One problem that I have with Bitcoin is its complete dependence on the strength of its crypto. While breaking it may seem impossible at the moment, advances in computation speed and cryptanalysis may one day lead to it being broken. This would basically make Bitcoins worthless overnight.
Of course traditional currencies can be forged as well, but printing huge amounts of forged bills and bringing them into circulation involves all sorts of logistical challenges that don't apply in a digital world. Moreover, forged bills are typically not absolutely perfect and can be distinguished from genuine money, this is not possible with a purely digital currency. The fact that paper currencies can be forged is incorporated into the design of the system, whereas the Bitcoin system is based on Bitcoin's crypto being unbreakable.
It's not just speed, but number of nodes. If someone could, lets say in 10 years, build a block-chain of equal length to then-current one, they would still need to control > 50% of the nodes a significant portion of the network sees.
> It's also a system that rewards people who take a shotgun approach to applications, rather than individually crafted responses.
One of the main purposes of these systems is to deal with the massive amount of shotgun applications that companies are receiving. Of course, this means that more targeted applications do not receive the consideration they deserve, thereby incentivising job seekers to use a shotgun approach.
The interview and the article state that "In some cases employers do not want to hire anyone at all, they think it's cheaper to leave positions unfilled!". If it is cheaper to leave a position vacant, why bother listing it as open? Wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate it?
Both the article and the interview say that employers "think" that it's cheaper to leave the position unfilled, typically because of lousy cost accounting systems that do not give an accurate picture of the reduced system throughput (and thus the foregone revenue). Most companies optimize locally, which results in de-optimizing the whole system -- a department saves some money by not hiring a new systems administrator until the next fiscal year, and the whole company suffers decreased effectiveness.
Some positions advertised may be, in fact, better eliminated. But that's not the point that the article and interview are making.
My guess is that it's a device that an employer would use to manipulate the employees who are filling in "temporarily" -- so that the employees feel something is being done and they'll only be doing the extra work for "a little while." So they can say, "we really are trying, but the work you do is so valuable, just not that many people can do it."
Sorry, I can't tell whether you are trying to parody the whole "check out my awesome workspace"-thing or whether you are actually serious?
In case you are serious (please excuse the profanity): Holy Sh* *!
I'm "serious" in the sense that this is indeed what I'm planning to do (I haven't gotten the Airtouch table yet as I've only recently come back around to the idea of having a desk at all, but I already have the lounge chair/arm mount combo thing).
I recognize that it's kind of pretentious (although my previous plan was to make my office into a 1940's detective office, so I'm no stranger to pretension).
It's really really comfortable. Maybe an 8 or 9 (I suppose I'd reserve a 10 for "the womb").
I've always had a hard time figuring out what to do with my arms though, as I either hang them down by my side, or sort of fold them on my lap, so for years, the chair has mostly been "occasional seating".
With the arm mount though, I end up having a really comfortable typing position.
If Nokia actually dies, Microsoft will pretty much have to buy them in order to ensure that they don't lose their (rather shaky) grasp on the mobile market (more of a foot in the door really...)
That would make Microsoft the third company producing an entire mobile ecosystem of its own after Apple and Google. It's interesting to observe that the technological trend towards ecosystems is also happenning in the business sphere, albeit with some delay.
Also, I would be sad to see Nokia go - I always liked their well-built (dumb) phones.
Of course traditional currencies can be forged as well, but printing huge amounts of forged bills and bringing them into circulation involves all sorts of logistical challenges that don't apply in a digital world. Moreover, forged bills are typically not absolutely perfect and can be distinguished from genuine money, this is not possible with a purely digital currency. The fact that paper currencies can be forged is incorporated into the design of the system, whereas the Bitcoin system is based on Bitcoin's crypto being unbreakable.