I know nothing about how this works, but logically it would seem that a company would pay a radio station to broadcast an ad on a particular channel. That's how radio stations make their money, right? So if that's the case who pays the ad agency and/or the actors? It could be either the radio station, taking part of the money they are paid by the company placing the ad, or the company placing the ad themselves. Now what would happen if a radio station accidentally played an ad one to many times? The client company could arguably say that they didn't "order" or agree to that many spots, so the radio station would have to "eat" the cost of making that mistake. But, the ad agency/actors would still need to get paid for the airing of that extra ad, right? So who would pay for that? It was the radio companies fault, so it would seem that they would have to pay. Given that situation, it makes the most sense for client companies to pay a "fixed fee" to radio stations for a given set of ad spots. The radio station would be responsible for paying the ad agency/actors for however many actual occasions that the ad was broadcast. If this is the way it works, and the radio stations agreed to pay ad agencies/actors 3x the rate for Internet "broadcasts" then they have a problem. Radio stations can't necessarily go back to the client companies and ask for 3x the money they already paid to cover the additional cost the radio stations have to pay. So apparently now the radio stations are looking into stripping out the commercials and adding in new commercials that they could market separately, and get paid for independantly taking into consideration the additional costs they they have in paying the ad agencies/actors.
But I don't know anything about the business, so all this may be wrong. It's just my simple guess at the way things may work, and why the radio stations are in a bit of a bind here...
Holy Cow, you must not travel that much! If I did that much investigation into each place I had to travel to I'd never get anything done. I mean, who the heck cares about municipal elections? As far as highway traffic conditions, I'm not a morning person so I don't fly in the morning and cut things so close that a 15-30 minute longer commute from the airport to the customer site would make me late. I'd rather fly in the night before to make sure I have plenty of time in the morning. Just about the only useful before-trip investigations that I would consider useful would be going to The Weather Channel and checking on the local weather to determine what to pack.
Maybe I'm just stupid, but that was not a response to the "misconception" at all. DNA research to save endangered species and plants??
It was a misprint but now that you mention it, lets take a close DNA exam of a Panda, how its body is composed, what illnesses is it succeptable to and act from there, you don't neccessarily need to clone an animal as to save it if its endangered. You could study up on it and determine better situations for the remaining animals to survive in greater fashions.
As far as I know you are talking about two different things that have vastly different levels of complexity. On the one hand you are talking about cloning. This, while arguably difficult, pales in comparison to understanding the workings of individual proteins present in the DNA of a panda or other living organism. This is the "other hand." There are studies under way that attempt to understand the relationships of the various sequences of genes in DNA. In fact, there is a program, much like SETI, that you can donate your CPU time towards for calcluating "protein folding" that attempts to understand the relationships between seemingly desparate protein sequences (sorry I don't have the link at the moment, but I'm relatively sure that Slashdot had the story a few weeks ago). You are, perhaps ingenously, suggesting that it is just as easy to "fix" the problems that put specific species of animals at risk of extinction as to clone such organisms to increase their population. I don't know of any other way of saying it that this is a red herring. To suggest that finding and modifying the individual genes that cause a particular disposition to extinction is as easy or even easier than simply increasing the population of possibly "defective" species by way of cloning is a disenginous proposition.
There are many occurances of "scandals" that have nothing to do with "personal matters." Forget about the Lewinsky matter. I wasn't even referring to that. What about "file gate" and the China issues, not to mention the Rich pardon? There have been so many questions regarding Clinton's judgement and ethics, other than the "personal matters," that the excuse you give fails to convince anyone anymore. Even people who voted for him both times are seeing the light. Plus, now that he's out of office everyone can see the result of his lack of attention to the economy, energy policy, and a list of other matters that are causing us pain now. Only the uneducated blame Bush for our current problems, as anyone with half a brain can see that the economy has been on a downward path for over a year and the energy crisis has been brewing for years.
But let's get back on topic. Would anyone want to see a clone of Clinton? I sincerely doubt it, as he didn't seem to have the foresight to avoid the current situation so I don't think he would be able to effectively deal with it now.
