That's why they turned to companies like Unisys. Unisys makes the claims that it needs H1B workers, and Unisys seeks contracts with big companies to handle their IT services. Big companies dissolve their IT departments, push the duties to Unisys on-paper, Unisys brings workers into the facilities to displace butts-in-seats of existing IT staff and the original company forces displaced workers to perform training in order to get any kind of severance package. The company that gets Unisys' services feels that they retain a degree of control over the situation since the workers are in their own facilities and there's no need to open the company network up to the whole world for just rote maintenance.
If you want to fix the problem, restricting the nature of the jobs eligible for H1B is a good start. I bet a lot of companies would not be so inclined to let foreigners on foreign soil so deeply into their networks as a matter of course, too much opportunity for malfeasance that might not be easily prosecuted or otherwise rectified, so those companies probably wouldn't seek to overseas their IT support to the degree that they're willing to outsource to outsiders within their own walls. Also raising the minimum wages required for H1B jobs would help, it would show that yes, those H1B workers really are worth the money and that the company really can't find the worker at nearly any wage. The $150,000 number with annual adjustments for inflation or cost of living makes sense, it means that truly skilled workers with advanced training that are not readily just internally trained or promoted would probably remain as they are, but lower-end skilled jobs that your average IT worker with five to ten years experience aren't outsourced to save 50%.
The value of a company is often based on perceived potential. Right now, Tesla has demonstrated viable products in an up and coming market that's perceived as being on the cusp of exploding in growth. Also, Tesla is more than just cars, the formal merger with SolarCity solidifies their presence in the market for home solar, home battery storage, and commercial power storage, and their existing plans for battery production might also benefit them well as a wholesaler of batteries to their competitors or to others with electric power ideas.
I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla also benefits from bleed-over from Musk's other headline-grabbing company, SpaceX. Successes with his companies, especially on viably bringing engineering projects to market as functional products probably bolsters all of them. Right now both companies appear to be making good engineering decisions, and if they continue to do so then they could end up being major disruptions to both markets.
Ideally all of the automakers would bring electrics to market with conventional styling; I really don't care for how most special-just-to-be-special bodywork is styled for electrics. To my eye, Tesla's cars look less like they're trying to be different as electrics than Toyota's or GM's, and this works a lot better than weird body shapes and bolt-on different color panels around the windows and beltline.
If you're being pedantic about it, Android's claim to Linux is just as strong, what it lacks is the GNU toolkit and the general base of additional software that one normally finds on a UNIX-like system. The Android shell, whatever it happens to be called, is intended to obscure what's underneath and it does a pretty good job of that.
I sort of see why they did that. Windows users were accustomed to running with account privileges that left the platform vulnerable to exploit. Android largely has avoided that through simply not giving the end user the ability to have those kinds of access privileges through native tools. This also forces application developers to design software that doesn't require those kinds of superuser access privileges, so that the whole system remains relatively secure compared to the morass that Microsoft's OSes have been for the past twenty-five years.
Perhaps the nitpickers were right when they wanted us to call it "GNU/Linux" back in the day.
Hell, my Apple laptop with OSX has more in common with Linux from an end-user point of view as far as UNIX-style tools and privilege escalation are concerned than my Android phone does.
We've basically always looked for ways to make achieving results easier. The migration from cottage-industry to the Industrial Revolution that led to massive factories was spurred by the desire to make more things with less labor, and to sell those things to more people for more total money, even if the per-unit cost came down in order to reach those new markets of poorer and poorer people.
The point of the assembly line was to make it efficient to build. Once the assembly line was put into use it now became a race to make the assembly line processes more and more efficient, and arguably to improve quality through the reduction in tolerances as parts are assembled. Case in point, from the earliest days of assembly-line automotive manufacturing on the assembly line, more and more jigs, machines, and other tools have been added to either reduce the number of workers needed to do assembly, or to increase the amount of end-result from any one worker as the number of individual parts in the cars has ballooned. Eventually many of the tasks that were previously human-performed are now automated with the use of industrial manufacturing robots. Whole car unit-bodies are made where robots stamp the parts, stack the parts, pull the parts off of stacks, align the parts, weld the parts, clean the assembly, primer the assembly, and paint the assembly without a person ever doing more than loading the spools of steel or wheeling the stamped, stacked parts in and out of storage.
Humans will always find their jobs under threat from robots, that should be a given, and those jobs that involve doing the exact same series of steps repeatedly are the most vulnerable.
