Are you a human being or a computer?
As you said: "Pick a style, pick a system, and STICK WITH IT."
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Are you a human being or a computer?
I believe that N. Korea is going to be the cause of a nuclear war in the next five years.
All the anger of the world is directed towards some happening and this will probably be it.
>>If you read the SF novels detailing life in Libertopia, you'll find that, as if by magic, citizens voluntarily donate enough of their income to feed, clothe, and house those that are poor through no fault of their own. They purchase, build, and staff a full parks system out of the goodness of their hearts.
>This is how things used to be done.
When? Please come up with a concrete time boxed example of a country doing this. I'm pretty sure that I could look at the details and come up with a more accurate story.
I thought we learned that the overall water content of the planet is steadily increasing due to gravitational attraction of the planet sucking in comets water deposits and the like. Sure in a few hundred years it's not much, and I don't imagine water mining the asteroids or capturing comets technologically.
You obviously aren't in their target business market.
No, they want CIO's, CTO's and CEO's thinking that they could have that much fun at "work" if only they had the kit.
And yes, these people do have the mindset that matches the ad you portrayed so it appears to be actually well matched.
So if a placebo cures *your* cancer you should try to get it to come out of remission?!?
That is essentially what you are advocating.
A sample size of one is all that is needed if it works for that one person, especially of the desired result is something like "happiness".
YOUR milage may vary...
There is a difference between trade secrets and general know how.
I agree that if an employee is divulging trade secrets and they had a contractual obligation not to that is one thing.
Being able to create a business similar to the one they came from is not in any way remarkable or wrong.
> It's quite another if recruiters from Palm are actively poaching their competitors' employees.
And this is what is wrong with your outlook as well as the outlook of most corporations.
You seem to feel that these companies own their employees, keeping them on their "employee farms" and only their King can kill them.
Kind of like cattle.
Now, please let me know what is wrong with receiving an offer of employment at another firm for a better salary?
The interesting bit is the meta question implied by this - whether truths developed in a mathematical sense are valid in other contexts.
AN answer is something along the lines of this:
While a single equation cannot be created to fit every possible model it IS possible to develop an equation that fits properties of the model under study (at least to your own level of understanding of both maths and the problem domain).
The question whether mathematical insight can be used as an analogy machine to determine outcomes in other domains is the same question as to the breath of any particular philosophy, IMO.
To come back down to the question at hand Consider that the proposition under study is that differing eras of paradims are incommesurable.
Given the new meta framework we can then ask what would the underlying scientific model changes between physics, biology, and the social sciences be that would necessarily invalidate this proposition?
Since all of these models ultimately rest in mathematical descriptions of experimentation on created models, the question appears to me to be moot. That is, given the basis of these disiplines they cannot help fall into the same category. Even broadening their functions to the philosophical does not lead one out of this conclusion (if one accepts Maths as simply A particular rigorous philosophy).
Privatize the profits in any way possible... even retroactively.
Externalize the costs in any way possible.. hell, that's just business.
not that they are unwritten. There were detailed instructions on this topic.
The problem is that the instructions were deleted before being implemented.
A koan for a new age.
Your reply us unfortunately wrong, however.
Given that C++ is turing complete, any 'spell' that the "Great Enchantress" can create well, so can the C++ guru. There is not a single thing the enchantress can do with her compiled spell that the wizard cannot, and that's the fact, jack.
Fact is, the end result for the great Enchantress is exactly the same if they misuse their language constructs or implementation details.
You can argue that you don't like how you have to go about the syntax construction, but fair is fair, they are both equally powerful in EFFECT.
>The people making $17,000 a year are buying cheap, disposable items made by people making $5,000 a year.
So, turtles all the way down?
I think you fail to understand the point. Businesses cannot ONLY EXCLUSIVELY make money off of other businesses.
Now. Who is going to be able to by the high market items that Businesses require (because they charge each other so much)? Or if all businesses charge less, then wages also must decrease, and...
So, what is the equilibrium point of this type of equation? Where do you find employees who are consumers who can buy the required high market goods after this equilibrium is reached?
Prove that they can, using the market economics. I bet you can't. Don't forget the wealth hoarding and ability to leverage that wealth to extract tax form the market by the (really now people! ONE PERCENT??? wtf, it's at most like 100,000 PEOPLE, total in the world who have the $MONEY$. )
So, spend some serious marketing $$ going to all these forums and letting other businesses know what you exactly have to offer.
Counter their points politely and suggest that other business owners check you out themselves and make up their own mind.
This is only a bad thing if you turn it into one.