Or, it could be that certain people just don't give a hoot about spelling or grammar! In any case, I'd be interested in hearing what particular mental deficiencies you are refering to, as I'm not aware of any. You certainly can't be refering to GWB's intellect, as it has been proven that he performed much better in college than most people realize.
If the current American president was cloned then it would be worth discussing any perceived mental deficiencies.. However, the last American president proves without a doubt that inproperly raised children induces moral and ethical deficiencies, along with a general lack of ability to properly consider the rammifications of one's actions regardless of the moral or ethical components. It may also induce a general deficiency in the lack of attention to spelling and gramar.;-)
Err, I read your original post, his reply, and your reply to his reply to your original post. After all that, I think that his reply to your original post was well thought out. I don't agree with you when you state in your reply to his reply to your original post that he was "trigger-happy" with the reply button and didn't "finish reading [your] post." Instead, it seems to me that your reply to his reply to your original post, which was a reply to ANOTHER post, shows a level of child like behaviour in that someone "called your bluff" as far as karma whoring is concerned.
Hopefully you won't reply to my reply to your reply to his reply to your original post, which was a reply in and of itself. Stop this now before you get ahead of yourself and warp the universe inside itself and cause another big bang (that'd be your karma-whore head exploding)...
Do you realize what a load that would put all routers? They would become basically nonfunctional. You make it sound like the list of "registered" web servers would be small, but in fact there would be hundreds of thousands. Access lists in routers (and switches) can only be a certain size and have those systems maintain a reasonable performance level.
What's with this "in Region 1 anyway" crap? You, of all people, would be the one that I would have thought rebellious enough to get a regionless DVD player. I mean, I did. And it even plays MP3 CDR's! It's not like they are that expensive. Yes, this could be considered a troll, but it's my honest feeling. I would have thought that CmdrTaco, with all his vast wealth, would have invested in a reasonable DVD player that didn't limit his viewing capabilities. I don't know, call me idealistic...
Well I, personally, am kind of sick just hearing about the "underfunded" USPTO. Just because they can't process all the claims in a timely manner doesn't mean that they should be approving such nonsense. Just don't approve them. Work at a rate that ensures proper processing of the claims. If (when) companies sue the government, or at least make enough noise to be heard, about how long it's taking to get your patent processed, THEN the USPTO will get "proper" funding and be able to process the claims, properly, in a timely manner. Meanwhile, DON't RUSH and just take your time. What are they going to do, fire you? Then it will just take longer to get the claims processed, or make it impossible to do at all.
Hmm. I checked and didn't see a version that I can run on Linux for my home server, or Solaris on both SPARC and Intel, nor anything for the IBM SP2 boxes running AIX or our S390 mainframe. Java, and true standards based APIs and programming languages are available for all these platforms. Where does that put.NET? As a proprietary solution from a company that doesn't understand the problem.
Well, that's pretty idiotic since you can get "large portions of the articles" or the whole thing via the Internet right now. Heck, we saw on the TV that the next Newsweek issue was going to have an article we were interested in and were planning on purchasing it. But, my wife went on the net and within five seconds found the complete text of the article, along with additional information not available in the print version. So, we are not going to be purchasing the print copy.
And if you don't link Slashdot leave, without replying.
You seem to be even more clueless than those posters you seem to be berating.
Miller was a compromise that ended a decade of legal wrangling over the subject of obscenity. It affirmed that legal obscenity must be sexual in nature (which this website likely is) and must violate community standards of propriety. Playboy isn't relevant, because playboy is a national magazine which may or may not violate community norms in New Hampshire.
What you seem to be either ignoring or just completely ignorant of is that by posting on the web the site in question had just as much a right to claim the whole nation as their "community" as Playboy. This isn't a paper newsletter that was only distributed in New Hampshire. This was a web site that I would imagine was accessible in all 50 states, in addition to other countries. While the New Hampshire police may claim that it was obscene in their community, they are but a small fraction of the community.
