven it will make the crust harder regardless of how it started out. But yes, I agree that toasting can help rescue french bread.
The flour itself is generally sufficient to feed the yeast (just a simple carbohydrate), though sometimes sugar is still added, often to enhance browning, or enzymes can be used to do this (they convert flour to sugar).
And yeast can be made in a continuum from culture to various grades of preserved yeast, with varying levels of activity. All of those contain some level of dead yeast, just as any significant volume of space on the surface of the earth will contain some dead people.
The volume of a gas is the area that it occupies, which is the volume of the container it fills at equilibrium.
So, both by volume and mass bread is 100% chemicals.
However, when I make bread I use chemicals like salt, water, flour, and yeast. The last two are mixtures (well, so are the first two, but even kitchen grade salt and water are reasonably pure).
And yes, bread composed of only those ingredients will only last about a day. Throw in butter or milk and it will last a bit longer. However, if you want to stick it on a store shelf you need to break out the stuff with long names (many of those stabilizers are in fact natural in origin, but much more highly processed).
I both make fresh bread and sometimes freeze/defrost it.
My experience is that from a taste standpoint freezing for reasonable periods of time (weeks) has little effect on the taste of the bread, or on the interior texture. Freezing does ruin the texture of the crust (it always comes out soft no matter how crunchy it was to start).
Without freezing breads higher in fat tend to last a few days, and low-fat bread tends to last about a day tops. Of course, that is without stabilizers/etc.
Is any of this viable in the absence of additives?
When I make bread it rarely tastes decent for more than a day or so, unless I freeze it immediately (which preserves the flavor well, but ruins the crust). Breads with higher fat content do tend to last a bit longer.
I suspect the only way you can make bread last a week is to give it the Twinkie treatment.
However, at the end of each pay period the employer and employee should be completely even,
Isn't this how 401Ks are right now?
Somewhat, which is why I said I'd be fine with them, though I would allow employees to move money freely between them and other tax-deferred investments like IRAs. 401ks are subject to a fair bit of employer control.
The issue isn't with 401ks so much as with pensions, which both private and public employers sometimes offer. Pensions generally remain within the control of the employer unless a union is involved, and union pensions aren't exactly immune to problems either.
My whole point is that all compensation should be paid out in full as it is earned, and should go into accounts owned by the employee and generally fully controlled by them. Compensation should be entirely based on current value, and should not include any promises that extend into the future.
Yup, but I think in practice it won't make much difference.
If you come up with a million-dollar idea during off-hours that is unrelated to your employment, then by all means go forward with it. Your employer can either sue you or not, and they can do this whether your contract included the provision described or not. The success of that lawsuit might be slightly influenced by the existence of that provision, but I suspect that for the most part the case is going to depend more on how related the work was to your employment than what you signed, regardless of your contract, assuming that the employer requires all employees to sign the same or similar contract (ie that clause was not explicitly negotiated in exchange for some specific consideration). If the clause were optional and you were given explicit additional compensation for electing it then I'd imagine it would be very hard to get out of.
Development of a product (giving ownership of your creative work for purposes of resale) should come with expectations of greater compensation, because you are handing over not just your hours of work -- but an opportunity to profit as well, from the resale of the work.
This really depends on the nature of your relationship with the employer.
What you are generally describing is contract-based work, where you're paid for the successful completion of some job. Your pay is likely at-risk in the sense that if the customer doesn't accept the software you build, then you don't get paid for it. In a situation like this, it makes sense that copyright is not treated as work-for-hire unless it was part of the contract (but anybody in such a relationship should make copyright ownership explicit in the contract either way).
Work-for-hire generally involved employee relationships. In such a relationship you are paid to work on whatever the employer asks you to work on, and you're paid by the hour or on salary, and you must be paid for the period of employment regardless of your productivity. The employer can of course fire you at any time if they don't like your work, but they can't tell you in June that they think your work from December on was poor so they want their paychecks back, or even refuse to give you your last paycheck. In such a relationship your pay is not at-risk, and your work is employer-directed, so the employer by default owns the copyright on what you do.
I don't see any real impact on people doing freelance work - anybody in this line of work should have well-written contracts making ownership of copyright explicit, and I doubt any court is going to modify the terms of the contract in such a situation.
You have the right to modify an employment contract before you sign it.
Of course, but the employer also has the right to not hire you. I doubt that they're going to strike ownership of inventions made on company time. They might not even strike ownership of inventions made on your own time, though I think in practice if you came up with something of serious value unrelated to your work it would be hard for them to claim ownership even with the contract.
Public workers have been vigilant in defending their standards of living; maybe you could learn something from them.
