Just look at the latest financial statements for the public company of your choice. My former company's CEO has $101M in vested stock options and another $40M in unvested options. All that and a $2.5M bonus last year, too. Of the 6-7M option shares available to give out, 25% go to "named executives". That's a shitload of money. If you can figure out what justifies that kind of reward, let me know. Personally, when I walk by I see them reading newspapers and shopping for golf clubs.
What does this have to do with declines in scientific works and education? Think about what's motivating the people that work at such companies. To get close to the top these days means not just "getting rich", but having something called "generational wealth" -- that means your grandchildren will be rich, too.
People of of all stripes do whatever it takes to get "close to the money" and stay there. That might mean a top-level MBA and the cronyism that comes with it. It might mean talking shit about anyone in the organization seen as a threat. It might mean being a "yes" person. One thing it means for certain is not looking out for the best interests of the shareholders and employees. One thing it doesn't mean is being skilled in science or engineering; those folks are the cannon fodder.
News flash: American capitalism is brutal, corrupt and discourages hard work and innovation. Who'd a thunk?
Why Mono? The answer is extremely clear: outstanding tools.
Microsoft has some of the best development tools around, and the best of their stuff targets.Net. That being the case, and seeing that windows developers largely use MS tools, it stands to reason they'd find targeting Linux via Mono the path of least resistance.
Just to put this in context, I learned to program in 3rd grade (circa 1978) and built (as in soldering iron) my first computer in junior high school. I'm deep in this crowd.
That said, my prefered definition of "geek" was "someone with no socially redeeming qualities"; and "nerd" was "someone deeply engrossed in the academic, perhaps to a fault".
Hence, I was a nerd but not a geek. It's possible to be both; we all know them. To avoid banal exchanges (like this) over who was which and why, I just stopped using the words entirely.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, he really must.
Just look at the latest financial statements for the public company of your choice. My former company's CEO has $101M in vested stock options and another $40M in unvested options. All that and a $2.5M bonus last year, too. Of the 6-7M option shares available to give out, 25% go to "named executives". That's a shitload of money. If you can figure out what justifies that kind of reward, let me know. Personally, when I walk by I see them reading newspapers and shopping for golf clubs.
What does this have to do with declines in scientific works and education? Think about what's motivating the people that work at such companies. To get close to the top these days means not just "getting rich", but having something called "generational wealth" -- that means your grandchildren will be rich, too.
People of of all stripes do whatever it takes to get "close to the money" and stay there. That might mean a top-level MBA and the cronyism that comes with it. It might mean talking shit about anyone in the organization seen as a threat. It might mean being a "yes" person. One thing it means for certain is not looking out for the best interests of the shareholders and employees. One thing it doesn't mean is being skilled in science or engineering; those folks are the cannon fodder.
News flash: American capitalism is brutal, corrupt and discourages hard work and innovation. Who'd a thunk?
Why Mono? The answer is extremely clear: outstanding tools.
.Net. That being the case, and seeing that windows developers largely use MS tools, it stands to reason they'd find targeting Linux via Mono the path of least resistance.
Microsoft has some of the best development tools around, and the best of their stuff targets
Just to put this in context, I learned to program in 3rd grade (circa 1978) and built (as in soldering iron) my first computer in junior high school. I'm deep in this crowd.
That said, my prefered definition of "geek" was "someone with no socially redeeming qualities"; and "nerd" was "someone deeply engrossed in the academic, perhaps to a fault".
Hence, I was a nerd but not a geek. It's possible to be both; we all know them. To avoid banal exchanges (like this) over who was which and why, I just stopped using the words entirely.
Yeah, I'm a quitter.