I'm sorry, but your blunt and offensive speach needed to be replied to in the same manner. You have every right to say what you did, but it doesn't make it any more intelligent or logical just because you appear to have read an opinion or two. And if you do have more legal experience than the average person it severely reduces your credibility when you make such a blatent mistake and overlook the facts I pointed out above.
Take some advice and read over your postings before actually clicking on submit. That's what preview is there for. If you are a lawyer in training or, God forbid, an actual lawyer then you should know the importance of every word, sentence, and puctuation mark in a legal arguement. Not that I do, as I've had absolutely no legal training, but I still think you should take my advice and preview before posting...
I don't understand what is so important about booting really really fast. Yes, it's an issue with Windows because it crashes so often and you have to boot quite often. It could be an issue with a laptop, depending on your usage habits (i.e., do you boot the thing every time you get a chance, or only when you have a 2-hr layover?). For an internet appliance, I would think the thing would be on all the time anyway. Why would you want to power it off on a regular basis? Have the monitor shut down and go into suspend or 0Mhz clock speed mode, don't shut the whole appliance off. In the infrequent occurances when the power is removed (power outage, moving the appliance, etc) the users can wait a minute.
Obviously you don't know anything about business accounting. A company can't spend so much money on IT related projects in one year to be strapped for the next two years. Yes, they can shift a bit more money in the budget to IT and then shift it back, and a little more, to other areas the next year, but it isn't plausible that it would so severely effect the IT budget in 2001 that "they don't have any to spend on new stuff they DO need."
I submit that the current tech market slump is due to "irrational exhuberance" with Internet related stocks -- which generally have nothing to do with Y2K related companies. Well sure, Y2K companies are computer companies, but I'm talking about the unjustified valuations for stocks such as Amazon, RedHat, and VA Linux. That's just to name a few of the "big" ones that have been corrected somewhat already. There are hundreds to thousands of other stocks out there that have irrational valuations, and that's what is going to create a continuing slump in the market if anything.
As far as companies' spending on IT in 2000, yes it was somewhat effected by their spending on Y2K related fixes the previous year. However, I submit that one of the reasons that companies did not go hog-wild on purchasing new computers in 2000 was simply because they didn't need them! What significant PC technolgies came out in 2000? Well, there's Windows 2000. Most companies took the stance of wait and see how stable it was and are only now starting to implement it. It's expensive, and IT staff require(d/s) a heck of a lot of training to tame this new best from Microsoft. Second, we have the Pentium IV. It was delayed, and delayed, and when it did come out we find out that it doesn't give that much more performance than Pentium III or Athlon systems. In fact, some tests conclusively show that due to the internal design of the processor it is slower than some Athlon systems. Plus, you can only currently use Pentium IV systems with RAMBUS RAM. This causes the systems to be much more expensive than comparable systems using standard SDRAM, or DDR SDRAM which will be available in consumer systems soon. So, you have to ask yourself, why would companies spend tons of money on operating system upgrades that they don't need and are unsure of the stability of, or computer hardware that doesn't offer significantly better performance yet cost tons more than equivalent systems? A CIO or CEO would have to be criminally negligent to spend on these technologies in the year 2000, as they have a fudiciary responsibility that "normal" IT workers don't.
So stop your FUD or your trolling and use some common sense. Failing that, just go away.
By the way, are you a manager at Amazon or an hourly employee? Do you own stock in Amazon?
Just a little nit, but just because you are not a manager does not mean that you are an hourly employee. In fact, a very small percentage of the people I know are hourly employees, and a very large number of them are not managers.
As far as the stock question, I would certainly hope the answer is yes. I would find it hard to believe that any reputable company does not have a stock purchase plan or option plan for "regular" employees. Sure, it may be that the options are reserved for "special" key employees that may or may not be managers, but again most people I know have options and everyone I know has the ability to get into a stock purchase plan (even hourly employees as long as they work at least a minimum number of hours). As far as Amazon itself, I would certainly hope that they have a stock purchase plan and options available for key "normal" employees.
