Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: Reading too much /. (Score 1) 111

"You can't trademark sound or lyric because they belong to copyright category."

Of course you can trade mark a song or lyric. All the requirement is for them being part of your Trade Mark. See how easy is it?

On the other hand, what I don't understand is the justification of this rule -unless it has been misrepresented in the summary: the problem for the ring-ring sound to be trademarked by this company cannot be that it is "too boring" (or even commonplace) but that it -by being both common place and previous *related* art, can't in any way or form be related to the trade mark requestor. I.e.: you see the Nike "smiling" logo and you think "Nike", even "just do it", despite being a common phrase, was context-less before Nike trademarked it but the standard ring tone is both common *and* bound to a known specific circumstance (a phone call) and, to add insult to injury, this company tried to tie it to its own corporate branding *in that very same realm*.

The question is, who's the stupid executive officer that even tried it? -and who's the brilliant (but sociopathically cynic) attorney that found the way to get apart said executive from his company's money that easy?

Comment Re:Requires a knowledge of the job (Score 1) 205

"So how to "ordinary" employees (even ones from a recruitment company) know what qualities to look for in a C-level? Do they understand the legal obligations that C-levelship brings."

Probably not. But looking at the aftermath of last economical crash, it seems neither do the judicial system up to the supreme court.

Comment Re:What's the point? (Score 1) 205

"The main job of the CEO isn't the administrative details [...] The CEO's main job is leadership."

And that's the basis for the abhorrent situation of most business. No, sir, it's not all about "leadership" (a word so vacuous that takes any real responsibility out). The E in CEO stands for Executive.

Comment Re:What's the point? (Score 1) 205

"Clearly not all CxOs are utter mongs or there'd be no companies left."

Think for a moment about what you said.

Get it?

Not yet?

Ok, I'll write down for you: If all (or a vast majority) CxOs were utter mongs, there would be exactly the same companies that there are now. It is if only a reduced percentage of CxOs were utter mongs that they would be crushed away by their rivals but then, we see evidence that there're at least a reduced percentage of CxOs being utter mongs. See now what does that mean?

Comment Re:I'd probably fire every CEO I've ever worked un (Score 1) 205

"Why is that a bad thing"

Because of your own text.

"There is evidence that psychopaths actually make better leaders"

Maybe you are right, but that's part of the problem. Hitler was surely a great leader. The problem "merely" was where he was leading to.

"They will dispassionately make the hard decisions for the good of the organization"

For the good... !? Wait, wait, wait... have you read what you yourself wrote down? Why the damn hell in hell would a psychopath (you probably were thinking about sociopaths, but anyway) think at all on the good of any organization? If he were, he'd be neither psychopath nor sociopath to start with!

Comment Re: All according to plan (Score 1) 256

"You're missing it. In history, if someone had "$1mil" it was in gold or silver or something actually worth something."

Because gold holds any intrinsic value but the one that people exchanging it want to consider, yes.

"someone with $1mil "in the bank" just means someone that has the number 1,000,000 strored in a database somewhere or possibly a bunch of worthless pieces of paper with $100 printed on them.."

As long as someone wants to give value to those pieces of paper, or those registries in a database, they hold as much real value as it has any amount of gold. Did you read my previous message, like the part of there being 700 million people wanting to give value to them?

You think that because money is a fiat currency it also happened by fiat. You'd better open a Economic History book -heck, even The Wealth of Nations would be good enough to start with, to try to understand what money is or isn't or why money looks the way it looks and -specifically, why there's no big difference using gold, paper or ones are zeroes in a database to that respect.

Comment Re: All according to plan (Score 1) 256

"If 9 out of 10 people have 0 dollars, then the $1mil the 1 person has is worthless."

For most of History that's been the case and still the one million dollar man was rich. For a matter of fact, if just only one out of ten had any money at all, it means there would be about seven hundred millions of millionaires in the world, about twice USA population. More than enough to:
a) Give a damn about the other 6.300 million people.
b) Produce enough of an army to reduce the other 6.300 million people to asses if they dare to fight, not among them but against the favored ones.

Now, statistics again: would you want to bet on your odds of being the one in ten instead of among the nine?

Comment Re:DR Test are Simple (Score 1) 52

And this is, sir, why IT is its current lame shape: allowing incompetent people taking key decisions just because they happen to relate to the right people.

Now, for a real world working DR plan:
10 REM 'DR Master Plan'
20 LET Power = OFF
30 PRINT 'AIIIIEEEEEEEE!'
40 GOTO 30

Now: *THAT'S* how professionalism looks like.

Comment Re: All according to plan (Score 1) 256

"he answer is obvious, massive amounts of warfare"

Yes. To some extent, it's already happening now; you just need to look at big cities with large inequalities, say -now that the Olympics are still recent, Rio. There's a warfare situation there, it's only that, quite against the desires and hopes of the naive liberals here, is not poor people against elites ala French revolution but among the destituted themselves within their favelas, while the elites are living la dolce vita mostly within their militarily isolated zones.

And that's now. Just imagine in some few decades, with those elites allowed to use robotized machine-guns and armed drones to defend themselves.

Comment Re: All according to plan (Score 5, Informative) 256

"The reason the economy rises is that the AVERAGE person has more ability to consume than prior."

You know that thingie called statistics. If I have one million in the bank and the other nine have zero, we all AVERAGE 100K in the bank. Still no good for those other nine.

"people will always find work"

What's that? the fifth law of thermodinamics, or something?

No, man, sorry: for most of History, people was absolutely unable to find work and it was more that a short elite forced them into work. What if that short elite has no work for them anymore?

"The 1% will make sure that people have propensity to consume. It's the natural order"

Again, have you ever opened a History book? Was a consumist society the "natural order" of ancient Egipt, or Greece, or Rome, or Middle Ages, or pre-revolution Europe? Was it the "natural order" along imperial Chine, traditional Japan, most Africa history or precolombine America?

Looking at the History book, it seems much more that your "natural order", if any, is for an elite taking benefit of most of the goodies squeezed out of a mass of people let just above the starving level. What if that elite manages not to need that mass of people to squeeze their goodies anymore?

Comment Re:Insider Info (Score 2) 252

"Because they knew it was a done deal. Palms greased, rounds of golf done, prostitutes paid."

Don't think so. I've been on my dose of these procurements and usually, no, they are not taken for granted. It really depends on the contract but you don't do (percieved) due diligence for two reasons:
1) Since you are not sure about winning the contract, pre-sales costs are a problem since you don't know if you'll recoup them, so you save them on on-site techs in order to expend on "hooks and booze" -which usually pays better at this stage.
2) You *positively* know these kind of contracts can't base their pricing on a honest cost-plus-margin valuation. They already come with a more or less fixed price so you only need a very rough ballpark go/no go valuation (usually mixed with some strategic considerations which make the real cost even more moot) -even worse, you usually have no time for anything better. In the end, since you know you are going to work backwards, why taking the effort? I mean, *if* you get the contract, you take the money, take out (at least) your expected profit and service it with whatever it remains, disregarding any real needs from the customer.

Obviously, this kind of approach rarely if ever offers good results.
Obviously, the hiring party absolutely knows it.
Astoundingly, they (both public or private entities) keep contracting that way.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit!" -- Looney Tunes, "What's Opera Doc?" (1957, Chuck Jones)

Working...