a) beancounters who create this technological debt out of ignorance and generally against the recommendations of their subject matter experts.
or
b) IT people who are knowledgeable enough to avoid this problem, but not powerful enough in the organization to follow through because of the beancounters above them.
That doesn't make sense. Private equity companies buy struggling companies at a multiple of what they are worth, in hopes of selling it for more later. It was purchased in 2005. I am sure the equity company who owns it isn't happy that they are going bankrupt.
No they don't. They buy them to suck them dry.
By the time these companies go bankrupt the private equity firm has usually gotten multiples of their actual investment back out.
In this case it is deliberate bankruptcy. The 80s corporate raiders never retired, they became private equity firms. They buy companies and let them fail under the weight of debt servicing (the debt being serviced, for good measure, was incurred in order to buy the company). The only people who lose are the complete idiots who finance these takeovers -- oh, and everyone who works at the company in question.
Yup, they are vampires. Suck a company dry by loading them up on debt and taking the money in management (ha!) fees and special dividends.. and if the company goes bankrupt, oh well.
You shouldn't worry because the end point OS doesn't matter to them any more.
They are going to make their money off of hosting the services and applications people actually use, and things like identity management, compute and other Azure goodies for organizations.
At least we can reasonably assume that encryption is doing the job it is meant to.
As always, law enforcement and politicians calling for a backdoor is pure stupidity. No matter how good the intentions, the details will always fall into the wrong hands eventually. Or more likely (as demonstrated conclusively by law enforcement everywhere) they will end up using it in unwarranted ways.
Law enforcement needs to get over it and find other ways to do their job. You can't put the math genie back in the bottle.
The main story arc was stupid and terrible.. and resulted in the slowest chase in movie history because they were low on gas!?
The secondary plotline was completely irrelevant to everything and everyone. Hating on rich people at a casino and then beating people over the head with heavy handed and incredibly simplistic morality before riding a pack of animals around and trashing the place!?
Most of the characters are two-dimensional and had no development whatsoever.
Annnnd they wasted Luke Skywalker's last appearance. After doing a very poor job of the build up throughout the (overly long) bloated mess of a movie, they wasted their last chance to redeem it with Luke going out like the legend he was despite his protestations.. and instead did a stupid gimmick for the final confrontation so it ended up having no emotional resonance at all.
Like it was bad, man. Just all around terrible storytelling.
But hey, it's making a ton of money so prepare for more of the same.
Again you are being mislead by old technology. We're talking about their ability to service the EV market. The number of old tech ICE vehicles they produce is irrelevant. As you can see from the Bolt and Ioniq examples I gave.
Again, you are missing the point. Tesla can't actually build their cars. They can't meet their own tiny milestones.
Tesla is hoping to deliver 100,000 Model S and Model X delivers this year. They delivered 222 Model 3's this quarter.
I think in the US the number of cars and light trucks sold last year was in the neighbourhood of 17 million.
So stop trying to tell me how they are the only ones who can service this market. They are a niche player.
The established car makers are all sitting on upcoming EV models, and they can actually produce and deliver them --- in most cases, worldwide.
Tesla is just doing them a favour and popularizing the concept for them.
You're giving the traditional car companies far too much credit. Look at Toyota for example, they are still trying to promote hydrogen fuel cells. They don't know that that technology has been beaten.
Yes, I'm sure they are unaware of what Tesla is doing.
GM and Hyundai have good EVs, but just like Tesla they can't produce even a fraction of what the market is demanding.
They produce millions of cars a year. If the market was demanding EVs they would be making them. We aren't there yet.
The only traditional car company that's doing as well as Tesla is Nissan.
Doing as well as Tesla? Tesla sells a rounding error worth of cars each year in comparison to the traditionals.
1) After their ridiculous stock valuation drops to a reasonable amount, they get scooped up by a real automaker as a premium badge.
2) They remain a niche premium car maker.
3) They become a battery company.
They don't have the infrastructure to compete on a world wide scale with the big automakers.
