Not sure what CEO pay has to do with corporate abuse. Just because people make more money doesn't mean they are bad. And leaders with shady practices exist in the privately owned business world, with less transparency than corporations. From your article, CEO pay essentially is tracking the S&P 500, part of which can be explained that they derive a large amount of pay from equity in the company (eg stock options). CEOs are getting compensated according to their job expectations, they grow the value of the company for the shareholders and they are paid accordingly.
If you are interested there is a paper that models CEO pay increases and links it to increasing firm size
So, no - it's only been in the last 15-20 years that we've -really- seen a lot of corporate abuse of their position (not that it didn't happen earlier, but it didn't necessarily happen at the same scale)
Look at what happened in the late 1800's during the industrial revolution. There was massive abuse by businesses in politics, government, and dealing with individuals. With better communication in the last few decades we have more transparency, that is the only difference.
Name one complete sub-assembly inside of your computer which had the majority of the R&D and Fabrication done in the USA.
Most of the R&D is still done in the USA, and depending on the complexity of the component the R&D for how to manufacture is also done in the US. The mass production which is less technically intensive is done in other countries.
There has to be enough room in the future technology development for us to foster and train our citizens to come up with new concepts which will not rely on foreign brains, labor, or money to develop, market, and sell.
There is plenty of training already here, the difference is it is much cheaper to produce goods elsewhere. In many cases that allows the brains/labor/money to go on to more value added things.
*Chant* We can nuke the planet... USA... USA! Kidding aside. The article was about "measuring the impact of technology on the development of nations." So the nordic countries are deriving more growth from their technology sectors. That doesn't necessarily mean they are technologically more advanced. Technological advancement tends to go in waves, in the 80's Japan probably derived more growth from technology, during the 90's the dotcom boom probably meant the US was growing more due to technology.
When a society decides that corporations are priviledged citizens, corporations decide that profit and Tax Evasion matter more than Education, how can the country NOT fall behind in technology?
If that were the case we would have fallen behind decades ago.
Since the eighties, when Japan began to take over U.S. role on technology, and U.S. started to focus more on services, this was something predictable. Sometimes people forget that there is no way to be prosper doing each others laundry
Your idea of "services" is skewed. Chip design for example is both technology and a service, as is contracted programming. With modern mass production, the value of goods is in their design, not the acutal labor involved in making them.
the same way that the US government turns a tidy profit these days from the airfields/airlines that it subsidized?
The US government does receive a lot of revenue on the airfields it builds. Its just like spending on public highways, there is no direct revenue, but the indirect revenue of enabling commerce far outweighs the cost.
The government should not be involved in the business of making money because it has been proven time and time again that government efforts cannot be done efficiently and do not make money.
You're right, government isn't designed to be an efficient profit making machine. It can, however, do a good job of investing to enable more efficient trade & commerce. Research done in the university ultimately has to be used by private business in order to effectively serve the public. The internet really didn't take off until commercial ventures became involved.
And there is a basic flaw with your economic argument... If it is going to be profitable and sustainable to provide this facility why do they need to raise sales taxes? Because the truth is they expect to make a net loss each year and need additional tax revenue to break even
The sales tax is to raise money to build the facility in the first place. And if the spaceport does take off, the city stands to gain more than just the 6.5M from the lease. There will be more jobs, more businesse, and more money flowing through the local economy that the city can tax for revenue.
and it didn't exactly go down the pan when News Corp bought it, so that pretty much proves my point.
Newscorp hasn't really made new decisions on the future of Myspace. Once the "old media" starts bastardizing Myspace with their own vision, you'll likely see it go downhill. Going back to the analogy, so long as you keep your mouth shut, and all people see are the clothes you'll remain "cool".
....but like them or not (and I don't), News Corporation own MySpace; and yes, they succeeded in buying "cool" there.
It's like buying "cool" clothes. You may look "cool," but it still doesn't change the "uncool" way you act, so quickly people will realize how "uncool" you are.
It used to be you had to be at least somewhat smart to get on the internet, mainly because it had little to offer the common twit, as it was composed mainly of technical and scientific documents, combined with the fact that you needed either a Unix system or 3rd party software to even get connected.
The problem with your arguement is these threats were posted on a techblog that has little to offer the "common twit." Intelligent people can be as cruel and closed-minded as anybody else.
It certainly doesn't help that modern parents have become pussies, kids are out of control and grow up confused, aimless and irreverent.
"Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers." - Socrates
No kidding. I'm sick and tired of such pointless news. We should focus on more important things -- like Britney's Hair.
*Sigh* Just goes to show how quickly real news is forgotten. What about the question of paternity for Anna Nicole Smith's child!? That still hasn't gone away you know!