Yeah, well, maybe those public employee legislators and judges could cut the private sector employees a break the next time some company wants to redefine their pension or do a mass layoff and the employees sue it in court. Unless you want private employees to form mobs I'm not quite sure what you'd have them do.
In Europe when companies do these kinds of things the government simply tells the company that they aren't permitted to do it, and that their property would be fined/seized and their profitable products would be banned from the market if they don't play ball. Hence multinational companies don't tend to treat their European employees the way they treat their American ones, even though they have even more money at risk in the USA.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks - I'll have to keep an eye out for that. When I do make bread I tend to ferment overnight or use a cold/wet method (the latter gives great results, but is really messy to work with). I've yet to get a french loaf to really taste decent for more than a day or two. I don't use diastatic malt, but perhaps I should some day.
Yup - this is why internet advertising is so reviled.
A newspaper is a page of black and white articles with some black and white ads nearby.
An online newspaper is a page of black and white articles, with some subset of:
1. Full color ads.
2. Ads that contain motion within them.
3. Ads that stay on screen even as you read down the page.
4. Ads that move around within the screen.
5. Ads that actually pop up over top of the article you're trying to read, and you get to try to close them.
6. Ads that do dynamic stuff that is broken on the browser you're using, so you have to resort to hacks like selecting text to try to get the page to scroll it out of the way of the text you're reading.
7. Ads that actually try to force you to watch them by blocking content and enforcing a time delay.
8. Ads that actually give you a quiz on the presented material before letting you see the article. (Yes, I've actually seen this.)
People don't have some kind of revulsion for online ads simply because they're online. People just hate ads that are intrusive. The last time I went to a play there were ads in the playbill, and I didn't care. Before the play started somebody thanked and named a sponsor or two, and I didn't care. Now, if in the middle of Act 1 Bozo the clown jumped in front of me and started waving signs and blowing his horns, then I'd care.
Well, arguably that is no harder than rewriting it all to be multi-threaded.
I think the articles's approach is a good one - it allows procedural code while hiding threading details from the programmer, which means that the programmers task is to properly tag code and not to try to carefully implement locks/etc.
Very true. You can have all the sockets you want in your ssh connection, and they can go whatever direction you want them to go in, but the outside connection is just one TCP connection that starts at the side you generally have the least control over.
Again, the only reason I could see for maybe doing something outside of ssh is if you wanted a realtime transport for screen updates. That is one problem I've seen with NX - if I hit page-down twice on a client-rendered browser like chromium I get to watch the thing paint the whole screen twice as all those screen updates go into one massive FIFO buffer. The thing should just throw away obsoleted information. Of course, to do that you'd probably also need to come up with the NX equivalent of keyframes.
I'm not sure the fermentation strategy actually matters so much. I buy moisture content, but I think a bigger factor is fat content. Whole-grain bread contains more fat, so that will tend to last longer than white bread. Start tossing in butter/oil/etc and the bread will last longer still.
I haven't found fermentation approach to affect the life of my bread much (when comparing the same type of bread), though it certainly can impact the flavor.
Can you have 35 users run 35 instances of a single application consuming roughly only 35x the data memory requirements of that application in this manner?
That was what I was getting at. This seems to be limited to sharing desktops, and I suspect it is limited to one login session per PC at a time, though I'm not certain of that.
Suppose I'm a small business with 15 employees. Most of what we do is on Google Apps. I have 3 quickbooks users who use the app a fair bit of the day, and an inventory app that is win32 only that gets about 10% usage. That is about 5 concurrent users across two apps. Right now if you want to deploy Chrombooks you'd need to deploy 5 PCs that individuals could remote desktop into in order to run those apps, and those PCs would basically have idle CPUs 95% of the time, and individuals need to worry about logging in/out and which PCs are used for which apps and all that nonsense. What any company would want to do is just have one PC serving up those two apps, and individuals would just launch a bookmark or whatever to get a tap that runs that one app without having to worry about where it is running.
If Google wants ChromeOS to take off in the business world they really need a simple solution to this problem, and it isn't exactly a problem that hasn't been solved 14 times already.
Absolutely true - you're likely to make more with a degree than without. The problem is that it likely isn't enough to matter. I suspect you'll find a pretty skewed distribution as well. For every MBA who is pulling down $300k there are hundreds of people working as waiters into their 40s.
Agreed. If somebody has real talent in an STEM field I think that a moderately expensive college education is still worthwhile (think good state college, or relatively inexpensive private science-oriented one). Those with strong talent can likely achieve scholarships to lighten the blow, and even though hiring isn't what it used to be you can still make a decent salary.