As soon as electrics are well accepted by the public and hit critical mass, the big automakers are going to destroy Tesla.. because unlike Tesla they can actually build cars. Lots of them. They haven't been doing nothing and being disrupted by Tesla. They've been waiting until it makes sense economically.
I am beyond sick and tired of Slashdot trying to push the "Russians influenced the election!" BS that the left has been pushing. It's fake. It never happened.
Apparently, it did? What motive would Facebook have to say it happened otherwise?
Who cares if they bought ads on Facebook? Does it matter?
I thought you just said it didn't happen?
Does anyone seriously think people voted for Trump because they saw ads from Russians?!
I mean it seems plausible when you consider how stupid the average Trump supporter has to have been to.. you know, have supported Trump.
The thing that caused Hillary to lose more than anything else is likely her shady dealings involving her email server and the FBI "investigation" into it. An investigation that could still be restarted as it's becoming more and more clear that one campaign did, in fact, have dealings with Russia: the Democrat's.
So Trump's campaign manager and foreign policy advisor's have just been changed, Jr. admitted meeting the Russians etc.. But her EMAILS!! REEEEEEEEEEE
Face it: Whether or not it's human-caused, there is literally no downside to our species ceasing to dump unnecessary waste gasses and pollutants into our environment. Saying "it costs too much, it's too much of an economic burden!" is about as short-sighted as you can get. We, as a species, keep shitting all over the planet we live on, and through the magic of denial, expect there's going to be no consequences -- or worse, don't care because the consequences won't affect us, immediately, it'll affect future generations ("that's their problem, not ours, why should we care?"); reprehensible. We have the technology to move away from 100-year-old energy sources, why not use it?
This pretty much sums it up.
Even if it were true that the pollution isn't going to have catastrophic economic and migrant effects (which it isn't unless you watch Fox news) we can still make a better world.. so why not?
The way you can tell CO2 doesn't have the effect on the climate the fear-mongers want you to think it does, is that as CO2 continues to climb climate changes do not track with CO2 increases, much less exhibit any kind of runaway effect which is the whole reason you were supposed to fear CO2 to begin with.
Luckily even for those of you that continue to fear irrationally, CO2 production will inevitably decline in the coming decades as solar and other forms of renewable energy take over for real, now that that are close to actually making more sense than fossil fuels.
I don't think that you understand the meaning of the word rational.
Teachers are hounded out of the business if they don't parrot the political bias of the department head, principal, superintendent. Good teachers won't work under such conditions, hacks do.
Citation needed. Turning education into a political issue is part of the problem. Stop doing it.
> There is no such thing as an objectively-"correct" price for anything.
What we have instead is the market clearing price. Which no one can manipulate in a free market (per microeconomic definition, when certain conditions are met - perfect competition, perfect information, no externalities).
The price of something is the intersection of supply and demand. Individuals make value judgments subjectively. But the market clearing price in a free market is an objective outcome from these subjective valuations.
> There's no physical law which governs economics.
Indeed. Economics transcends physics in that the laws of physics could have been different (might be in alternative universes), but the results of free market microeconomics are in fact *mathematical* theorems.
These theorems apply whenever there are limited resources and agents must make mutually exclusive choices between them.
Except that there is no such thing as a free market in reality, and the mathematical theories in economics fall apart in the face of actual human behaviour.
Slashdot Mirror
That the IT decision makers are generally:
a) beancounters who create this technological debt out of ignorance and generally against the recommendations of their subject matter experts.
or
b) IT people who are knowledgeable enough to avoid this problem, but not powerful enough in the organization to follow through because of the beancounters above them.
The fact is that there aren't many eyes on most parts of the code, and of the ones that are, very few of them are qualified to find the problems.
Because its cheap.
About security, or BlackBerry.
That doesn't make sense. Private equity companies buy struggling companies at a multiple of what they are worth, in hopes of selling it for more later. It was purchased in 2005. I am sure the equity company who owns it isn't happy that they are going bankrupt.
No they don't. They buy them to suck them dry.