Here's a wacky thought, but what if someone could find a way to turn the angle of that "equal and opposite" force? What if, instead of being opposite, the "force" was deflected somehow into the superconductors in a circular motion around the hunk of metal that made up the electromagnet? If they are somehow able to make an asymmetric magnetic field then the only other "force" would be the force of shooting the electrons through the coil around the electromagnet, which if using superconductors would be minimal if anything measurable. This may be what they are thinking of. They may be thinking that because they are not creating a "north" and "south" pole in the electromagnet and instead are creating an asymmetric magnetic field they are cutting out the "equal and opposite force." In other words, they may be thinking that the "equal and opposite force" of the north end of the magnet is the south end of the magnet, so if they can create an asymmetric magnet with only a north end they cut out the opposite force and walla, there's your (magnetic) force drive that takes you to the stars. How you can use this single vector magnetic force generator to actually drive your ship to the stars is academic, in their mind, as they have solved the "hard" part.
Geesh! Can't anyone take a little humor here and there. FYI, I certainly didn't grow up in "the city" and anyone who did would laugh if they heard you call me a "city boy!" I have flown all around the US and have been in some small "towns" in addition to large cities. "Towns" such as Bismark, ND, Dothan, AL, Yuma, AZ, etc. And I know all about dialing a 7-digit number and having it still be long distance, as I used to have to do this when I was a kid to talk to my friends - because my parents sent me to another county for school (Catholic, if you must know). I make one little sarcastic, but I thought humorous, jab at LA and small towns at the same time (which I thought was rather an accomplishment) and it looks like I managed to piss off both the people in large cities, thinking I didn't read the article first, as I always do, and commented without a clue, and the people in smaller towns who didn't seem to get that I was really making fun of large city folks who are the ones complaining, apparently. People, I think we all need to chill a little bit. May be that this election fiasco and Gore's desparate grasp to steal the election, along with the stock market woes which are certainly effected by Gore's selfish motives, has gotten everyone a bit jumpy...
Well, I tried, but the link failed so I couldn't. Besides, it says right on the Slashdot heading that they "tried this in LA" and I certainly read that. In case you didn't get it, my comment was meant as a jab at those in LA that can't seem to handle 10 digit dialing while the rest of the country apparently has no issue with it. Yes, I was a little purturbed when they brought it to the Atlanta area, simply because I couldn't figure out TECHNICALLY why they needed it, but there certainly wasn't a "large backlash." So, before slamming me simply because you don't understand a little sarcasm and humor take a pill and chill, or someone's likely to hit you with a big clue-stick one of these days.
I mean, come on! Just about everywhere you go you have to use 10 digit dialing right now. I don't see this as a big step at all, as local telephone companies have been doing this for years. I suppose in some backwater place where the population is less than the crowd at the local football stadium it may be an issue, but for everyone else this is old news.
Yep, music, like all "intellectual property" is intangible. Musicians should make their money from performances and not on some intellectual property that they created 30 years prior. Yes, this is contrary to the laws of the United States of America, and probably most other countries, but that's my view. It's the "what have you done for me lately" perspective. Perhaps musicians should get paid more for performances so that they can invest their money to live off of in their elder years like the rest of us instead of collecting proceeds for copyrighted works for years on-end. The saddest part is that a lot of musicians don't even get any significant income, it all goes to the music companies.
I think the idea is to put a watermark that includes your name in all files that you purchase from the Big5. That way, if you made those songs available on the Internet to anonymous users they could find out that you were doing that and possibly get a court order to search your house. Then they would sue you for Copyright infringement, even though you didn't copy anything, because you were making it available on-line. That's what they are trying to do. So, if you only make it available to your friends that you know instead of to everyone in the world then you will probably be safe, unless your friends make it available on-line and then you're in the shit house again.
A reprehensible tactic. Might as well all write numbers on our foreheads...
The funny thing is, no company could pay me enough to take MCSE courses. It would be a liability on my resume, and while I suppose I could just leave it off it's sure to come up at some point in the interview process. It would be an insult to even suggest such a thing. Now if we are talking about CCIE certification that's something else entirely.
