I'd probably take that bet. Why can't they? You don't have to use their service. As long as the cell phone company isn't denying someone rights based on race, sex, religion, I'd be surprised if there's anything in the law that would prohibit them from putting anything in their contract that they want.
"This is a chance to improve the quality of life for tech workers across the country."
Oh quit it, you're making me cry. Living in your tar paper shack wondering where your next meal is coming from?
Seriously people - you are responsible for your own quality of life. It's a free country. You don't have to do tech work, you don't have to work at EA, you can take a lower-paying job and not work weekends. But no. You want both a high paying job and no extra hours, don't you? What make you feel you've earned it? Some special skills? But I can hire dozens of other people that have the same skills you do....Because of company loyalty? How loyal are you if you were offered a higher paying salary+better benefits somewhere else?
There are all sorts of "flawed" technologies that win in the marketplace over aesthetically superior rivals.
The question would be:
Is the PHP solution such a sufficient improvement that IT shops world wide will throw away millions of hours of J2EE training, development, and maintenance in order to satisfy the purists?
I seriously doubt it. How many more ways do you need to solve the same problem?
I know I was wondering just this morning, just after breakfast, how much spam Bill Gates was getting. "Self", I said, "How many unsolicited emails does Bill Gates, the richest man in the world, get, do you think? Two hundred fifty thousand? A million? What DO you think?"
1) patents last for 20 years, not 17.
2) in the technology business, 20 years is a lifetime and then some. consider the damage done to customers by the ridiculous LZW Unisys patent. Millions of dollars were wasted getting applications off of GIF onto non-proprietary image formats.
3) most patents, when challenged, are overturned completely or in part.
4) if I come up with an idea, on my own, and I can make a business of it, then I should own it. If you come up with the same idea, sooner or afterwards, then we should compete in the marketplace, not the courtroom. Let the consumer decide.
I am not saying that someone should accept that the scientific community or any one scientist is always right. After all, that would run contrary to the basic tenets of science.
That was my original point. What I meant was "I no longer worship at the altar of science as being the sole arbiter of truth"
Sorry, I don't have anything to "cite" since it was years ago, and I'm too lazy to try and find it But I do remember at least one newscast reporting that "fact". Everybody knows fossil fuels are finite, so I'm sure it was more than that. Personally, I don't really care. My only point was only that science theories and techniques change as more information is learned.
I don't know whose post you read, but it wasn't what I wrote. Who said I didn't believe in DNA evidence? My point was only that I would listen to opposing views, no matter how ridiculous or lacking in facts they were. Yours, for example.
but consider the number of people that have walked off death row after it was found that the original "evidence" against them was bogus as proved by the new "evidence" (DNA).
Truth is a bitch. I have far less faith in science and scientists than I used to. In the late 70's academics were telling us we'd be out of fossil fuels in 10 years. And what about the continuing nonsense about what's okay and what's not okay to eat? Every damn thing causes cancer apparently.
I'm not ready to tune out the contrarians just yet.
Well, I guess this depends on how much stock was offered (on a percentage basis) as well as the vesting period. Are you willing to work for a small salary in order to own a decent share of a company? Forget "wealth beyond my wildest dreams" because it rarely ever happens that quickly, if at all.
What you should be negotiating for (in my unsolicited opinion) is control. Control of what you do and when. If the company is still small, perhaps being fairly autonomous/influential within the organization has some value to you.
Stock options aren't gambling. They are shared ownership. Corporations are structured for the benefit of ALL shareholders (but not necessarily employees). If you don't want options, trust me, most companies won't feel bad about paying you more cash instead. The more stock that stays in the stock pool means the dilution is that much less for everybody else.
It's real simple. The corporation exists for the sole benefit of the shareholders. This isn't about being nice to anybody, it's business.
Employees don't owe the company any more loyalty than the company owes them, which is nothing. As an exec, I treat people fairly and honestly, and I'll let them know in advance if something is going to affect their job. Still, business decisions, and the best interests of the stockholder, always come first.
Ya know, I voted for Kerry, and yet a lot of my closest friends are Republicans. It's hardly as if 50 million of your neighbors are bible-thumping mindless bigots. And although I disagree strongly (and sometimes bitterly) with my friends, I get more irritated by those who paint them with a broad brush. These are people trying to make a living and trying to do the right things.
Stay and fight? What the hell is wrong with you people? Kerry lost the election. It ain't the end of the world. The democrats need to stop letting the republican party leadership define what the democrats stand for. That's when you'll see things change.
IMO, the problem is with the democrat party leadership, not your fellow citizens.
Executives are there to sell and spin, not admit that their product is more deficient than the competition. It's like politics...he's selectively using this report to give his entrenched constituency something to spout when the Linux fanatics start slobbering over themselves.
It would be good if President Bush would do something that would not divide the country any further. Based on his first term, I'm not holding out much hope.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd probably take that bet. Why can't they? You don't have to use their service. As long as the cell phone company isn't denying someone rights based on race, sex, religion, I'd be surprised if there's anything in the law that would prohibit them from putting anything in their contract that they want.
I suspect the cell phone companies user contract will contain a provision prohibiting you from dialing a service such as this.
That *is* all their code after all....
"This is a chance to improve the quality of life for tech workers across the country."
Oh quit it, you're making me cry. Living in your tar paper shack wondering where your next meal is coming from?