Why do we have an Electoral College? Because back in the 1800's, it took too long to count the popular votes.
Actually it's because federal government power is derived from the states, rather than the people. States are allowed to choose their electors however they want, which allows states to choose faulty Diebold machines, or deny voting based on a number of reasons (other than those protected under the 14th amendment).
On the other hand, election by Congress would require the members to both accurately assess the desires of the people of their states and to actually vote accordingly
That is only true of the House, the Senate originally was set up to represent the interests of the state. Senators were elected by the state legislatures not directly by the people.
Once the airlines start buying the real models, the spacing will be set back to the "stack em in like cordwood" norm to make as much money as possible off each airframe
For the routes a plane like this would fly (long haul international) compression wouldn't be nearly as bad as with domestic flights. The flights I've taken like Singapore->LAX direct, are pretty comfortable... then again they need to be since you're inside the plane for 16+ hours.
Also - a plane doesn't have to land on a runway - the computer could just have a general terrain map and look for someplace flat that isn't covered in water in the worst case.
Except the terrain map may not take into account the building/car/fireworks stockpile sitting on the field. Something a person can see.
The advantage of computers is that they can be reproducibly made
That is the advantage/disadvantage of current computers. They will always make the same decisions, but they also will always make the same mistakes. For example, if a computer enters a state where it makes a "mistake" it may correct itself, but then it could very well enter the same state again. While a human makes a mistake, learns, and doesn't make the same mistake again. Computers also have less flexible input configurations. Typically the only sensors on a plane are those that the designers think are necessary, while a pilot can look/feel/hear things that may not normally be examined.
And even if the computer had crashed the flight, how many other crashes that have happened would have been prevented if a computer were in charge?
That is why a hybrid of man/machine is the best configuration. For nominal flight the computer is superior, when things are unpredictable the human is superior.
Yes, only those with the finances to have their opinions televised should be allowed to express opinions or influence people.
Such financial issues wouldn't matter if there were actually an informed voting populace. The problem is the majority of people rely solely on 15 second soundbites from TV to make their decision, rather than actual research. Little people allow themselves to be so in democracy; How else would you explain the intellectual stimulating movie "Predator" being the launchpad for 2 future governors.
Now it seems like everything but the most professional jobs are getting outsourced either oversees or to temp, staffing services, and contractor agencies.
Don't forget replaced by machines; I'm sure many slashdotters are responsible for people losing a job. It might suck for the person losing the job, but in a macroeconomic sense improved capital efficiency isn't a bad thing.
This makes about as much sense as shooting a perfectly good horse while you're riding through the middle of the desert.
The shutdown doesn't mean that the research possibilities are lost. From the articles, it seems the NIAC was just a clearing house for funding research. The same research could be funded through other NASA teams.
Put the research where it belongs, to university labs.
Who is going to pay for the research, and who is going to decide what drugs to research? You'll end up with more government bloat and politics. Do you really want people to hold political rallies so that their disease will get proper funding. Is it fair for government to take your money to spend on medicine you will never need? A market driven environment means the people who benefit from a drug end up paying for it.
According to some figures I encountered long ago, the cash spent on PR, advertising and marketing often exceeds [oftwominds.com] the cash spent on R&D
Which indicates a competitive environment, if there were only 1 medicine to treat a specific disease, there would be no need to market. In fact, a perfectly competitive environment has more money spent on marketing; J&J spends $250M on advertising Tylenol.
More money and effort is going toward finding copied disks than in finding Bin Laden? I thought sniff-dogs were in short supply after 9/11? What gives? Big corps have way too much power of late.
Probably because the economic impact of what Bin Laden does is much smaller in comparison (the real global shock has been caused by the US overreaction)
See you in court bitch, the whole Slashdot audience witnessed you assault me when I tried to explain that to you, I was in fear that if I didn't do somthing, I could be laying there next to that poor bastard
Slashdot Witness 1: First Testimony!!! Slashdot Witness 2: In Soviet Russia, dying man resucitates you! Slashdot Witness 3: 1. See dying man, 2. ???, 3. Profit! Slashdot Witness 4: Pr0n!
we have people starving in the streets in developing nations, nobody raises a stink about it.
We try to get them food, but unfortunately people shoot at us when we do. If we shoot back then we are the evil ones.
we have people dying of diseases that are curable or quite treatable because big pharma wants their patent money,
And without the patent money, big pharma would never have developed many of those medicines in the first place.
we have confirmed human rights violations (and related labor rights violations) across the boards with several of our major trading partners, and nobody raises a voice.