What's wrong with your picture is that it certainly sounds like the employee is not given a choice. If they are forced into such a contract the contract would be unenforceable.
I don't get it. What's with all these "raise offers?" I never received a raise offer, it was simply understood that I would be getting a raise every review period. The question is simply a matter of how much, and if it had to be sent to the executive committee for review or not. I don't understand what people are talking about "raise offers" for. Do they not constantly improve their productivity and help the company meet and exceed their goals? If they are not doing that then the company may not have any money to "offer" them. If they are busting out the numbers then the whole concept of "raise offers" are ludicrous to begin with. In any case, the employee should know what the numbers are and how they are contributing to them. If they don't I suppose they don't deserve to get an automatic raise.
Slashdot Mirror
I know nothing about how this works, but logically it would seem that a company would pay a radio station to broadcast an ad on a particular channel. That's how radio stations make their money, right? So if that's the case who pays the ad agency and/or the actors? It could be either the radio station, taking part of the money they are paid by the company placing the ad, or the company placing the ad themselves. Now what would happen if a radio station accidentally played an ad one to many times? The client company could arguably say that they didn't "order" or agree to that many spots, so the radio station would have to "eat" the cost of making that mistake. But, the ad agency/actors would still need to get paid for the airing of that extra ad, right? So who would pay for that? It was the radio companies fault, so it would seem that they would have to pay. Given that situation, it makes the most sense for client companies to pay a "fixed fee" to radio stations for a given set of ad spots. The radio station would be responsible for paying the ad agency/actors for however many actual occasions that the ad was broadcast. If this is the way it works, and the radio stations agreed to pay ad agencies/actors 3x the rate for Internet "broadcasts" then they have a problem. Radio stations can't necessarily go back to the client companies and ask for 3x the money they already paid to cover the additional cost the radio stations have to pay. So apparently now the radio stations are looking into stripping out the commercials and adding in new commercials that they could market separately, and get paid for independantly taking into consideration the additional costs they they have in paying the ad agencies/actors.
But I don't know anything about the business, so all this may be wrong. It's just my simple guess at the way things may work, and why the radio stations are in a bit of a bind here...
Holy Cow, you must not travel that much! If I did that much investigation into each place I had to travel to I'd never get anything done. I mean, who the heck cares about municipal elections? As far as highway traffic conditions, I'm not a morning person so I don't fly in the morning and cut things so close that a 15-30 minute longer commute from the airport to the customer site would make me late. I'd rather fly in the night before to make sure I have plenty of time in the morning. Just about the only useful before-trip investigations that I would consider useful would be going to The Weather Channel and checking on the local weather to determine what to pack.
There are many occurances of "scandals" that have nothing to do with "personal matters." Forget about the Lewinsky matter. I wasn't even referring to that. What about "file gate" and the China issues, not to mention the Rich pardon? There have been so many questions regarding Clinton's judgement and ethics, other than the "personal matters," that the excuse you give fails to convince anyone anymore. Even people who voted for him both times are seeing the light. Plus, now that he's out of office everyone can see the result of his lack of attention to the economy, energy policy, and a list of other matters that are causing us pain now. Only the uneducated blame Bush for our current problems, as anyone with half a brain can see that the economy has been on a downward path for over a year and the energy crisis has been brewing for years.
But let's get back on topic. Would anyone want to see a clone of Clinton? I sincerely doubt it, as he didn't seem to have the foresight to avoid the current situation so I don't think he would be able to effectively deal with it now.
Or, it could be that certain people just don't give a hoot about spelling or grammar! In any case, I'd be interested in hearing what particular mental deficiencies you are refering to, as I'm not aware of any. You certainly can't be refering to GWB's intellect, as it has been proven that he performed much better in college than most people realize.