In post-secondary education, class sizes are often at least partially based on the nature of what's being taught and if the subject requires student to student interaction or not. Some classes can have as few as a dozen students even for undergrad studies, and other classes may have 150+ in a lecture hall. Others still may have a hybrid; weekly lectures and also weekly small-group studies.
in high schools though, typically all subject have approximately the same number of students per class, with the exception of some fine-arts programs where a band director may have a hundred students or where an auto shop teacher may have fifteen to twenty simply because of a lack of interest.
Perhaps it makes sense to start looking how various subjects benefit from smaller class sizes. In particular, subjects where student to student interaction is almost as important as student to teacher interaction probably are not as-helped by smaller class sizes. Social Studies classes where the curriculum calls for students to discuss issues and their relative merits both as contemporary events and as historical ones may not require smaller classes, but mathematics, where students are learning from a combination of the rote facts of the textbook and from the teacher's instruction probably could disproportionately benefit from smaller class sizes, so that when students struggle the teacher has more time per pupil to address those struggles.
Honestly it would make a lot more sense for either leagues to handle it themselves, or for the leagues to establish frameworks so that teams can do it. Such a framework would probably require that raw camera footage from the home team's stadium be provided to the visiting team, such that the two teams each operate their own control booths with their own directors and commentators. Fans could then subscribe to their team's games similarly to how they might purchase tickets to individual games or season tickets.
Could also have the two-tier approach, where the subscriber gets their team's games and also gets access to either the rest of the games from their conference or division or whatever for one price, or they get their team's games plus the rest of the league for another, higher price.
For college sports, could subscribe to the team, or could subscribe to the college. For alumni this might be good, as lesser publicized sports might also get coverage so they could see how the women's softball season is going, or the wrestling, or track and field events if they subscribed to a schoolwide package.
Any of these team or league or school based approaches would have the advantage of allowing a sports fan to only pay for what they care about.
I was under this impression too, and as far back as I can remember, if I had a cable subscription it had ESPN even though I do not watch sports. If everyone with cable is in this situation then perhaps as high as half of households are paying for a network that they never watch or only watch because they didn't find anything better on TV.
Way back in the day I had friends that had C-band satellite dishes. They had the problem of the Big Ugly Dish, and they had to have all of the necessary equipment, but they were able to pay for only those channels that they actually wanted to watch.
It's a way for people to bypass publicists and other fairly expensive forms of communication with the press and with a fanbase without having to maintain one's own infrastructure like an e-mail distribution server. Its original novelty was that due to its character limit it was compatible with TAPP and SMS, so alphapagers and text messaging on even dumb phones could receive it, but that character limitation has helped to dumb-down the message.
As the AC above me has said, it's also a source for lazy journalists, especially if people who are known to be controversial and good for ratings use it a lot. They love to repeat what others have said on Twitter even though those who care about the twit are probably already following them, so we get an endless barrage of, "you won't believe what X said on Twitter!" when it's not even a matter of not believing, it's a matter of not caring.
Unfortunately for Twitter, there doesn't really seem to be a good way to monetize it. They're stuck paying for what I have to assume is expensive infrastructure to maintain but with their character limit and intentional ability to send notifications to non-web devices and protocols that aren't twitter's own clients they can't get ad revenue, and apparently their backend is so badly written that they can't even do a good job of data-mining to sell trend data.
I guess that if you want to be pedantic, unfertilized eggs are female, but given that the point of the egg as represented on the twit farm was of a developing embryo that wasn't ready yet, calling eggs female is like calling fetuses female when clearly about half are not.
as skeptical as I am over Hyperloop (and I am very, very skeptical) his companies have been able to produce durable electric cars, have been able to repeatedly send rockets to space, and have managed to construct solar systems that seem to do the job properly. I'm inclined to let the man and his employees get to work, we may well be surprised depsite our skepticism.
To me, Hyperloop looks like a mashup of the transit system from the book version of Logan's Run, the turbolifts from Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the gas pipeline transits used in two different James Bond movies. Maybe they'll work, maybe not. He doesn't appear to be asking for our money to do the initial development so we'll just sit back and watch.
My assumption is that business users that are going to give the whole smartphone-dock-PC thing a go will end up with the productivity applications on the phone that they expect to have, without themselves having to figure out how to install them.
Before Windows 10, we bought three computers from the Microsoft store because for what we were looking for equipment-wise they were the best price. Back when Windows 7 was new we were looking for a laptop for my wife, and bought a Lenovo Thinkpad x301 for probably $300 less than it would've cost from anywhere else. It came with a free Ideapad netbook that I used for several years. More recently, when Windows 8.1 was their modern OS, we decided to replace the five year old X301 with a newer model, and ended up buying a Core I7 based Thinkpad Yoga 12.5 from the Microsoft Store, again, it was far less expensive than from anywhere else.
