The comparison is to road infrastructure, but what makes government funding of roads work are taxes on fuel. Without something like that there is no direct link between use of the capacity and the funding required for that capacity.
How to respond to business advice from Sun? Laugh, cry, both?
Perhaps they could reach this happy medium by auctioning off the process of opening sources for projects. Start with a high initial bid and reserve and see what the market will pay to have source code opened up.
There are lots of ways of sorting activity, but there are usually five things that players are seen to do in games: Explore, Compete, Socialize, Create, and Grief. Fear or fear generation can be well integrated with any of these, but is by no means necessary. What matters is that there is some dramatic narrative. That usually means some kind of foe, but that could be completely abstract. Gaming is entirely subjective as well. Did Starcraft really do so well for so long because of the fear, or was it all the rest?
These kittens can be expected to trigger allergies and as such cannot correctly be referred to as allergy free. The contempt here is for truth, logic, and the nature of the world as revealed by science. The kittens are just an accessory.
These cats may reduce allergic reactions for some people, but allergic reactions may still occur. The "Allergy-Free Kittens Produced" headline is wrong in a way that shows not merely misunderstanding, but contempt of the world and the science that explains it.
Motorola is having a lot of trouble in the market. In order to make it they have to attract not only more customers, but more top engineers as well. This move could draw in more customers and also interest more potential employees. If this works for them, then this could be an extremely efficient way to build up an email list of competent engineers while at the same time generating the goodwill necessary to harvest their labor in the future.
Backing up a little, one cause of the Middle East conflicts is tension over oil. This technology offers the possibility of one of the primary uses of that oil being made significantly more efficient. At the macro level the Iraq conflict, even including the amount of time required to pay off all related debt, is barely even significant.
Attitude is a big issue for Linux, in the Kernel. Linux is all about a big, messy kernel where all the high profile action takes place. Nearly everything gets shoved into the kernel, so the kernel is now this huge morass of tens of thousands of integrated features that takes way too long to compile and can make performance problems and bugs difficult to isolate. After coming from Windows, one look at this situation and FreeBSD seems like the Promised Land.
After just evaluating Joomla alongside e107 I found Joomla took at least twice as long for every part of set up. This is a new project and they should smooth things out, but this is an important part of any CMS product and Joomla is way behind in this. The easy browser install is likely not to work for many users. Building up the basic database user and tables is confusing when it should be foolproof and automatic. Subtle problems with the configuration cause bizarre errors instead of helpful warnings. Lots of cool machinery is there, but the overall smoothness of installing and setting up Joomla is behind most open CMS utilities and way behind leaders in this space such as e107 and Drupal. Very cool that they are opening things up and going for it, though.
Meat eating is directly responsible for heart disease, and in conjunction with smoking causes almost all cases. Heart healthy eating involves a vegan or restricted vegitarian diet. Eating this different pork could potentially be healthier than eating normal pork because of the increased omega-3 oils, but other compounds such as saturated fats make eating this meat still dangerous especially over the long term.
If something as complex and integrated as a home which currently needs lots of on site assembly could be made so cheap to produce and efficient to reprocess that they could be set up, redone, or got rid of at will then that would be cool. It might also help with the sustainability thing as long as the process doesn't take too much energy.
Your notion that your company, its profits, and your job could be threatened by this discovery is anti-science and anti-capitalist. In science an unexpected result should be considered an opportunity for discovery and increase of knowledge. With capitalism an unexpected result should be considered a business opportunity for improvement of existing products or the creation of new products. If you are going to be successful then you will have to weigh reality more heavily than stock prices since nature is less forgiving than financial markets.
The reasons that creatures become gigantic have to do with lack of competition and predation, neither of which is the case in the environment in which King Kong lives.
To strongly influence relevant teams to make a real change could be hard without being on location. Powerful ideas still need advocacy and tend to be misunderstood unless there is a really good and easily understood example. Being able to provoke real change in such a large organization from a distance would be an impressive feat.
When the Feds moved their own operations out of the facility the community had to deal with it. Because it is a heavily polluted superfund site the obvious thing would be to use part of the land for landfill and the rest for recreation such as golf, tennis, trails, and such like nearby bay side locations. Because the locals are committed to research they have been getting the contamination dealt with and putting in the work to extend light rail to the site. This has meant a huge committment by the community, a lot of political haggling, and a big investment in light rail, new roads, and lots of other stuff just to keep this facility open. Had the people who made this possible realized what was going to happen they probably would have just gone for the landfill and park combo and let researches choose from the many available post boom locations.