If the current American president was cloned then it would be worth discussing any perceived mental deficiencies.. However, the last American president proves without a doubt that inproperly raised children induces moral and ethical deficiencies, along with a general lack of ability to properly consider the rammifications of one's actions regardless of the moral or ethical components. It may also induce a general deficiency in the lack of attention to spelling and gramar. ;-)
Err, I read your original post, his reply, and your reply to his reply to your original post. After all that, I think that his reply to your original post was well thought out. I don't agree with you when you state in your reply to his reply to your original post that he was "trigger-happy" with the reply button and didn't "finish reading [your] post." Instead, it seems to me that your reply to his reply to your original post, which was a reply to ANOTHER post, shows a level of child like behaviour in that someone "called your bluff" as far as karma whoring is concerned.
Hopefully you won't reply to my reply to your reply to his reply to your original post, which was a reply in and of itself. Stop this now before you get ahead of yourself and warp the universe inside itself and cause another big bang (that'd be your karma-whore head exploding)...
Do you realize what a load that would put all routers? They would become basically nonfunctional. You make it sound like the list of "registered" web servers would be small, but in fact there would be hundreds of thousands. Access lists in routers (and switches) can only be a certain size and have those systems maintain a reasonable performance level.
I do believe this is all FUD.
What's with this "in Region 1 anyway" crap? You, of all people, would be the one that I would have thought rebellious enough to get a regionless DVD player. I mean, I did. And it even plays MP3 CDR's! It's not like they are that expensive. Yes, this could be considered a troll, but it's my honest feeling. I would have thought that CmdrTaco, with all his vast wealth, would have invested in a reasonable DVD player that didn't limit his viewing capabilities. I don't know, call me idealistic...
Well I, personally, am kind of sick just hearing about the "underfunded" USPTO. Just because they can't process all the claims in a timely manner doesn't mean that they should be approving such nonsense. Just don't approve them. Work at a rate that ensures proper processing of the claims. If (when) companies sue the government, or at least make enough noise to be heard, about how long it's taking to get your patent processed, THEN the USPTO will get "proper" funding and be able to process the claims, properly, in a timely manner. Meanwhile, DON't RUSH and just take your time. What are they going to do, fire you? Then it will just take longer to get the claims processed, or make it impossible to do at all.
Hmm. I checked and didn't see a version that I can run on Linux for my home server, or Solaris on both SPARC and Intel, nor anything for the IBM SP2 boxes running AIX or our S390 mainframe. Java, and true standards based APIs and programming languages are available for all these platforms. Where does that put .NET? As a proprietary solution from a company that doesn't understand the problem.
Well, that's pretty idiotic since you can get "large portions of the articles" or the whole thing via the Internet right now. Heck, we saw on the TV that the next Newsweek issue was going to have an article we were interested in and were planning on purchasing it. But, my wife went on the net and within five seconds found the complete text of the article, along with additional information not available in the print version. So, we are not going to be purchasing the print copy.
And if you don't link Slashdot leave, without replying.
What you seem to be either ignoring or just completely ignorant of is that by posting on the web the site in question had just as much a right to claim the whole nation as their "community" as Playboy. This isn't a paper newsletter that was only distributed in New Hampshire. This was a web site that I would imagine was accessible in all 50 states, in addition to other countries. While the New Hampshire police may claim that it was obscene in their community, they are but a small fraction of the community.
I'm sorry, but your blunt and offensive speach needed to be replied to in the same manner. You have every right to say what you did, but it doesn't make it any more intelligent or logical just because you appear to have read an opinion or two. And if you do have more legal experience than the average person it severely reduces your credibility when you make such a blatent mistake and overlook the facts I pointed out above.
Take some advice and read over your postings before actually clicking on submit. That's what preview is there for. If you are a lawyer in training or, God forbid, an actual lawyer then you should know the importance of every word, sentence, and puctuation mark in a legal arguement. Not that I do, as I've had absolutely no legal training, but I still think you should take my advice and preview before posting...
