First, in regards to the comments regarding the lack of randomization in the study, these are right on target. If people are volunteering to fill it out, chances are, the selected population are wasting more time than the real population mean.
Second, the number tagged on as "lost" money is complete baloney. This is similar to the figures put towards pirated software by the various software companies. XXX number of pirated copies means YYY numbers of "lost" money. This overlooks the point that MOST people who pirate software probably aren't willing to pay for it, regardless of whether or not they can get it for free. Therefore, if all the XXX number of pirated copies were simply unpiratable, they would NOT generate YYY amount of extra money for the software companies, because that money IS NOT THERE.
The same goes for the figure put towards measuring lost productivity into real money value. Chances are a majority of people who are wasting time are not busy enough, waiting for someone else, waiting for a meeting, or whatever the reason might be. So in other words, IMO, if these people were not wasting time by surfing the web or what have you, they would probably be staring at a wall. This is not lost money, as the productivity to generate the money isn't possible.
It's interesting that you say that the American Chemical Society testifies that there is a shortage, just to make sure wages are kept low, and PhD's are easily available. I've heard lots of people complaining about how it is "unfair" that scientists make so little compared to an MBA (which, I might add, I know an MBA not making much -- but that might be his own issue).
It really comes down to basic economics. It is not at all unfair that scientists (PhDs) are paid less, as this poster said, there are a surplus supply of them. If more people respond to the lack of economic incentive (the low pay), then there will be less PhDs, and eventually the salary MUST go up. That is of course, if they do their research properly and realize that they may be recipients of a disinformation program such as this poster discussed.
The thing I have noticed, is that most PhDs I know do what they do because they love it, and they don't really consider the financial incentive much at all. Which means the benefit they get from the job exceeds that which the money supplies... money is not the only benefit available.
This is really a very basic economic model, and there is nothing "unfair" IMHO about scientists getting paid less if there is a surplus supply of them, and they simply aren't needed in such supply. It might be unfair if they were purposefully mislead, which is really a very horrible thing, BUT, if they were not and are complaining because they think there work is more important, well, that's a different matter. Lots of people do important things and are underpaid, but that's the nature of the economic beast.
In response to the likeness of the War on Drugs and the War on Copying, there is a seriously oft-overlooked economic problem.
It works like this. Policing resources are limited, which means like any other economic equation, when the resources are diverted or used to do one thing, they cannot be used to do another thing at the same time.
In respect to the Drug War, one of the premises behind increasing enforcement is that drug use causes crime, typically property crime. So what happens when resources are diverted from fighting property crime to drug crime? PROPERTY CRIME INCREASES because now there is less disincentive to commit property crime (less chance of getting caught).
Of course, the politicians turn this around and put even more enforcement into drug crime.
Now, imagine if the limited police resources are sent off to fight another somewhat pointless "war." You could expect increases in all other criminal activites (violent crime, property crime, traffic crime, etc).
Plus, more non-violent offenders in prison helps expel the violent offenders.
Funny how people seem to forget that all resources are limited, including enforcement resources. So basically, if you support the diversion of police resources to help fight copyright crime, remember what is being sacrificed.
Having problems posting this, cause IE decided backspace is now alt-
Anyhow. Anyone recall reading the DoS attack for faxes? I think it was cDc that posted it...
You get a few sheets of paper, tape them together end to end, fax somebody, and tape the ends together. On and on it goes...
I'm wondering how many faxes have built-in DoS detection... I'm betting not many...
IF however, MS had built a fax machine, we'd be able to send it a page with some script in it to send to cause the fax to send those pages to all the numbers in it's memory....
"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pac Man had affected us as kids, now we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, bumping into people, munching pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
Having owned a company when I was underage.., you are correct. My father is a lawyer and held onto the shares which I could not legally own, but appointed me as an officer.
That way, any deals were between the company and the client, not myself. As for this Comdex thing, why to they have an age limit? That's very bizarre...
I think it's worth noting along these lines that, there have been many rich people in history... but are they ever remember as Great People (tm)? Chances are they aren't... the greatest people were never the richest but usually the most spiritually or philosophically enlightened...
Slashdot Mirror
First, in regards to the comments regarding the lack of randomization in the study, these are right on target. If people are volunteering to fill it out, chances are, the selected population are wasting more time than the real population mean.