In all of these cases the computers were very lightly loaded with extra software instead of the bloat that I was accustomed to seeing from other brick and mortar retailers. The only preloaded junk was on the Ideapad, and it was the stupid Lenovo camera-based login crap that we just removed.
At this point I probably wouldn't buy a computer from the Microsoft Store anymore, simply because I don't want Windows 10, and I'm eyeing that Dell "Developer Edition" laptop so that I'll know it runs Linux natively without issues anyway. But prior to Windows 10, the Microsoft Store was not a bad place to get a good price on the hardware and to have much less preloaded crap.
And you can eat something other than popcorn, and you can pause the movie if you need to, and back it up if you missed dialogue that was really important, or if a scene was particularly awesome you can rewind and replay it to just watch it again.
I've had a video projector in one form or another for sixteen years, current model is an Epson 1080p model, works great. 100" screen that I'm sitting about fifteen feet from.
As for the "theatre-going experience", the only movie that I've really enjoyed the experience with the rest of the random audience is one that has played every Saturday night since 1975.
We have an asset tax based on real property. It's called property taxes. We also have taxes on some other goods that are based on transactions, like sales taxes, and in some places taxes on vehicles for registering for license plates that's based on a percentage of the vehicle's initial purchase price, depreciated over time. Thing is, if one documents one's purchases and all of the tax paid (ie, keeps receipts) one can deduct those taxes paid from one's federal income tax filing.
Taxing non-profit-making holdings is difficult because if the system was set up properly to begin with, most of those now-stagnant holdings were taxed when they were initially assembled, and we don't like double-taxation. It's also difficult to identify where the wealth is and how much is there without it moving, it's comparatively easier to see transactions.
Pretty much. That's why Cisco bought Meraki, to attempt to dissect how to leverage the subscription model instead of just selling hardware to customers and providing support if it's needed.
Slashdot Mirror
Well Ho Lee shit...
That's why they turned to companies like Unisys. Unisys makes the claims that it needs H1B workers, and Unisys seeks contracts with big companies to handle their IT services. Big companies dissolve their IT departments, push the duties to Unisys on-paper, Unisys brings workers into the facilities to displace butts-in-seats of existing IT staff and the original company forces displaced workers to perform training in order to get any kind of severance package. The company that gets Unisys' services feels that they retain a degree of control over the situation since the workers are in their own facilities and there's no need to open the company network up to the whole world for just rote maintenance.
If you want to fix the problem, restricting the nature of the jobs eligible for H1B is a good start. I bet a lot of companies would not be so inclined to let foreigners on foreign soil so deeply into their networks as a matter of course, too much opportunity for malfeasance that might not be easily prosecuted or otherwise rectified, so those companies probably wouldn't seek to overseas their IT support to the degree that they're willing to outsource to outsiders within their own walls. Also raising the minimum wages required for H1B jobs would help, it would show that yes, those H1B workers really are worth the money and that the company really can't find the worker at nearly any wage. The $150,000 number with annual adjustments for inflation or cost of living makes sense, it means that truly skilled workers with advanced training that are not readily just internally trained or promoted would probably remain as they are, but lower-end skilled jobs that your average IT worker with five to ten years experience aren't outsourced to save 50%.
The value of a company is often based on perceived potential. Right now, Tesla has demonstrated viable products in an up and coming market that's perceived as being on the cusp of exploding in growth. Also, Tesla is more than just cars, the formal merger with SolarCity solidifies their presence in the market for home solar, home battery storage, and commercial power storage, and their existing plans for battery production might also benefit them well as a wholesaler of batteries to their competitors or to others with electric power ideas.
I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla also benefits from bleed-over from Musk's other headline-grabbing company, SpaceX. Successes with his companies, especially on viably bringing engineering projects to market as functional products probably bolsters all of them. Right now both companies appear to be making good engineering decisions, and if they continue to do so then they could end up being major disruptions to both markets.
Ideally all of the automakers would bring electrics to market with conventional styling; I really don't care for how most special-just-to-be-special bodywork is styled for electrics. To my eye, Tesla's cars look less like they're trying to be different as electrics than Toyota's or GM's, and this works a lot better than weird body shapes and bolt-on different color panels around the windows and beltline.
There's one that's still going strong...
i was under the impression that Microsoft had solved that with Windows 10.
If you're being pedantic about it, Android's claim to Linux is just as strong, what it lacks is the GNU toolkit and the general base of additional software that one normally finds on a UNIX-like system. The Android shell, whatever it happens to be called, is intended to obscure what's underneath and it does a pretty good job of that.