Seriously people - you are responsible for your own quality of life. It's a free country. You don't have to do tech work, you don't have to work at EA, you can take a lower-paying job and not work weekends. But no. You want both a high paying job and no extra hours, don't you? What make you feel you've earned it? Some special skills? But I can hire dozens of other people that have the same skills you do....Because of company loyalty? How loyal are you if you were offered a higher paying salary+better benefits somewhere else?
FLAME ON!
In light of your questions, it seems the solution is not to target the spammer, but to go after those companies featured in the spam.
There are all sorts of "flawed" technologies that win in the marketplace over aesthetically superior rivals.
The question would be:
Is the PHP solution such a sufficient improvement that IT shops world wide will throw away millions of hours of J2EE training, development, and maintenance in order to satisfy the purists?
I seriously doubt it. How many more ways do you need to solve the same problem?
I know I was wondering just this morning, just after breakfast, how much spam Bill Gates was getting. "Self", I said, "How many unsolicited emails does Bill Gates, the richest man in the world, get, do you think? Two hundred fifty thousand? A million? What DO you think?"
I had no answer.
Until now.
Thank you slashdot.
How about MustPTV? (Apologies to NBC)
1) patents last for 20 years, not 17. 2) in the technology business, 20 years is a lifetime and then some. consider the damage done to customers by the ridiculous LZW Unisys patent. Millions of dollars were wasted getting applications off of GIF onto non-proprietary image formats. 3) most patents, when challenged, are overturned completely or in part. 4) if I come up with an idea, on my own, and I can make a business of it, then I should own it. If you come up with the same idea, sooner or afterwards, then we should compete in the marketplace, not the courtroom. Let the consumer decide.
Oh, I get it alright. Trash-80's etc....The first machine I ever owned was a TI-99 tho. That was livin'!
I think CmdrTaco is showing us the instruction booklet for the /. webserver
Thanks for the clarification.
I am not saying that someone should accept that the scientific community or any one scientist is always right. After all, that would run contrary to the basic tenets of science.
That was my original point. What I meant was "I no longer worship at the altar of science as being the sole arbiter of truth"
Sorry, I don't have anything to "cite" since it was years ago, and I'm too lazy to try and find it But I do remember at least one newscast reporting that "fact". Everybody knows fossil fuels are finite, so I'm sure it was more than that. Personally, I don't really care. My only point was only that science theories and techniques change as more information is learned.
I don't know whose post you read, but it wasn't what I wrote. Who said I didn't believe in DNA evidence? My point was only that I would listen to opposing views, no matter how ridiculous or lacking in facts they were. Yours, for example.
but consider the number of people that have walked off death row after it was found that the original "evidence" against them was bogus as proved by the new "evidence" (DNA).
Truth is a bitch. I have far less faith in science and scientists than I used to. In the late 70's academics were telling us we'd be out of fossil fuels in 10 years. And what about the continuing nonsense about what's okay and what's not okay to eat? Every damn thing causes cancer apparently.
I'm not ready to tune out the contrarians just yet.
Well, I guess this depends on how much stock was offered (on a percentage basis) as well as the vesting period. Are you willing to work for a small salary in order to own a decent share of a company? Forget "wealth beyond my wildest dreams" because it rarely ever happens that quickly, if at all.
What you should be negotiating for (in my unsolicited opinion) is control. Control of what you do and when. If the company is still small, perhaps being fairly autonomous/influential within the organization has some value to you.
Stock options aren't gambling. They are shared ownership. Corporations are structured for the benefit of ALL shareholders (but not necessarily employees). If you don't want options, trust me, most companies won't feel bad about paying you more cash instead. The more stock that stays in the stock pool means the dilution is that much less for everybody else.
It's real simple. The corporation exists for the sole benefit of the shareholders. This isn't about being nice to anybody, it's business.
Employees don't owe the company any more loyalty than the company owes them, which is nothing. As an exec, I treat people fairly and honestly, and I'll let them know in advance if something is going to affect their job. Still, business decisions, and the best interests of the stockholder, always come first.
Question 1:
File Edit View Favorites Tools Help.
What does this mean?
Question 2:
What is that little X thingy in the upper right hand panel?
If you can answer these questions correctly, you're technically competent. If not, you have a bright future as a technology patent examiner.
Ya know, I voted for Kerry, and yet a lot of my closest friends are Republicans. It's hardly as if 50 million of your neighbors are bible-thumping mindless bigots. And although I disagree strongly (and sometimes bitterly) with my friends, I get more irritated by those who paint them with a broad brush. These are people trying to make a living and trying to do the right things.
Stay and fight? What the hell is wrong with you people? Kerry lost the election. It ain't the end of the world. The democrats need to stop letting the republican party leadership define what the democrats stand for. That's when you'll see things change.
IMO, the problem is with the democrat party leadership, not your fellow citizens.
Is it more important for you to be a Republican than an American? Who exactly is your "enemy"?
Executives are there to sell and spin, not admit that their product is more deficient than the competition. It's like politics...he's selectively using this report to give his entrenched constituency something to spout when the Linux fanatics start slobbering over themselves.
And, yes. I'm relatively new here.
It would be good if President Bush would do something that would not divide the country any further. Based on his first term, I'm not holding out much hope.
Worst yet, my Redskins lost their final home before the election for nothing!