I don't understand what is so important about booting really really fast. Yes, it's an issue with Windows because it crashes so often and you have to boot quite often. It could be an issue with a laptop, depending on your usage habits (i.e., do you boot the thing every time you get a chance, or only when you have a 2-hr layover?). For an internet appliance, I would think the thing would be on all the time anyway. Why would you want to power it off on a regular basis? Have the monitor shut down and go into suspend or 0Mhz clock speed mode, don't shut the whole appliance off. In the infrequent occurances when the power is removed (power outage, moving the appliance, etc) the users can wait a minute.
Obviously you don't know anything about business accounting. A company can't spend so much money on IT related projects in one year to be strapped for the next two years. Yes, they can shift a bit more money in the budget to IT and then shift it back, and a little more, to other areas the next year, but it isn't plausible that it would so severely effect the IT budget in 2001 that "they don't have any to spend on new stuff they DO need."
I submit that the current tech market slump is due to "irrational exhuberance" with Internet related stocks -- which generally have nothing to do with Y2K related companies. Well sure, Y2K companies are computer companies, but I'm talking about the unjustified valuations for stocks such as Amazon, RedHat, and VA Linux. That's just to name a few of the "big" ones that have been corrected somewhat already. There are hundreds to thousands of other stocks out there that have irrational valuations, and that's what is going to create a continuing slump in the market if anything.
As far as companies' spending on IT in 2000, yes it was somewhat effected by their spending on Y2K related fixes the previous year. However, I submit that one of the reasons that companies did not go hog-wild on purchasing new computers in 2000 was simply because they didn't need them! What significant PC technolgies came out in 2000? Well, there's Windows 2000. Most companies took the stance of wait and see how stable it was and are only now starting to implement it. It's expensive, and IT staff require(d/s) a heck of a lot of training to tame this new best from Microsoft. Second, we have the Pentium IV. It was delayed, and delayed, and when it did come out we find out that it doesn't give that much more performance than Pentium III or Athlon systems. In fact, some tests conclusively show that due to the internal design of the processor it is slower than some Athlon systems. Plus, you can only currently use Pentium IV systems with RAMBUS RAM. This causes the systems to be much more expensive than comparable systems using standard SDRAM, or DDR SDRAM which will be available in consumer systems soon. So, you have to ask yourself, why would companies spend tons of money on operating system upgrades that they don't need and are unsure of the stability of, or computer hardware that doesn't offer significantly better performance yet cost tons more than equivalent systems? A CIO or CEO would have to be criminally negligent to spend on these technologies in the year 2000, as they have a fudiciary responsibility that "normal" IT workers don't.
So stop your FUD or your trolling and use some common sense. Failing that, just go away.
By the way, are you a manager at Amazon or an hourly employee? Do you own stock in Amazon?
Just a little nit, but just because you are not a manager does not mean that you are an hourly employee. In fact, a very small percentage of the people I know are hourly employees, and a very large number of them are not managers.
As far as the stock question, I would certainly hope the answer is yes. I would find it hard to believe that any reputable company does not have a stock purchase plan or option plan for "regular" employees. Sure, it may be that the options are reserved for "special" key employees that may or may not be managers, but again most people I know have options and everyone I know has the ability to get into a stock purchase plan (even hourly employees as long as they work at least a minimum number of hours). As far as Amazon itself, I would certainly hope that they have a stock purchase plan and options available for key "normal" employees.
Here's a wacky thought, but what if someone could find a way to turn the angle of that "equal and opposite" force? What if, instead of being opposite, the "force" was deflected somehow into the superconductors in a circular motion around the hunk of metal that made up the electromagnet? If they are somehow able to make an asymmetric magnetic field then the only other "force" would be the force of shooting the electrons through the coil around the electromagnet, which if using superconductors would be minimal if anything measurable. This may be what they are thinking of. They may be thinking that because they are not creating a "north" and "south" pole in the electromagnet and instead are creating an asymmetric magnetic field they are cutting out the "equal and opposite force." In other words, they may be thinking that the "equal and opposite force" of the north end of the magnet is the south end of the magnet, so if they can create an asymmetric magnet with only a north end they cut out the opposite force and walla, there's your (magnetic) force drive that takes you to the stars. How you can use this single vector magnetic force generator to actually drive your ship to the stars is academic, in their mind, as they have solved the "hard" part.