I sort of see why they did that. Windows users were accustomed to running with account privileges that left the platform vulnerable to exploit. Android largely has avoided that through simply not giving the end user the ability to have those kinds of access privileges through native tools. This also forces application developers to design software that doesn't require those kinds of superuser access privileges, so that the whole system remains relatively secure compared to the morass that Microsoft's OSes have been for the past twenty-five years.
Perhaps the nitpickers were right when they wanted us to call it "GNU/Linux" back in the day.
Hell, my Apple laptop with OSX has more in common with Linux from an end-user point of view as far as UNIX-style tools and privilege escalation are concerned than my Android phone does.
Why would you connect your cell phone or other personal device to your work's network?
Think of any data cap as a means of throttling your unproductiveness to reasonable levels.
No, she doesn't drink coffee.
But she does seem to enjoy it when associated with comedians driving cars to get it.
My wife would've said Friends, but your point is a decent one.
She has an illogical, almost pathological hatred of Seinfeld, which stands in stark contrast to actually like Jerry Seinfeld's standup.
I was wondering how his claims made any sense.
We've basically always looked for ways to make achieving results easier. The migration from cottage-industry to the Industrial Revolution that led to massive factories was spurred by the desire to make more things with less labor, and to sell those things to more people for more total money, even if the per-unit cost came down in order to reach those new markets of poorer and poorer people.
The point of the assembly line was to make it efficient to build. Once the assembly line was put into use it now became a race to make the assembly line processes more and more efficient, and arguably to improve quality through the reduction in tolerances as parts are assembled. Case in point, from the earliest days of assembly-line automotive manufacturing on the assembly line, more and more jigs, machines, and other tools have been added to either reduce the number of workers needed to do assembly, or to increase the amount of end-result from any one worker as the number of individual parts in the cars has ballooned. Eventually many of the tasks that were previously human-performed are now automated with the use of industrial manufacturing robots. Whole car unit-bodies are made where robots stamp the parts, stack the parts, pull the parts off of stacks, align the parts, weld the parts, clean the assembly, primer the assembly, and paint the assembly without a person ever doing more than loading the spools of steel or wheeling the stamped, stacked parts in and out of storage.
Humans will always find their jobs under threat from robots, that should be a given, and those jobs that involve doing the exact same series of steps repeatedly are the most vulnerable.
In post-secondary education, class sizes are often at least partially based on the nature of what's being taught and if the subject requires student to student interaction or not. Some classes can have as few as a dozen students even for undergrad studies, and other classes may have 150+ in a lecture hall. Others still may have a hybrid; weekly lectures and also weekly small-group studies.
in high schools though, typically all subject have approximately the same number of students per class, with the exception of some fine-arts programs where a band director may have a hundred students or where an auto shop teacher may have fifteen to twenty simply because of a lack of interest.
Perhaps it makes sense to start looking how various subjects benefit from smaller class sizes. In particular, subjects where student to student interaction is almost as important as student to teacher interaction probably are not as-helped by smaller class sizes. Social Studies classes where the curriculum calls for students to discuss issues and their relative merits both as contemporary events and as historical ones may not require smaller classes, but mathematics, where students are learning from a combination of the rote facts of the textbook and from the teacher's instruction probably could disproportionately benefit from smaller class sizes, so that when students struggle the teacher has more time per pupil to address those struggles.
Honestly it would make a lot more sense for either leagues to handle it themselves, or for the leagues to establish frameworks so that teams can do it. Such a framework would probably require that raw camera footage from the home team's stadium be provided to the visiting team, such that the two teams each operate their own control booths with their own directors and commentators. Fans could then subscribe to their team's games similarly to how they might purchase tickets to individual games or season tickets.
Could also have the two-tier approach, where the subscriber gets their team's games and also gets access to either the rest of the games from their conference or division or whatever for one price, or they get their team's games plus the rest of the league for another, higher price.
For college sports, could subscribe to the team, or could subscribe to the college. For alumni this might be good, as lesser publicized sports might also get coverage so they could see how the women's softball season is going, or the wrestling, or track and field events if they subscribed to a schoolwide package.
Any of these team or league or school based approaches would have the advantage of allowing a sports fan to only pay for what they care about.
I was under this impression too, and as far back as I can remember, if I had a cable subscription it had ESPN even though I do not watch sports. If everyone with cable is in this situation then perhaps as high as half of households are paying for a network that they never watch or only watch because they didn't find anything better on TV.
Way back in the day I had friends that had C-band satellite dishes. They had the problem of the Big Ugly Dish, and they had to have all of the necessary equipment, but they were able to pay for only those channels that they actually wanted to watch.
