"It would be interesting if they purchased some patents and GPL'd them.. "
Interesting yes. In complete breach of their fiduciary duty to their stockholders? Sure. Realistic? Of course not...:)
Now that they are publicly traded, they will do whatever it takes to keep their stockholders happy, and to make the numbers $THIS_QUARTER.
Re:My George Lucas moment
on
Star Wars on DVD
·
· Score: 5, Funny
No, it means you have one really smart kid, who, at the ripe age of 4, can already make the connection that to be associated with George Lucas in any way is a Bad Thing(TM).
Starwars, the Original Trilogy, Version 3
on
Star Wars on DVD
·
· Score: 3, Funny
In version 3 of TOT, not only does Han not shoot first, but greedo is arrested by the department of homeland security for no goddamn reason whatsoever. After 45 years of litigation, he is found guilty of making terroristic threats, but the decision is overturned by the ninth circus court of appeals on grounds that his trial was unfair because he's green. After seeing this news on intergalactic TV, Han escapes from his retirement home, finds greedo, and finally shoots him dead with the only weapon remaining in the universe that can still be taken on space vessels - strained peas!
Haha.. I actually laughed out loud at this... Just the thought that my charred, burning corpse would still be neatly fastened to my seat, and that the seat would still be neatly attached to the fuselage, with the seat number sticker on the overhead still in tact, after SLAMMING INTO THE GROUND AT 500 MPH, was just hilarious.
If the Chinese really were storing up lots of dollars, it would exert a measurable backpressure on inflation here - because that money is coming out of circulation. China does not own a significant enough number of dollars to cause a significant inflation, even if they did "dump" them - although to "dump" them would mean they had to SPEND them on something to get them back into U.S. circulation. The only way to get them back into U.S. circulation is to either buy stocks, bonds, products, or just give them away. They would not buy bonds in this "depression" that you speak of because the interest rates would be too low. They'd either buy stocks or product, which would stimlate the economy, create jobs, and improve the economic health of the country, much like Bush's tax cuts have done in conjunction with low interest rates. A Bush win in November would be great for the economy because the stimulation would continue.
Maybe you could come into my company and teach our managers that lesson! We have 50 Indians in our office and I can't tell you how difficult it is between training them on our different systems, not to mention the language barrier. However, my company doesn't pay them more... $6/hr w/ basic health care and dental (worth more than the $6, if you ask me).. so they may be saving money doing this.. I dunno, I'm just a cubicle drone..
I wonder how much of that third that will be in North America will be foreign nationals brought in on L-1 visas. American companies with offices abroad are allowed under the L-1 visa program to transfer workers without any of the restrictions of the H1-B, most notably the prevailing wage restriction. So, all a company has to do is hire workers in India, transfer them to the US on L-1 Visas, and pay them the Indian wage. The L-1 visa was originally intended to allow MANAGEMENT personnel to transfer - and the law was passed specifically so that Toyota and Honda could come to the US and build car plants under the supervision of their own managers. Since the law was written so loosely, it has morphed into allowing companies to send over any workers they want. I think this should be a hot election issue this fall because for one it is very unfair to companies who do not have foreign offices and also because the intent of the L-1 visa is not to subvert American jobs. Its unintended effect has been for huge multinationals to circumvent immigration law and also for the US to lose jobs to cheap overseas labor.
Right, and the revenue that pays for that licensing technology comes from where? Internet advertising... and the other things that yahoo might do that generate revenue - all of which depend on the survival of the internet market. You bring up a point that makes the picture doubly worse - if the Internet markets go bust again, not only does google lose revenue, but googles customers also lose revenue and may not be able or willing to continue to pay google. The whole point of diversification is to get into opposing or dependent markets as a hedge against the failure of one market or the other.
For example, one of my holdings is a diversified manufacturing company that makes aircraft nav systems and also security and monitoring products. Two separate businesses within that conglomerate. So, after 9/11, the aircraft industry went to shit, but the security and monitoring industry went to the moon. That company's stock went up from 25 to 40 in the year immediately following 9/11.
Point is, Google has no product that isn't dependent upon the Internet, and no business that will do better if the Internet markets do poorly. Google is a single-market, niche company that is not diversified and is extremely vulnerable to the next internet bust.
Hello people... this is not 1999. We're talking about a company whose only product is online advertising - subtle online advertising at that. You're talking about an Internet search engine having a larger market cap than a lot of Dow30 components who actually have shipping product. What makes google so valuable? What is google going to do for money (besides take it from investors) the next time the Internet advertising market evaporates? What dependencies has google created that will keep revenue flowing? How has google diversified to guard against volatility in the Internet markets?
It's time to start thinknig RATIONALLY about google. Everyone has become so enamored with google that they are overlooking the somewhat minor point that they have zero fundamentals.