By the time these companies go bankrupt the private equity firm has usually gotten multiples of their actual investment back out.
In this case it is deliberate bankruptcy. The 80s corporate raiders never retired, they became private equity firms. They buy companies and let them fail under the weight of debt servicing (the debt being serviced, for good measure, was incurred in order to buy the company). The only people who lose are the complete idiots who finance these takeovers -- oh, and everyone who works at the company in question.
Yup, they are vampires. Suck a company dry by loading them up on debt and taking the money in management (ha!) fees and special dividends.. and if the company goes bankrupt, oh well.
Debt riddled husk leftover from a leveraged buyout plundering by private equity.
You shouldn't worry because the end point OS doesn't matter to them any more.
They are going to make their money off of hosting the services and applications people actually use, and things like identity management, compute and other Azure goodies for organizations.
At least we can reasonably assume that encryption is doing the job it is meant to.
As always, law enforcement and politicians calling for a backdoor is pure stupidity. No matter how good the intentions, the details will always fall into the wrong hands eventually. Or more likely (as demonstrated conclusively by law enforcement everywhere) they will end up using it in unwarranted ways.
Law enforcement needs to get over it and find other ways to do their job. You can't put the math genie back in the bottle.
Tesla is most likely not going to survive as an independent car maker.
Maybe they'll make it as a niche luxury brand, but unless the miraculously start producing, they are going to be crushed by the real carmakers.
All the majors have EVs and hybrids on the way, and they can actually build them across the globe and in large quantities.
I think they are going to be bought up after their stock crashes, or turn into a battery company. Making money on cars is a very tough business.
The main story arc was stupid and terrible.. and resulted in the slowest chase in movie history because they were low on gas!?
The secondary plotline was completely irrelevant to everything and everyone. Hating on rich people at a casino and then beating people over the head with heavy handed and incredibly simplistic morality before riding a pack of animals around and trashing the place!?
Most of the characters are two-dimensional and had no development whatsoever.
Annnnd they wasted Luke Skywalker's last appearance. After doing a very poor job of the build up throughout the (overly long) bloated mess of a movie, they wasted their last chance to redeem it with Luke going out like the legend he was despite his protestations.. and instead did a stupid gimmick for the final confrontation so it ended up having no emotional resonance at all.
Like it was bad, man. Just all around terrible storytelling.
But hey, it's making a ton of money so prepare for more of the same.
For jobs that are largely task work oriented.. sorry you gotta be where the task is..
For other jobs, we still commute because managers are bad.
Again you are being mislead by old technology. We're talking about their ability to service the EV market. The number of old tech ICE vehicles they produce is irrelevant. As you can see from the Bolt and Ioniq examples I gave.
Again, you are missing the point. Tesla can't actually build their cars. They can't meet their own tiny milestones.
Tesla is hoping to deliver 100,000 Model S and Model X delivers this year. They delivered 222 Model 3's this quarter.
I think in the US the number of cars and light trucks sold last year was in the neighbourhood of 17 million.
So stop trying to tell me how they are the only ones who can service this market. They are a niche player.
The established car makers are all sitting on upcoming EV models, and they can actually produce and deliver them --- in most cases, worldwide.
Tesla is just doing them a favour and popularizing the concept for them.
You're giving the traditional car companies far too much credit. Look at Toyota for example, they are still trying to promote hydrogen fuel cells. They don't know that that technology has been beaten.
Yes, I'm sure they are unaware of what Tesla is doing.
GM and Hyundai have good EVs, but just like Tesla they can't produce even a fraction of what the market is demanding.
They produce millions of cars a year. If the market was demanding EVs they would be making them. We aren't there yet.
The only traditional car company that's doing as well as Tesla is Nissan.
Doing as well as Tesla? Tesla sells a rounding error worth of cars each year in comparison to the traditionals.
1) After their ridiculous stock valuation drops to a reasonable amount, they get scooped up by a real automaker as a premium badge.
2) They remain a niche premium car maker.
3) They become a battery company.