Regarding the tax structure, people really need to take another look at what is going on here. The comparisons to Boston are way off because it turns out Moffet Field is not in Massachusetts, but is actually in California instead. That is a whole different bay, and a whole different tax mess. Because the state of California has been in severe financial dire straights for a long time yet refuses to tax the living hell out of its citizens the way Massachusetts does a huge percentage of all local property taxes collected goes directly to the state just to pay the interest on the ever growing debt. Of course most researchers around here will tell you that is no problem because the state cannot go bankrupt which in turn shows how useless most researchers are when confronted with the kind of real problems that governments have to at least try to solve. Do the math on the local tax reveue from real estate prices going up. It is next to nothing, and far less than the demands on local infrastructure created by people moving in to the area.
The issue with Federal land is not like any other rent situation, either. If you rent a normal apartment, your rent is set so that a fraction of the rent you pay goes to pay the taxes on the property through the owners and managers. On federal property the rent goes to set up an entire alternative system of services. None of that money goes to localities or the state unless they get a cut of the sewer outflow or something. Yum!
Additionally it is worth taking a look at the area. Between the current Google location and Moffet there are literally dozens of abandoned corporate campuses. One cluster of buildings completed at the end of the dot com boom has never had any tennnants ever and so has never been fitted out, and this is adjacent to the existing Google campus. There are many options for taking over existing sites and rebuilding them to suit, but what big corporations want is empty land in a tax free location. They cannot be blamed, really, but the idea of spending all the money and effort to keep Moffet open for research was oriented toward actual research, not Google's product development.
This is just pure corporate greed. Google is not a research institution, and they are not more deserving of tax breaks than other big players like Microsoft, Adobe, Apple, Cisco, or even the many smaller players. They have plenty of reasonably priced options, and the tax revenue coming from this will mostly go to the state anyway. The sad thing is how this will damage real development over time. Why allow a Federal facility in your area when you know it will be gutted in the future for corporate tax breaks?
Historically big players in the Valley go for open spaces, use them for a while, then move on. That is how the bay side parkland in Mountain View was mostly converted to now abandoned offices. Recently locals have been trying to encourage more sustainable development patterns. Companies are encouraged to build taller infill development instead of competing over the last few open spaces like those found along the bay, on the protected hillsides, and in nearby Coyote Valley. Adobe, for example, has a compact campus in a downtown area. Of course, even with PDF and all that it we are supposed to accept that Adobe does not serve the public at all while Google does. So Google will be making products for the marketplace by making use of subsidy while Adobe has to slog along paying taxes like other companies because they did things right and followed local community guidelines for development. And having Adobe and other companies that are expanding as recommended foot the bill for companies still addicted to abandoning one sprawling campus in order to build another makes sense. The only good to come of this is that once Cisco or some other company moves into Coyote Valley the system of unfair givaways will be forced to an end because all the big open spaces are gone. There is only so much land in the valley, so infill development is the future. Maybe someone will be able to come up with a robust business model that can handle expansion without a lot of taxpayer kickbacks. Too bad that won't be Google.
It is amazing how far this nation has fallen after a decade of rule by cronies. In the past very profitable institutions were expected to pay their fare share, but now we argue that big profits lead naturally to big tax breaks. Fortunately small companies are such a large and productive part of the marketplace that they can probably support this kind of aggressive wealth redistribution scheme.
Sure thing, when you are capable of partnering with NASA and funding and manging a 1 million square foot research facility, we'll give you a tax break too.
Wrong on many counts: You could not, I and other Silicon Valley business coalitions would fight against you much more strongly than you expect, and I personally would never except tax breaks of any kind for any enterprise I am have any influence over.
You have a lot to learn about how commerce actually works. Freeloaders are not welcome at any level, not even the highest levels. A lot of work and tax dollars went into securing that land and providing public transit. Doing all that for freeloaders was never part of the plan.