If he lives in a "Right to Work" state, then Seagate has no suit. In so-called RtW states, companies cannot prevent any worker from obtaining employment in their trained profession.
I believe the office he would have been working at is in the Boulder area in Colorado. I don't know if CO is a Right-to-Work state, but are there any CO residents who care to chime in?
his will, of course, make it very difficult to download Linux. Without BitTorrent, I would not have been able to get my hands on the DVD iso for Fedora Core 2. I wonder what percentage of bandwidth on a typical P2P network is consumed by PERFECTLY LEGAL ISO distribution. Maybe we should all just swap Linux ISOs ad perpetuem to jack up the stats.
Another question to ask is, how many copies of Linux will not get distributed to people because of this RIAA/MPAA/BSA(Microsoft) backed initiative?
Yet another, how about companies that want to distribute their software but can't afford to be the sole host? Seems to me this would hurt small business as well.
Actually, it was speculation on the original poster's part. First, you are not accredited by ABET, which is the ONLY accrediation most major employers will consider for a real engineering position (I know mine only accepts ABET-E accreditation for engineering candidates). Who is the Accreditation Council for Independent Colleges and Schools? I have never heard of them, and their website is not working, but for some more juicy speculation, how about we go out on a limb and suggest that it is a loose accreditation board created by a bunch of small schools so that they can say they're accredited? I don't know, but I will find out if their website ever comes back up.
You are correct about one thing thought - you are biased. Because you are employed there, however, you do have more intimate knowledge of what the school has to offer. However, people don't decide to hire college grads based upon intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the school. They hire based on reputation, and right now, Northface has no reputation. Until industry leaders start talking WOW about Northface graduates, that will not change. In order for that to happen, you have to have the curriculum that will create students that will WOW employers.
Regardless of any opinions you have already formulated about me, I do wish you guys good luck.
I think you missed the point the original poster was trying to make. I share his opinion that the dilution of credentials is a growing problem. Trade schools indeed do not prepare you for the type of work and innovation that a bona fide university does. The difference lies in the complexity of problem the student is challenged to solve. A trade school doesn't really cultivate true problem solving or critical thinking skills. They _train_ students to code functions, or follow debugging instructions, and largely work in support of someone else, but not to think critically about how to solve a large, system-level problem. On the other hand, a University curriculum goes much farther to challenge the critical thinking skills that are necessary to solve bigtime problems. The breadth of knowledge is wider, and students are left more to think on their own rather than simply follow a set of instructions. In a Trade School lab class, a laboratory experiment might go something like this:
1) Write a function that does X with parameters a, b, and c passed to it 2) Write a function that does Y 3) Write a main loop that calls functions X and Y under these circumstances: 1, 2, 3, etc 4) Format the output this way and print to stdout
whereas a University lab course would say:
1) Write software that does X.
And the rest is up to the student to figure out on their own.
Trade school students do not learn the same things as university students. The processes and goals are completely different, and should not under any circumstances be confused.
I'd just like to point out that nothing is "free." You pay for it one way or another, even if you don't get a bill for it.
In general, however, I am curious how this actually happened. The government has typically played every card that the RIAA/MPAA has told them to, so I'm very surprised that the FCC made this ruling.
The only logic that I can think of is that this falls somehow under fair use. It is perfectly okay to tape a show off of TV and give it to your friends or relatives to watch. It is not, however, okay to tape a show off the air and then publicly redistribute it. Any lawyers care to chime in?
I think it would be sufficient for the car to record only a 15-30 second FIFO of telemetry that is saved to Flash if the car detects an impact. NOTHING OTHER THAN AN IMPACT SHOULD CAUSE DATA TO BE PERMANENTLY SAVED. PERIOD. This solves the issue of safety that they use to try to justify this without alarming privacy advocates.
Use your eyeballs and your brain and RTFP (paperwork) before you accept a job. If you don't like what it says, DON'T TAKE THE JOB. It's that simple. I turned down two job offers because they had all-encompassing IP rights clauses in their policies. I finally found a great job with a great employer whose policy is "If we pay you to do it, it's ours. If it's related to the business unit that employs you, it's ours. Otherwise, we could give a flip."
We're even allowed to use company resources (computers, labs, etc) for personal projects so long as we ask our manager beforehand and get approval. I guess there are some good things about working for a huge company that has bigger things to worry about than the little widget you're coming up with in your dreams.
Slashdot Mirror
One of my three patents certainly covers what you are talking about.. now pay up...
That's called a PUN, not a metaphor. A really bad one at that... :/
Dear New Google Stockholder:
YOU'RE SMOKING CRACK!
Sincerely
The Google Executive Board
I just shorted a boatload of it... have a nice day...