Beyond that, honestly I don't see the point in spending so much for a piece of paper. As the earlier post said, you don't need one to become a barista.
Oh, and if you're even remotely concerned about whether you'll get accepted into college, then don't bother to apply, as I can guarantee that you'll never be accepted into your dream job, whatever that is, unless your dream job is one that doesn't really require the degree in the first place. If you want to know what your chances are in the real world, look at how many colleges are begging you to enroll and offering you deals to entice you. That gives you a decent chance of your prospects in the current economy, whether you want to be an NBA player or a scientist or a musician or whatever. In a world where you can hire a PhD overseas for $20/hr including overhead, there just isn't room for somebody who has a BS with a B average.
However, the article itself is pretty bogus as well - for every Zuckerburg who makes it there are a thousand more who had everything it took but failed and are living off their parent's trust fund. You do have one of those, don't you? If not, then you aren't a Zuckerburg.
Yup, but perchlorate makes oxygen seem tame by comparison.
I'd think that dealing with it in any kind of high concentration would be difficult, which kind of rules out the whole "well, maybe there is an ocean of salt water stabilized by perchlorates under the surface" bit.
It looks like Chrome Remote Desktop requires leaving a desktop running chrome all the time (which is pretty RAM-intensive), and it doesn't support linux either. There are a bazillion solutions for accessing windows remotely, in part because RDP isn't that bad, and Citrix pretty much has the high end locked up.
If Google really wants to sell chromebooks to business what they need is a chrome-based app for viewing applications hosted on windows/linux/OSX PCs, which is lightweight on the server side so that you can run those applications on a server and not just have a PC dedicated for each chromebook. I don't get their strategy - it is obviously an ideal business laptop from a security/maintainability standpoint, so if they just provided a way to run applications that aren't web-based that would probably drive more adoption.
No. That simply forwards X11, and compresses the data stream. NX does a whole lot more - it implements an X server on the client, and an X client on the server, and re-implements the protocol in a manner that involves fewer round trips.
Suppose you trigger an X11 call to move a window or something, and it requires two round trips and sends 10 bytes of data. If you simply compress that you might get it down to a few bytes, but that isn't doing much since bandwidth wasn't your problem. You still have to wait for 4x the link latency for the operation to complete.
All of these solutions try to cut down on the latency problem by running a fake server/client close to the real client/server. Each of these sees a low-latency connection and goes at full speed, and then the software tries to keep the screen as up-to-date as it can within the real-world constraints.
I can't speak for how this solution compares to the various other ones. I can vouch for the fact that getting it to run will be a PITA since they don't seem to distribute source, and I don't run their one chosen distro.
How does xrdp run over high latency connections? Oh, and is it any good with chrome which is brain-dead and uses client-side-rendering as an unchangeable default?
Interesting. Most of the competing solutions just stream the whole thing over ssh. Makes sense - that takes care of both encryption and authentication and is a solved problem. Then they do their magic on top. Unless you want to use a UDP-based solution you'd be hard-pressed to do better.
Sounds good to me. If government did this, maybe they would have fewer problems, too.
Absolutely. The whole problem is that past governors hired people cheap on the promise that they'd be paid money in the future (a pension). Now we're in the future and we don't have the money to pay up.
If the previous governors had to pay everything up-front then there could not be any debts left for later.
Debt-based government spending makes little sense unless you're really desperate, as in times of war (and I mean REAL war - as in your country might not be around in five years if you don't pull out all the stops - think WWII, not Iraq). It might make sense for things like infrastructure since it allows you to do things like build a bridge and fund it with future tolls on the bridge, which makes the bridge "free" to the public - taxes don't pay for it, and anybody who doesn't like the idea of building the bridge is free to not drive on it and therefore never pay a toll. The nature of funding would be made clear to those footing the bill, and they could weigh the risk accordingly. That doesn't leave an obligation to future generations.
Well, if you stick it in a hot oven it will make the crust harder regardless of how it started out. But yes, I agree that toasting can help rescue french bread.
And hence the fact that I pointed out that yeast and flour are mixtures. But then again, so is every "chemical" on the shelf of every chemistry lab.
The flour itself is generally sufficient to feed the yeast (just a simple carbohydrate), though sometimes sugar is still added, often to enhance browning, or enzymes can be used to do this (they convert flour to sugar).
And yeast can be made in a continuum from culture to various grades of preserved yeast, with varying levels of activity. All of those contain some level of dead yeast, just as any significant volume of space on the surface of the earth will contain some dead people.
I'm a chemist. I also bake bread.
The volume of a gas is the area that it occupies, which is the volume of the container it fills at equilibrium.