They don't have the infrastructure to compete on a world wide scale with the big automakers.
As soon as electrics are well accepted by the public and hit critical mass, the big automakers are going to destroy Tesla.. because unlike Tesla they can actually build cars. Lots of them. They haven't been doing nothing and being disrupted by Tesla. They've been waiting until it makes sense economically.
I am beyond sick and tired of Slashdot trying to push the "Russians influenced the election!" BS that the left has been pushing. It's fake. It never happened.
Apparently, it did? What motive would Facebook have to say it happened otherwise?
Who cares if they bought ads on Facebook? Does it matter?
I thought you just said it didn't happen?
Does anyone seriously think people voted for Trump because they saw ads from Russians?!
I mean it seems plausible when you consider how stupid the average Trump supporter has to have been to.. you know, have supported Trump.
The thing that caused Hillary to lose more than anything else is likely her shady dealings involving her email server and the FBI "investigation" into it. An investigation that could still be restarted as it's becoming more and more clear that one campaign did, in fact, have dealings with Russia: the Democrat's.
So Trump's campaign manager and foreign policy advisor's have just been changed, Jr. admitted meeting the Russians etc.. But her EMAILS!! REEEEEEEEEEE
So glad to be Canadian right now.
Face it: Whether or not it's human-caused, there is literally no downside to our species ceasing to dump unnecessary waste gasses and pollutants into our environment. Saying "it costs too much, it's too much of an economic burden!" is about as short-sighted as you can get. We, as a species, keep shitting all over the planet we live on, and through the magic of denial, expect there's going to be no consequences -- or worse, don't care because the consequences won't affect us, immediately, it'll affect future generations ("that's their problem, not ours, why should we care?"); reprehensible. We have the technology to move away from 100-year-old energy sources, why not use it?
This pretty much sums it up.
Even if it were true that the pollution isn't going to have catastrophic economic and migrant effects (which it isn't unless you watch Fox news) we can still make a better world.. so why not?
The way you can tell CO2 doesn't have the effect on the climate the fear-mongers want you to think it does, is that as CO2 continues to climb climate changes do not track with CO2 increases, much less exhibit any kind of runaway effect which is the whole reason you were supposed to fear CO2 to begin with.
Luckily even for those of you that continue to fear irrationally, CO2 production will inevitably decline in the coming decades as solar and other forms of renewable energy take over for real, now that that are close to actually making more sense than fossil fuels.
I don't think that you understand the meaning of the word rational.
CO2's effect has been demonstrated conclusively.
1) New developers coming up employ the latest whiz-bang buzzword frameworks etc. and blindly repeat the mistakes of the past.
2) Security takes a back seat to "getting it working" as always in IT.
Teachers are hounded out of the business if they don't parrot the political bias of the department head, principal, superintendent. Good teachers won't work under such conditions, hacks do.
Citation needed. Turning education into a political issue is part of the problem. Stop doing it.
Progressives.
I like progress.
I wish I hadn't posted in the thread so that I could mod you up.
Great points.
People need to realize how dramatically schools have changed in the past few decades. It isn't like when we were in school.
Cutting out the politics and having good teachers fixes education.
Traditional media has been taking a side more and more as well.
Partisan organizations shouldn't be able to masquerade as impartial news organizations.
> There is no such thing as an objectively-"correct" price for anything.
What we have instead is the market clearing price. Which no one can manipulate in a free market (per microeconomic definition, when certain conditions are met - perfect competition, perfect information, no externalities).
The price of something is the intersection of supply and demand. Individuals make value judgments subjectively. But the market clearing price in a free market is an objective outcome from these subjective valuations.
> There's no physical law which governs economics.
Indeed. Economics transcends physics in that the laws of physics could have been different (might be in alternative universes), but the results of free market microeconomics are in fact *mathematical* theorems.
These theorems apply whenever there are limited resources and agents must make mutually exclusive choices between them.
Except that there is no such thing as a free market in reality, and the mathematical theories in economics fall apart in the face of actual human behaviour.