Second, the number tagged on as "lost" money is complete baloney. This is similar to the figures put towards pirated software by the various software companies. XXX number of pirated copies means YYY numbers of "lost" money. This overlooks the point that MOST people who pirate software probably aren't willing to pay for it, regardless of whether or not they can get it for free. Therefore, if all the XXX number of pirated copies were simply unpiratable, they would NOT generate YYY amount of extra money for the software companies, because that money IS NOT THERE.
The same goes for the figure put towards measuring lost productivity into real money value. Chances are a majority of people who are wasting time are not busy enough, waiting for someone else, waiting for a meeting, or whatever the reason might be. So in other words, IMO, if these people were not wasting time by surfing the web or what have you, they would probably be staring at a wall. This is not lost money, as the productivity to generate the money isn't possible.
The study ITSELF is a real waste of money.
It's interesting that you say that the American Chemical Society testifies that there is a shortage, just to make sure wages are kept low, and PhD's are easily available. I've heard lots of people complaining about how it is "unfair" that scientists make so little compared to an MBA (which, I might add, I know an MBA not making much -- but that might be his own issue).
It really comes down to basic economics. It is not at all unfair that scientists (PhDs) are paid less, as this poster said, there are a surplus supply of them. If more people respond to the lack of economic incentive (the low pay), then there will be less PhDs, and eventually the salary MUST go up. That is of course, if they do their research properly and realize that they may be recipients of a disinformation program such as this poster discussed.
The thing I have noticed, is that most PhDs I know do what they do because they love it, and they don't really consider the financial incentive much at all. Which means the benefit they get from the job exceeds that which the money supplies... money is not the only benefit available.
This is really a very basic economic model, and there is nothing "unfair" IMHO about scientists getting paid less if there is a surplus supply of them, and they simply aren't needed in such supply. It might be unfair if they were purposefully mislead, which is really a very horrible thing, BUT, if they were not and are complaining because they think there work is more important, well, that's a different matter. Lots of people do important things and are underpaid, but that's the nature of the economic beast.
In response to the likeness of the War on Drugs and the War on Copying, there is a seriously oft-overlooked economic problem.
It works like this. Policing resources are limited, which means like any other economic equation, when the resources are diverted or used to do one thing, they cannot be used to do another thing at the same time.
In respect to the Drug War, one of the premises behind increasing enforcement is that drug use causes crime, typically property crime. So what happens when resources are diverted from fighting property crime to drug crime? PROPERTY CRIME INCREASES because now there is less disincentive to commit property crime (less chance of getting caught).
Of course, the politicians turn this around and put even more enforcement into drug crime.
Now, imagine if the limited police resources are sent off to fight another somewhat pointless "war." You could expect increases in all other criminal activites (violent crime, property crime, traffic crime, etc).
Plus, more non-violent offenders in prison helps expel the violent offenders.
Funny how people seem to forget that all resources are limited, including enforcement resources. So basically, if you support the diversion of police resources to help fight copyright crime, remember what is being sacrificed.
Having problems posting this, cause IE decided backspace is now alt-
Anyhow. Anyone recall reading the DoS attack for faxes? I think it was cDc that posted it...
You get a few sheets of paper, tape them together end to end, fax somebody, and tape the ends together. On and on it goes...
I'm wondering how many faxes have built-in DoS detection... I'm betting not many...
IF however, MS had built a fax machine, we'd be able to send it a page with some script in it to send to cause the fax to send those pages to all the numbers in it's memory....
Mmm.
When I look at it like that, MS hits new lows..
"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pac Man had affected us as kids, now we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, bumping into people, munching pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
hehe
Having owned a company when I was underage.., you are correct. My father is a lawyer and held onto the shares which I could not legally own, but appointed me as an officer.
That way, any deals were between the company and the client, not myself. As for this Comdex thing, why to they have an age limit? That's very bizarre...
I think it's worth noting along these lines that, there have been many rich people in history... but are they ever remember as Great People (tm)? Chances are they aren't... the greatest people were never the richest but usually the most spiritually or philosophically enlightened...
Actually... on the canarie website, they have a probably accurate graphic.. Now it doesn't include Edmonton (*weep*).