We raise our voice, we protest, we issue statements of condemnation. There's nothing short of war we can do to stop such violations.
hell i wouldnt be surprised if we went to war because of it
I wouldn't doubt it in the next few decades, though probably not about the early release to the internet of the new 007 movie. Information is quickly becoming the most valuable commodity, and I'm sure widespread cybercrime will lead to global political conflict.
i hope we as a species die in a fire, preferrably nuclear, so the roaches can grow up and inherit the earth. theyre much cleaner, gentler creatures than we are.
Compared to the average/. reader... I think you may actually be right.
How does anyone benefit from a kid being computer illiterate because his parents one year salary still can not buy Vista, Office and Photoshop?
There are many alternatives that would make a kid actually computer literate rather than just another powerpoint whiz. It is in the best interests of countries to not develop their economic infrastructure based primarily on a foreign product like Windows. Because if they continue allowing copyright violations then the rich countries impose sanctions and stifle investment. Also, Cold war hysteria aside, there is the possibility of the US government working with Microsoft to track/steal information (only to stop terrorists of course).
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure what CEO pay has to do with corporate abuse. Just because people make more money doesn't mean they are bad. And leaders with shady practices exist in the privately owned business world, with less transparency than corporations.
From your article, CEO pay essentially is tracking the S&P 500, part of which can be explained that they derive a large amount of pay from equity in the company (eg stock options). CEOs are getting compensated according to their job expectations, they grow the value of the company for the shareholders and they are paid accordingly.
If you are interested there is a paper that models CEO pay increases and links it to increasing firm size
There is plenty of training already here, the difference is it is much cheaper to produce goods elsewhere. In many cases that allows the brains/labor/money to go on to more value added things.
Kidding aside. The article was about "measuring the impact of technology on the development of nations." So the nordic countries are deriving more growth from their technology sectors. That doesn't necessarily mean they are technologically more advanced. Technological advancement tends to go in waves, in the 80's Japan probably derived more growth from technology, during the 90's the dotcom boom probably meant the US was growing more due to technology.
You're right, government isn't designed to be an efficient profit making machine. It can, however, do a good job of investing to enable more efficient trade & commerce. Research done in the university ultimately has to be used by private business in order to effectively serve the public. The internet really didn't take off until commercial ventures became involved.
The sales tax is to raise money to build the facility in the first place. And if the spaceport does take off, the city stands to gain more than just the 6.5M from the lease. There will be more jobs, more businesse, and more money flowing through the local economy that the city can tax for revenue.
Going back to the analogy, so long as you keep your mouth shut, and all people see are the clothes you'll remain "cool".
"Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers." - Socrates
That is only true of the House, the Senate originally was set up to represent the interests of the state. Senators were elected by the state legislatures not directly by the people.
That is the advantage/disadvantage of current computers. They will always make the same decisions, but they also will always make the same mistakes. For example, if a computer enters a state where it makes a "mistake" it may correct itself, but then it could very well enter the same state again. While a human makes a mistake, learns, and doesn't make the same mistake again. Computers also have less flexible input configurations. Typically the only sensors on a plane are those that the designers think are necessary, while a pilot can look/feel/hear things that may not normally be examined.
That is why a hybrid of man/machine is the best configuration. For nominal flight the computer is superior, when things are unpredictable the human is superior.
Little people allow themselves to be so in democracy; How else would you explain the intellectual stimulating movie "Predator" being the launchpad for 2 future governors.
It might suck for the person losing the job, but in a macroeconomic sense improved capital efficiency isn't a bad thing.
Which indicates a competitive environment, if there were only 1 medicine to treat a specific disease, there would be no need to market. In fact, a perfectly competitive environment has more money spent on marketing; J&J spends $250M on advertising Tylenol.
Slashdot Witness 2: In Soviet Russia, dying man resucitates you!
Slashdot Witness 3: 1. See dying man, 2. ???, 3. Profit!
Slashdot Witness 4: Pr0n!
And without the patent money, big pharma would never have developed many of those medicines in the first place.
We raise our voice, we protest, we issue statements of condemnation. There's nothing short of war we can do to stop such violations.
I wouldn't doubt it in the next few decades, though probably not about the early release to the internet of the new 007 movie.
Information is quickly becoming the most valuable commodity, and I'm sure widespread cybercrime will lead to global political conflict.
Compared to the average
It is in the best interests of countries to not develop their economic infrastructure based primarily on a foreign product like Windows. Because if they continue allowing copyright violations then the rich countries impose sanctions and stifle investment. Also, Cold war hysteria aside, there is the possibility of the US government working with Microsoft to track/steal information (only to stop terrorists of course).