This comment is completely ignorant of the realities of what is going on. The Moffet complex recently had most federal functions taken away which is why the land is being used now for other purposes. Google grew in the valley and would almost certainly put most of its expansion in the valley, so there is none of this luring business with tax incentives junk that usually goes on. Businesses themselves have been campaining for bigger freeways and more light rail such as recently installed in this location, so instead of making up junk about grasping local governments it would make more sense to try and deal with the reality of business and government working together to understand community needs and pay for them together. The idea behind the revitalization of Moffet was to bring in valued institutions that the public can get value from such as the new Carnegie Mellon campus which is a center for learning and research, not tax-free profits. This comment is based on a thorough misunderstanding of local history, politics, services, and commercial activity in this area.
They didn't use due dilligence because they don't have to. Microsoft owns this space, so what is to worry. If they make a mistake then they can just get some of their lawyers to destroy anyone who is in the way.
It would make more sense to advocate roof gardens, street trees, and vines. These would have similar effects, but function more efficiently. Plants have the added advantage of making environments desirable to humans.
One of the aspects of the Macintosh that keeps users coming back is the overal simplicity of it. The interface is mostly blank until users work with it and then it reflects them and their usage and their data. Having a minimalist yet fully functional mode could be important not only for appeal but sorting out the system as a whole.
This argument is too abstract. The battles on and around Midway and Iwo Jima involved extreme difficulties and high casualty rates because the Japanese forces really did fight often to the last which is unusual and notable. Fire bombing raids on other cities such as Tokyo had actually caused even bigger atrocities already by igniting firestorms. The expected alternative was an invasion beginning at Okinawa that was projected to have a vast cost in money, material, and human life.
As for the Japanese mind set at the time, some people knew of problems, but that Japan was loosing was not broadly known. Also, there were various preparations for extreme reactions to invasion including civilian resistance and suicide when alternaves ran out. Ending the war with devastating force very likely saved Japanese lives.
And let's be honest about the impact of nukes. Yes, some people got incinerated or poisoned by radioactivity, but with the introduction of nuclear weapons the impact of war, which had only ever grown worse over time, was for the first time not only reduced, but effectively minimized. Nuclear weapons are awful things, but they have tamed our thirst for conflict like nothing else before or since.
Slashdot Mirror
The comparison is to road infrastructure, but what makes government funding of roads work are taxes on fuel. Without something like that there is no direct link between use of the capacity and the funding required for that capacity.
How to respond to business advice from Sun? Laugh, cry, both?
Perhaps they could reach this happy medium by auctioning off the process of opening sources for projects. Start with a high initial bid and reserve and see what the market will pay to have source code opened up.
and dandilions--LOTS of dandilions
There are lots of ways of sorting activity, but there are usually five things that players are seen to do in games: Explore, Compete, Socialize, Create, and Grief. Fear or fear generation can be well integrated with any of these, but is by no means necessary. What matters is that there is some dramatic narrative. That usually means some kind of foe, but that could be completely abstract. Gaming is entirely subjective as well. Did Starcraft really do so well for so long because of the fear, or was it all the rest?
These kittens can be expected to trigger allergies and as such cannot correctly be referred to as allergy free. The contempt here is for truth, logic, and the nature of the world as revealed by science. The kittens are just an accessory.
These cats may reduce allergic reactions for some people, but allergic reactions may still occur. The "Allergy-Free Kittens Produced" headline is wrong in a way that shows not merely misunderstanding, but contempt of the world and the science that explains it.
Motorola is having a lot of trouble in the market. In order to make it they have to attract not only more customers, but more top engineers as well. This move could draw in more customers and also interest more potential employees. If this works for them, then this could be an extremely efficient way to build up an email list of competent engineers while at the same time generating the goodwill necessary to harvest their labor in the future.
Backing up a little, one cause of the Middle East conflicts is tension over oil. This technology offers the possibility of one of the primary uses of that oil being made significantly more efficient. At the macro level the Iraq conflict, even including the amount of time required to pay off all related debt, is barely even significant.
Attitude is a big issue for Linux, in the Kernel. Linux is all about a big, messy kernel where all the high profile action takes place. Nearly everything gets shoved into the kernel, so the kernel is now this huge morass of tens of thousands of integrated features that takes way too long to compile and can make performance problems and bugs difficult to isolate. After coming from Windows, one look at this situation and FreeBSD seems like the Promised Land.
