Who is the CEO of Kaspersky to claim authority on these issues? Why does he feel entitled to to be in a position to even make suggestions, affecting basically the entire human population?
There might be ideas which are suitable only for Google. In fact, the best ideas might be the one, which are only for Google.
In that case it's like being a musician before you could record decently yourself. You had to sign with a record company. Of course, you could have chosen "not to contribute" and play your music on a street corner.
If someone submits a usable idea, what Google can turn into a product, which generates revenue - there is no reason why the person who offered them the idea should not be credited properly as the source of the idea and rewarded properly. I am not thinking of the Microsoft-type of reward: buy DOS from someone in the neighborhood for peanuts and license it to IBM. That would be evil by Google standards, wouldn't it?
How about turning around and say: if you don't want people to compensate for their ideas according to their proper value, don't ask people to contribute.
There seems to be an agreement that this supervolcano will blow... there seems to be an agreement that it is overdue...
What if we found out that it blows - let's say - in 2012? How would it change history between now and then?
Although we can't be certain, should not we do it anyway?
It's kind of interesting, how the Slashdot crowd has really nothing meaningful to comment on this possible and according to some scientists "overdue" event.
Slashdot Mirror
Who is the CEO of Kaspersky to claim authority on these issues? Why does he feel entitled to to be in a position to even make suggestions, affecting basically the entire human population?
There might be ideas which are suitable only for Google. In fact, the best ideas might be the one, which are only for Google.
In that case it's like being a musician before you could record decently yourself. You had to sign with a record company. Of course, you could have chosen "not to contribute" and play your music on a street corner.
If someone submits a usable idea, what Google can turn into a product, which generates revenue - there is no reason why the person who offered them the idea should not be credited properly as the source of the idea and rewarded properly. I am not thinking of the Microsoft-type of reward: buy DOS from someone in the neighborhood for peanuts and license it to IBM. That would be evil by Google standards, wouldn't it?
How about turning around and say: if you don't want people to compensate for their ideas according to their proper value, don't ask people to contribute.
There seems to be an agreement that this supervolcano will blow... there seems to be an agreement that it is overdue... What if we found out that it blows - let's say - in 2012? How would it change history between now and then? Although we can't be certain, should not we do it anyway?
It's kind of interesting, how the Slashdot crowd has really nothing meaningful to comment on this possible and according to some scientists "overdue" event.
... it's shoking at the 1st time... it's somewhat disturbing at the 10th time... and it who gives a fuck at the 1000th time.
Just think of those footages you saw last time about children dying of hunger. Can you remember what did you do? Opened a new can of Coke?
Just a Random.idea
I would tell you: Now you know what I meant when I said: you can hide nothing from my eyes.
Just a Random.idea