"It would be interesting if they purchased some patents and GPL'd them.. "
:)
Interesting yes. In complete breach of their fiduciary duty to their stockholders? Sure. Realistic? Of course not...
Now that they are publicly traded, they will do whatever it takes to keep their stockholders happy, and to make the numbers $THIS_QUARTER.
No, it means you have one really smart kid, who, at the ripe age of 4, can already make the connection that to be associated with George Lucas in any way is a Bad Thing(TM).
In version 3 of TOT, not only does Han not shoot first, but greedo is arrested by the department of homeland security for no goddamn reason whatsoever. After 45 years of litigation, he is found guilty of making terroristic threats, but the decision is overturned by the ninth circus court of appeals on grounds that his trial was unfair because he's green. After seeing this news on intergalactic TV, Han escapes from his retirement home, finds greedo, and finally shoots him dead with the only weapon remaining in the universe that can still be taken on space vessels - strained peas!
Haha.. I actually laughed out loud at this... Just the thought that my charred, burning corpse would still be neatly fastened to my seat, and that the seat would still be neatly attached to the fuselage, with the seat number sticker on the overhead still in tact, after SLAMMING INTO THE GROUND AT 500 MPH, was just hilarious.
No kidding... by last count, there are about 290 million people who hate the US government - already living within its borders...
If the Chinese really were storing up lots of dollars, it would exert a measurable backpressure on inflation here - because that money is coming out of circulation. China does not own a significant enough number of dollars to cause a significant inflation, even if they did "dump" them - although to "dump" them would mean they had to SPEND them on something to get them back into U.S. circulation. The only way to get them back into U.S. circulation is to either buy stocks, bonds, products, or just give them away. They would not buy bonds in this "depression" that you speak of because the interest rates would be too low. They'd either buy stocks or product, which would stimlate the economy, create jobs, and improve the economic health of the country, much like Bush's tax cuts have done in conjunction with low interest rates. A Bush win in November would be great for the economy because the stimulation would continue.
especially because $1US is a SHITLOAD of money in China...
That's the problem. The L-1 visa has no prevailing wage requirement.
Maybe you could come into my company and teach our managers that lesson! We have 50 Indians in our office and I can't tell you how difficult it is between training them on our different systems, not to mention the language barrier. However, my company doesn't pay them more... $6/hr w/ basic health care and dental (worth more than the $6, if you ask me).. so they may be saving money doing this.. I dunno, I'm just a cubicle drone..
I wonder how much of that third that will be in North America will be foreign nationals brought in on L-1 visas. American companies with offices abroad are allowed under the L-1 visa program to transfer workers without any of the restrictions of the H1-B, most notably the prevailing wage restriction. So, all a company has to do is hire workers in India, transfer them to the US on L-1 Visas, and pay them the Indian wage. The L-1 visa was originally intended to allow MANAGEMENT personnel to transfer - and the law was passed specifically so that Toyota and Honda could come to the US and build car plants under the supervision of their own managers. Since the law was written so loosely, it has morphed into allowing companies to send over any workers they want. I think this should be a hot election issue this fall because for one it is very unfair to companies who do not have foreign offices and also because the intent of the L-1 visa is not to subvert American jobs. Its unintended effect has been for huge multinationals to circumvent immigration law and also for the US to lose jobs to cheap overseas labor.
"I guess the prior art does not stand in court."
To my knowledge, it has not yet tried.
Right, and the revenue that pays for that licensing technology comes from where? Internet advertising... and the other things that yahoo might do that generate revenue - all of which depend on the survival of the internet market. You bring up a point that makes the picture doubly worse - if the Internet markets go bust again, not only does google lose revenue, but googles customers also lose revenue and may not be able or willing to continue to pay google. The whole point of diversification is to get into opposing or dependent markets as a hedge against the failure of one market or the other.
For example, one of my holdings is a diversified manufacturing company that makes aircraft nav systems and also security and monitoring products. Two separate businesses within that conglomerate. So, after 9/11, the aircraft industry went to shit, but the security and monitoring industry went to the moon. That company's stock went up from 25 to 40 in the year immediately following 9/11.
Point is, Google has no product that isn't dependent upon the Internet, and no business that will do better if the Internet markets do poorly. Google is a single-market, niche company that is not diversified and is extremely vulnerable to the next internet bust.
Hello people... this is not 1999. We're talking about a company whose only product is online advertising - subtle online advertising at that. You're talking about an Internet search engine having a larger market cap than a lot of Dow30 components who actually have shipping product. What makes google so valuable? What is google going to do for money (besides take it from investors) the next time the Internet advertising market evaporates? What dependencies has google created that will keep revenue flowing? How has google diversified to guard against volatility in the Internet markets?