After just evaluating Joomla alongside e107 I found Joomla took at least twice as long for every part of set up. This is a new project and they should smooth things out, but this is an important part of any CMS product and Joomla is way behind in this. The easy browser install is likely not to work for many users. Building up the basic database user and tables is confusing when it should be foolproof and automatic. Subtle problems with the configuration cause bizarre errors instead of helpful warnings. Lots of cool machinery is there, but the overall smoothness of installing and setting up Joomla is behind most open CMS utilities and way behind leaders in this space such as e107 and Drupal. Very cool that they are opening things up and going for it, though.
Meat eating is directly responsible for heart disease, and in conjunction with smoking causes almost all cases. Heart healthy eating involves a vegan or restricted vegitarian diet. Eating this different pork could potentially be healthier than eating normal pork because of the increased omega-3 oils, but other compounds such as saturated fats make eating this meat still dangerous especially over the long term.
If something as complex and integrated as a home which currently needs lots of on site assembly could be made so cheap to produce and efficient to reprocess that they could be set up, redone, or got rid of at will then that would be cool. It might also help with the sustainability thing as long as the process doesn't take too much energy.
That's a lot of iPods!
Your notion that your company, its profits, and your job could be threatened by this discovery is anti-science and anti-capitalist. In science an unexpected result should be considered an opportunity for discovery and increase of knowledge. With capitalism an unexpected result should be considered a business opportunity for improvement of existing products or the creation of new products. If you are going to be successful then you will have to weigh reality more heavily than stock prices since nature is less forgiving than financial markets.
The reasons that creatures become gigantic have to do with lack of competition and predation, neither of which is the case in the environment in which King Kong lives.
To strongly influence relevant teams to make a real change could be hard without being on location. Powerful ideas still need advocacy and tend to be misunderstood unless there is a really good and easily understood example. Being able to provoke real change in such a large organization from a distance would be an impressive feat.
When the Feds moved their own operations out of the facility the community had to deal with it. Because it is a heavily polluted superfund site the obvious thing would be to use part of the land for landfill and the rest for recreation such as golf, tennis, trails, and such like nearby bay side locations. Because the locals are committed to research they have been getting the contamination dealt with and putting in the work to extend light rail to the site. This has meant a huge committment by the community, a lot of political haggling, and a big investment in light rail, new roads, and lots of other stuff just to keep this facility open. Had the people who made this possible realized what was going to happen they probably would have just gone for the landfill and park combo and let researches choose from the many available post boom locations.
Regarding the tax structure, people really need to take another look at what is going on here. The comparisons to Boston are way off because it turns out Moffet Field is not in Massachusetts, but is actually in California instead. That is a whole different bay, and a whole different tax mess. Because the state of California has been in severe financial dire straights for a long time yet refuses to tax the living hell out of its citizens the way Massachusetts does a huge percentage of all local property taxes collected goes directly to the state just to pay the interest on the ever growing debt. Of course most researchers around here will tell you that is no problem because the state cannot go bankrupt which in turn shows how useless most researchers are when confronted with the kind of real problems that governments have to at least try to solve. Do the math on the local tax reveue from real estate prices going up. It is next to nothing, and far less than the demands on local infrastructure created by people moving in to the area.
The issue with Federal land is not like any other rent situation, either. If you rent a normal apartment, your rent is set so that a fraction of the rent you pay goes to pay the taxes on the property through the owners and managers. On federal property the rent goes to set up an entire alternative system of services. None of that money goes to localities or the state unless they get a cut of the sewer outflow or something. Yum!
Additionally it is worth taking a look at the area. Between the current Google location and Moffet there are literally dozens of abandoned corporate campuses. One cluster of buildings completed at the end of the dot com boom has never had any tennnants ever and so has never been fitted out, and this is adjacent to the existing Google campus. There are many options for taking over existing sites and rebuilding them to suit, but what big corporations want is empty land in a tax free location. They cannot be blamed, really, but the idea of spending all the money and effort to keep Moffet open for research was oriented toward actual research, not Google's product development.
This is just pure corporate greed. Google is not a research institution, and they are not more deserving of tax breaks than other big players like Microsoft, Adobe, Apple, Cisco, or even the many smaller players. They have plenty of reasonably priced options, and the tax revenue coming from this will mostly go to the state anyway. The sad thing is how this will damage real development over time. Why allow a Federal facility in your area when you know it will be gutted in the future for corporate tax breaks?
