Posts by Yet Another Anonymous coward 26130 publicly visible posts • joined 31 Dec 2009
>Top sales people are often screwed by their employers as they climb higher up the sales ladder.
And then they quit and go and work for a competitor, with the existing client list, knowledge of the flaws and margins on the previous firms products and a deep motivation to fsck over their ex-employer
And thus capitalism triumphs...
>I suspect that the reason these companies are putting their money into Bitcoin is for tax avoidance purposes.
Microstratgy is basically a way to buy bitcoin in a share account (pension/IRA/ISA etc) by buying shares in a company whose only asset is bitcoin.
Telsa is Musk taking the piss. He buys bitcoin, tweets about it, everyone else buys it, price goes up, he sells
Bitcoin = an imaginary made-up currency with strict mathematical controls on how much can be produced and a value set by the market
Dollar (or Pound) = an imaginary made-up currency with politicians controlling how much can be produced depending on what their poll numbers look like and a value set by the unemployment figures going into the next election
>So why doesn't this tech ever get transplanted into real cameras?
It does, it's called Photoshop/Gimp
The phone does a lot of processing for you because people want to click and have instagram ready shots - even if they look like every other instagram shot.
"Real" cameras assume you want the flexibility to capture the best raw data you can and then fix it later for your requirements.
Most interchangeable lens cameras already do non-artistic corrections - for things like lens distortion
That's dumb, it would be like having an emergency release handle for a nuclear bomb be just where you needed to grab to climb into the bomb bay
>Larger operators tend to buy, smaller ones lease. This is purely because of financing cost, not any technical advantages.
Probably also if you have a legacy of service bases around the world.
If you are a new airline it may be convenient for RR to tell you that next time your aeroplane stops anywhere it will get serviced - rather than having to return it to your base.
> On the other hand you may think it safet to be on the ground near a fire engine than fanning the flames at a few thousand feet.
Trade off, you don't know that the wing/control surface isn't damaged or that the engine isn't about to fall off and take your wing with it (El Al Flight 1862)
But landing 32,000lbs overweight with no thrust reversers and the risk of over-heating your brakes, bursting tires and starting a fire - is still risky
> expect leaps in automation to create these items if it is repatriated. The work is just too expensive for the developed world.
You really think you can build advanced 5nm semiconductors with automated machines - rather than using cheap below minimum wage 3rd world labour ?
>The benefit will be to weed out misinformation dressed as news, and for those that get their news from Facebook, this is a great improvement.
Nope, this means they can't show news snippets from the trusted Murdoch proper newspapers but can only show free bot generated fake-news content.
> but that will take an effort of international co-operation. Ho hum.
If you leave enforcement upto the nations - yes.
If corporations decide to take it into their own hands....
Sue a member of "The Organisation" for a software patent and suddenly you are blocked of from Twitter and Facebook, Google don't list you, Microsoft Office rejects your email etc
>Companies owning Copyright is a ridiculous idea and will soon suppress creativity altogether.
Might make it difficult to get funding for films, especially films which aren't opening weekend blockbusters.
With no copyright, or very short copyright, I have no foreign TV, or streaming sales. I can only make money for the initial cinema run, and even then I no longer get any licencing fee from the toys, t-shirt and fast-food tie-ins.
>Allowing Patents to be held by anyone other than the original creator(s) is equally ridiculous.
Then they have no value to the original creator if they can't be sold.
I have a patent on an improvement to MRI machines. It's assigned to the consultancy company I worked for at the time. It's only of value to them because they can sell/licence the technology to makers of MRI machines. Neither me nor the company can make an MRI machine so if the patent couldn't be sold it would never be produced.
>otherwise many more businesses would have signed up to OIN sooner
It only really protects you from being sued by someone else in the business.
eg if Oracle tries to sue say Redhat then they can bring down all of the patents of all the OIN members onto Larry
If you are being sued by Bermuda Patent Troll #123 Ltd whose only asset is this single patent - it doesn't do much good
On but Sleezy-tech_124 while being in the same business as Sleezy-tech_123 and having the same directors and owner and operating from the same Caribbean lawyers office has no connection with Sleezy-tech_123
I think this is going to be the standard for dodgy ad-tech companies - like the double-glazing that offered 20year guarantees but closed and reopened under a new name every year.
Sleezy-tech_123 is hit by a twitter storm for it selling video from its line of embedded underwear cameras.
Sleezy-tech_124 is spun up by the Bermudaa Chamber of Commerce equivalent of a Docker container 20ms later
>the European Commission is a kindergarten of discarded national politicians
I always assumed it was only the UK that used it as a dumping ground for people too unpopular to be in the House of Lords, and that was why the UK did so badly in Eu votes.
But it seems that every other country uses it to dump it's B-Ark politicians.
Perhaps it would have been easier and cheaper to have both the Brussels and Strasbourg parliaments in session. Use one as a decoy filled with the useless politicians - just don't tell them that they are being ignored,