So, both by volume and mass bread is 100% chemicals.
However, when I make bread I use chemicals like salt, water, flour, and yeast. The last two are mixtures (well, so are the first two, but even kitchen grade salt and water are reasonably pure).
And yes, bread composed of only those ingredients will only last about a day. Throw in butter or milk and it will last a bit longer. However, if you want to stick it on a store shelf you need to break out the stuff with long names (many of those stabilizers are in fact natural in origin, but much more highly processed).
I both make fresh bread and sometimes freeze/defrost it.
My experience is that from a taste standpoint freezing for reasonable periods of time (weeks) has little effect on the taste of the bread, or on the interior texture. Freezing does ruin the texture of the crust (it always comes out soft no matter how crunchy it was to start).
Without freezing breads higher in fat tend to last a few days, and low-fat bread tends to last about a day tops. Of course, that is without stabilizers/etc.
Is any of this viable in the absence of additives?
When I make bread it rarely tastes decent for more than a day or so, unless I freeze it immediately (which preserves the flavor well, but ruins the crust). Breads with higher fat content do tend to last a bit longer.
I suspect the only way you can make bread last a week is to give it the Twinkie treatment.
However, at the end of each pay period the employer and employee should be completely even,
Isn't this how 401Ks are right now?
Somewhat, which is why I said I'd be fine with them, though I would allow employees to move money freely between them and other tax-deferred investments like IRAs. 401ks are subject to a fair bit of employer control.
The issue isn't with 401ks so much as with pensions, which both private and public employers sometimes offer. Pensions generally remain within the control of the employer unless a union is involved, and union pensions aren't exactly immune to problems either.
My whole point is that all compensation should be paid out in full as it is earned, and should go into accounts owned by the employee and generally fully controlled by them. Compensation should be entirely based on current value, and should not include any promises that extend into the future.
Yup, but I think in practice it won't make much difference.
If you come up with a million-dollar idea during off-hours that is unrelated to your employment, then by all means go forward with it. Your employer can either sue you or not, and they can do this whether your contract included the provision described or not. The success of that lawsuit might be slightly influenced by the existence of that provision, but I suspect that for the most part the case is going to depend more on how related the work was to your employment than what you signed, regardless of your contract, assuming that the employer requires all employees to sign the same or similar contract (ie that clause was not explicitly negotiated in exchange for some specific consideration). If the clause were optional and you were given explicit additional compensation for electing it then I'd imagine it would be very hard to get out of.
Development of a product (giving ownership of your creative work for purposes of resale) should come with expectations of greater compensation, because you are handing over not just your hours of work -- but an opportunity to profit as well, from the resale of the work.
This really depends on the nature of your relationship with the employer.
What you are generally describing is contract-based work, where you're paid for the successful completion of some job. Your pay is likely at-risk in the sense that if the customer doesn't accept the software you build, then you don't get paid for it. In a situation like this, it makes sense that copyright is not treated as work-for-hire unless it was part of the contract (but anybody in such a relationship should make copyright ownership explicit in the contract either way).
Work-for-hire generally involved employee relationships. In such a relationship you are paid to work on whatever the employer asks you to work on, and you're paid by the hour or on salary, and you must be paid for the period of employment regardless of your productivity. The employer can of course fire you at any time if they don't like your work, but they can't tell you in June that they think your work from December on was poor so they want their paychecks back, or even refuse to give you your last paycheck. In such a relationship your pay is not at-risk, and your work is employer-directed, so the employer by default owns the copyright on what you do.
I don't see any real impact on people doing freelance work - anybody in this line of work should have well-written contracts making ownership of copyright explicit, and I doubt any court is going to modify the terms of the contract in such a situation.
You have the right to modify an employment contract before you sign it.
Of course, but the employer also has the right to not hire you. I doubt that they're going to strike ownership of inventions made on company time. They might not even strike ownership of inventions made on your own time, though I think in practice if you came up with something of serious value unrelated to your work it would be hard for them to claim ownership even with the contract.
Public workers have been vigilant in defending their standards of living; maybe you could learn something from them.
Yeah, well, maybe those public employee legislators and judges could cut the private sector employees a break the next time some company wants to redefine their pension or do a mass layoff and the employees sue it in court. Unless you want private employees to form mobs I'm not quite sure what you'd have them do.
In Europe when companies do these kinds of things the government simply tells the company that they aren't permitted to do it, and that their property would be fined/seized and their profitable products would be banned from the market if they don't play ball. Hence multinational companies don't tend to treat their European employees the way they treat their American ones, even though they have even more money at risk in the USA.