Historically big players in the Valley go for open spaces, use them for a while, then move on. That is how the bay side parkland in Mountain View was mostly converted to now abandoned offices. Recently locals have been trying to encourage more sustainable development patterns. Companies are encouraged to build taller infill development instead of competing over the last few open spaces like those found along the bay, on the protected hillsides, and in nearby Coyote Valley. Adobe, for example, has a compact campus in a downtown area. Of course, even with PDF and all that it we are supposed to accept that Adobe does not serve the public at all while Google does. So Google will be making products for the marketplace by making use of subsidy while Adobe has to slog along paying taxes like other companies because they did things right and followed local community guidelines for development. And having Adobe and other companies that are expanding as recommended foot the bill for companies still addicted to abandoning one sprawling campus in order to build another makes sense. The only good to come of this is that once Cisco or some other company moves into Coyote Valley the system of unfair givaways will be forced to an end because all the big open spaces are gone. There is only so much land in the valley, so infill development is the future. Maybe someone will be able to come up with a robust business model that can handle expansion without a lot of taxpayer kickbacks. Too bad that won't be Google.
It is amazing how far this nation has fallen after a decade of rule by cronies. In the past very profitable institutions were expected to pay their fare share, but now we argue that big profits lead naturally to big tax breaks. Fortunately small companies are such a large and productive part of the marketplace that they can probably support this kind of aggressive wealth redistribution scheme.
Sure thing, when you are capable of partnering with NASA and funding and manging a 1 million square foot research facility, we'll give you a tax break too.
Wrong on many counts: You could not, I and other Silicon Valley business coalitions would fight against you much more strongly than you expect, and I personally would never except tax breaks of any kind for any enterprise I am have any influence over.
You have a lot to learn about how commerce actually works. Freeloaders are not welcome at any level, not even the highest levels. A lot of work and tax dollars went into securing that land and providing public transit. Doing all that for freeloaders was never part of the plan.
Translation: Google is cool, so they should not have to pay taxes like others do.
I'm tempted to ask for a break too, but I'm not as cool as Google and I'm not really into freeloading either.
This comment is completely ignorant of the realities of what is going on. The Moffet complex recently had most federal functions taken away which is why the land is being used now for other purposes. Google grew in the valley and would almost certainly put most of its expansion in the valley, so there is none of this luring business with tax incentives junk that usually goes on. Businesses themselves have been campaining for bigger freeways and more light rail such as recently installed in this location, so instead of making up junk about grasping local governments it would make more sense to try and deal with the reality of business and government working together to understand community needs and pay for them together. The idea behind the revitalization of Moffet was to bring in valued institutions that the public can get value from such as the new Carnegie Mellon campus which is a center for learning and research, not tax-free profits. This comment is based on a thorough misunderstanding of local history, politics, services, and commercial activity in this area.
They didn't use due dilligence because they don't have to. Microsoft owns this space, so what is to worry. If they make a mistake then they can just get some of their lawyers to destroy anyone who is in the way.
It would make more sense to advocate roof gardens, street trees, and vines. These would have similar effects, but function more efficiently. Plants have the added advantage of making environments desirable to humans.
One of the aspects of the Macintosh that keeps users coming back is the overal simplicity of it. The interface is mostly blank until users work with it and then it reflects them and their usage and their data. Having a minimalist yet fully functional mode could be important not only for appeal but sorting out the system as a whole.
This argument is too abstract. The battles on and around Midway and Iwo Jima involved extreme difficulties and high casualty rates because the Japanese forces really did fight often to the last which is unusual and notable. Fire bombing raids on other cities such as Tokyo had actually caused even bigger atrocities already by igniting firestorms. The expected alternative was an invasion beginning at Okinawa that was projected to have a vast cost in money, material, and human life.
As for the Japanese mind set at the time, some people knew of problems, but that Japan was loosing was not broadly known. Also, there were various preparations for extreme reactions to invasion including civilian resistance and suicide when alternaves ran out. Ending the war with devastating force very likely saved Japanese lives.
And let's be honest about the impact of nukes. Yes, some people got incinerated or poisoned by radioactivity, but with the introduction of nuclear weapons the impact of war, which had only ever grown worse over time, was for the first time not only reduced, but effectively minimized. Nuclear weapons are awful things, but they have tamed our thirst for conflict like nothing else before or since.