It's time to start thinknig RATIONALLY about google. Everyone has become so enamored with google that they are overlooking the somewhat minor point that they have zero fundamentals.
If he lives in a "Right to Work" state, then Seagate has no suit. In so-called RtW states, companies cannot prevent any worker from obtaining employment in their trained profession.
I believe the office he would have been working at is in the Boulder area in Colorado. I don't know if CO is a Right-to-Work state, but are there any CO residents who care to chime in?
his will, of course, make it very difficult to download Linux. Without BitTorrent, I would not have been able to get my hands on the DVD iso for Fedora Core 2. I wonder what percentage of bandwidth on a typical P2P network is consumed by PERFECTLY LEGAL ISO distribution. Maybe we should all just swap Linux ISOs ad perpetuem to jack up the stats.
Another question to ask is, how many copies of Linux will not get distributed to people because of this RIAA/MPAA/BSA(Microsoft) backed initiative?
Yet another, how about companies that want to distribute their software but can't afford to be the sole host? Seems to me this would hurt small business as well.
Actually, it was speculation on the original poster's part. First, you are not accredited by ABET, which is the ONLY accrediation most major employers will consider for a real engineering position (I know mine only accepts ABET-E accreditation for engineering candidates). Who is the Accreditation Council for Independent Colleges and Schools? I have never heard of them, and their website is not working, but for some more juicy speculation, how about we go out on a limb and suggest that it is a loose accreditation board created by a bunch of small schools so that they can say they're accredited? I don't know, but I will find out if their website ever comes back up.
You are correct about one thing thought - you are biased. Because you are employed there, however, you do have more intimate knowledge of what the school has to offer. However, people don't decide to hire college grads based upon intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the school. They hire based on reputation, and right now, Northface has no reputation. Until industry leaders start talking WOW about Northface graduates, that will not change. In order for that to happen, you have to have the curriculum that will create students that will WOW employers.
Regardless of any opinions you have already formulated about me, I do wish you guys good luck.
I think you missed the point the original poster was trying to make. I share his opinion that the dilution of credentials is a growing problem. Trade schools indeed do not prepare you for the type of work and innovation that a bona fide university does. The difference lies in the complexity of problem the student is challenged to solve. A trade school doesn't really cultivate true problem solving or critical thinking skills. They _train_ students to code functions, or follow debugging instructions, and largely work in support of someone else, but not to think critically about how to solve a large, system-level problem. On the other hand, a University curriculum goes much farther to challenge the critical thinking skills that are necessary to solve bigtime problems. The breadth of knowledge is wider, and students are left more to think on their own rather than simply follow a set of instructions. In a Trade School lab class, a laboratory experiment might go something like this:
1) Write a function that does X with parameters a, b, and c passed to it
2) Write a function that does Y
3) Write a main loop that calls functions X and Y under these circumstances: 1, 2, 3, etc
4) Format the output this way and print to stdout
whereas a University lab course would say:
1) Write software that does X.
And the rest is up to the student to figure out on their own.
Trade school students do not learn the same things as university students. The processes and goals are completely different, and should not under any circumstances be confused.
I'd just like to point out that nothing is "free." You pay for it one way or another, even if you don't get a bill for it.
In general, however, I am curious how this actually happened. The government has typically played every card that the RIAA/MPAA has told them to, so I'm very surprised that the FCC made this ruling.
The only logic that I can think of is that this falls somehow under fair use. It is perfectly okay to tape a show off of TV and give it to your friends or relatives to watch. It is not, however, okay to tape a show off the air and then publicly redistribute it. Any lawyers care to chime in?
Very very very well-said! I wonder if the original poster was even aware of just how insightful their comment was.
Clap Clap Clap... Mod parent up, please. Aside from the occasional spelling error, I could not have said it better myself.
I think it would be sufficient for the car to record only a 15-30 second FIFO of telemetry that is saved to Flash if the car detects an impact. NOTHING OTHER THAN AN IMPACT SHOULD CAUSE DATA TO BE PERMANENTLY SAVED. PERIOD. This solves the issue of safety that they use to try to justify this without alarming privacy advocates.
Use your eyeballs and your brain and RTFP (paperwork) before you accept a job. If you don't like what it says, DON'T TAKE THE JOB. It's that simple. I turned down two job offers because they had all-encompassing IP rights clauses in their policies. I finally found a great job with a great employer whose policy is "If we pay you to do it, it's ours. If it's related to the business unit that employs you, it's ours. Otherwise, we could give a flip."
We're even allowed to use company resources (computers, labs, etc) for personal projects so long as we ask our manager beforehand and get approval. I guess there are some good things about working for a huge company that has bigger things to worry about than the little widget you're coming up with in your dreams.