It's a way for people to bypass publicists and other fairly expensive forms of communication with the press and with a fanbase without having to maintain one's own infrastructure like an e-mail distribution server. Its original novelty was that due to its character limit it was compatible with TAPP and SMS, so alphapagers and text messaging on even dumb phones could receive it, but that character limitation has helped to dumb-down the message.
As the AC above me has said, it's also a source for lazy journalists, especially if people who are known to be controversial and good for ratings use it a lot. They love to repeat what others have said on Twitter even though those who care about the twit are probably already following them, so we get an endless barrage of, "you won't believe what X said on Twitter!" when it's not even a matter of not believing, it's a matter of not caring.
Unfortunately for Twitter, there doesn't really seem to be a good way to monetize it. They're stuck paying for what I have to assume is expensive infrastructure to maintain but with their character limit and intentional ability to send notifications to non-web devices and protocols that aren't twitter's own clients they can't get ad revenue, and apparently their backend is so badly written that they can't even do a good job of data-mining to sell trend data.
I guess that if you want to be pedantic, unfertilized eggs are female, but given that the point of the egg as represented on the twit farm was of a developing embryo that wasn't ready yet, calling eggs female is like calling fetuses female when clearly about half are not.
It's kind of funny how we almost come to miss the trolling that at the time we didn't care so much for...
as skeptical as I am over Hyperloop (and I am very, very skeptical) his companies have been able to produce durable electric cars, have been able to repeatedly send rockets to space, and have managed to construct solar systems that seem to do the job properly. I'm inclined to let the man and his employees get to work, we may well be surprised depsite our skepticism.
To me, Hyperloop looks like a mashup of the transit system from the book version of Logan's Run, the turbolifts from Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the gas pipeline transits used in two different James Bond movies. Maybe they'll work, maybe not. He doesn't appear to be asking for our money to do the initial development so we'll just sit back and watch.
Ooooh ooooooooh oh-oh-oooooh....
Yep, from the back row.
My assumption is that business users that are going to give the whole smartphone-dock-PC thing a go will end up with the productivity applications on the phone that they expect to have, without themselves having to figure out how to install them.
Before Windows 10, we bought three computers from the Microsoft store because for what we were looking for equipment-wise they were the best price. Back when Windows 7 was new we were looking for a laptop for my wife, and bought a Lenovo Thinkpad x301 for probably $300 less than it would've cost from anywhere else. It came with a free Ideapad netbook that I used for several years. More recently, when Windows 8.1 was their modern OS, we decided to replace the five year old X301 with a newer model, and ended up buying a Core I7 based Thinkpad Yoga 12.5 from the Microsoft Store, again, it was far less expensive than from anywhere else.
In all of these cases the computers were very lightly loaded with extra software instead of the bloat that I was accustomed to seeing from other brick and mortar retailers. The only preloaded junk was on the Ideapad, and it was the stupid Lenovo camera-based login crap that we just removed.
At this point I probably wouldn't buy a computer from the Microsoft Store anymore, simply because I don't want Windows 10, and I'm eyeing that Dell "Developer Edition" laptop so that I'll know it runs Linux natively without issues anyway. But prior to Windows 10, the Microsoft Store was not a bad place to get a good price on the hardware and to have much less preloaded crap.
And you can eat something other than popcorn, and you can pause the movie if you need to, and back it up if you missed dialogue that was really important, or if a scene was particularly awesome you can rewind and replay it to just watch it again.
I've had a video projector in one form or another for sixteen years, current model is an Epson 1080p model, works great. 100" screen that I'm sitting about fifteen feet from.
As for the "theatre-going experience", the only movie that I've really enjoyed the experience with the rest of the random audience is one that has played every Saturday night since 1975.
Funny, I thought it was because of small-arms fire.
We have an asset tax based on real property. It's called property taxes. We also have taxes on some other goods that are based on transactions, like sales taxes, and in some places taxes on vehicles for registering for license plates that's based on a percentage of the vehicle's initial purchase price, depreciated over time. Thing is, if one documents one's purchases and all of the tax paid (ie, keeps receipts) one can deduct those taxes paid from one's federal income tax filing.
Taxing non-profit-making holdings is difficult because if the system was set up properly to begin with, most of those now-stagnant holdings were taxed when they were initially assembled, and we don't like double-taxation. It's also difficult to identify where the wealth is and how much is there without it moving, it's comparatively easier to see transactions.
Pretty much. That's why Cisco bought Meraki, to attempt to dissect how to leverage the subscription model instead of just selling hardware to customers and providing support if it's needed.