Or maybe not.
Atlanta has 678...
Geesh! Can't anyone take a little humor here and there. FYI, I certainly didn't grow up in "the city" and anyone who did would laugh if they heard you call me a "city boy!" I have flown all around the US and have been in some small "towns" in addition to large cities. "Towns" such as Bismark, ND, Dothan, AL, Yuma, AZ, etc. And I know all about dialing a 7-digit number and having it still be long distance, as I used to have to do this when I was a kid to talk to my friends - because my parents sent me to another county for school (Catholic, if you must know). I make one little sarcastic, but I thought humorous, jab at LA and small towns at the same time (which I thought was rather an accomplishment) and it looks like I managed to piss off both the people in large cities, thinking I didn't read the article first, as I always do, and commented without a clue, and the people in smaller towns who didn't seem to get that I was really making fun of large city folks who are the ones complaining, apparently. People, I think we all need to chill a little bit. May be that this election fiasco and Gore's desparate grasp to steal the election, along with the stock market woes which are certainly effected by Gore's selfish motives, has gotten everyone a bit jumpy...
Well, I tried, but the link failed so I couldn't. Besides, it says right on the Slashdot heading that they "tried this in LA" and I certainly read that. In case you didn't get it, my comment was meant as a jab at those in LA that can't seem to handle 10 digit dialing while the rest of the country apparently has no issue with it. Yes, I was a little purturbed when they brought it to the Atlanta area, simply because I couldn't figure out TECHNICALLY why they needed it, but there certainly wasn't a "large backlash." So, before slamming me simply because you don't understand a little sarcasm and humor take a pill and chill, or someone's likely to hit you with a big clue-stick one of these days.
I mean, come on! Just about everywhere you go you have to use 10 digit dialing right now. I don't see this as a big step at all, as local telephone companies have been doing this for years. I suppose in some backwater place where the population is less than the crowd at the local football stadium it may be an issue, but for everyone else this is old news.
Yep, music, like all "intellectual property" is intangible. Musicians should make their money from performances and not on some intellectual property that they created 30 years prior. Yes, this is contrary to the laws of the United States of America, and probably most other countries, but that's my view. It's the "what have you done for me lately" perspective. Perhaps musicians should get paid more for performances so that they can invest their money to live off of in their elder years like the rest of us instead of collecting proceeds for copyrighted works for years on-end. The saddest part is that a lot of musicians don't even get any significant income, it all goes to the music companies.
I think the idea is to put a watermark that includes your name in all files that you purchase from the Big5. That way, if you made those songs available on the Internet to anonymous users they could find out that you were doing that and possibly get a court order to search your house. Then they would sue you for Copyright infringement, even though you didn't copy anything, because you were making it available on-line. That's what they are trying to do. So, if you only make it available to your friends that you know instead of to everyone in the world then you will probably be safe, unless your friends make it available on-line and then you're in the shit house again.
A reprehensible tactic. Might as well all write numbers on our foreheads...
The funny thing is, no company could pay me enough to take MCSE courses. It would be a liability on my resume, and while I suppose I could just leave it off it's sure to come up at some point in the interview process. It would be an insult to even suggest such a thing. Now if we are talking about CCIE certification that's something else entirely.
What's wrong with your picture is that it certainly sounds like the employee is not given a choice. If they are forced into such a contract the contract would be unenforceable.
I don't get it. What's with all these "raise offers?" I never received a raise offer, it was simply understood that I would be getting a raise every review period. The question is simply a matter of how much, and if it had to be sent to the executive committee for review or not. I don't understand what people are talking about "raise offers" for. Do they not constantly improve their productivity and help the company meet and exceed their goals? If they are not doing that then the company may not have any money to "offer" them. If they are busting out the numbers then the whole concept of "raise offers" are ludicrous to begin with. In any case, the employee should know what the numbers are and how they are contributing to them. If they don't I suppose they don't deserve to get an automatic raise.