As long as it's no more than the price of the cheaper legal team this method would work. That way poorer people who have been wronged are not heavily deterred from filing suit.
I would very much like them to revert this change. Using backspace to go back has been in my browsing habits since I began using the internet. Atl+left or right is annoying. Either give us a checkbox or revert it. Please. Pretty please.
c2 is a great wiki. Start googling languages and programming phrases with site:c2.com at beginning. You'll find some good stuff. Unfortunately, its commenting got shut down shortly after I discovered it. I think I read all the debates and stuff. Too many haha.
Note: The debates over LISP, OOP, Cleanroom, Smalltalk, and so on are all especially interesting.
Unfortunately, his current employer chose a different order: 3, 1, 2. Sometimes they drop 1, 2, or 3 separately or in groups at random. Gotten much better at 2 and 3, though.
They can but it's going to take a good long while before they have the same kind of access to their physical environment to experiment like humans can. Just think about the steps between figuring out that bean water can be used in meringues for instance; not just the mental ones, but the physical ones as well.
AR or MR is the endgame. Once the technology is capable of blocking out the world then you have VR in MR. Similar attempts have been made with passthrough video with VR[1]; the tech will converge at some point, it's inevitable.
So while you may not be the only one who doesn't want this tech to come about you and anyone else who shares your sentiments are wishing for something that absolutely won't happen. As for your usability concerns, those always come later as the tech matures.
It will happen in the sense that AR technology will become viable and cost-effective. I think it's far from set in stone how much it will be used outside of niche applications. Smartphones are an enormously powerful technology but they have a social limit. For instance, if you're building an app which requires people to use their phones while in conversation, and overlay information on top, that is clearly going to come up against social barriers. Just because you can build something, it doesn't mean people will use it.
It is almost undoubtedly going to be very useful in particular professional contexts, how much it goes beyond that is anyone's guess.
So it cuts the genomes out, does it keep the cells alive while doing so? I heard that CRISPR/Cas9 doesn't rejoin the dna it cuts. I'm new to this and would love to know from someone more knowledgeable about this.
Cells are always poised to repair DNA breaks. For example: over your lifetime, your cells will have repaired thousands of DNA breaks due to gamma radiation. The breaks due to CRISPR/Cas9 are similar to the breaks caused by gamma radiation and likely to be repaired very rapidly. If the DNA break is not resolved, there are other biochemical pathways to lead to apoptosis (programmed cell suicide).
Serious question: How do you keep your stuff from getting replicated, tweaked and crushed by people with possibly better tooling and more machines than you? China comes to mind tbh.
This is a common concern amongst all founders I'm pretty sure. It certainly was for us at first. But it shouldn't be. Most people have their own problems to worry about. Obviously it depends on what stage you're at. If you are "pre-market", that is, if you haven't shipped yet. I wouldn't worry to much about it. Just focus on making it better than anyone else and understanding what your customers or potential customers actually want, from an end-to-end experience. It's unlikely that someone with better tools and more machines will ALSO be scrappier and learn to understand their user better and execute on all of those fronts better (I'm thinking customer service and e-commerce for example).
I would focus less on being replicated, and focus more on handling your own issues. Another way to think about it is if you get to the point where you product is good enough and with enough attention that it gets copied in a serious way, you've clearly achieved something.
Cover your bases with IP and be smart, but just focus on getting the best product to market fastest and delivering a great customer experience.
Honestly, you don't. You just need to focus on building something that people want and making sure that the experience you deliver is better than any other.
Further, if you start to think about your hardware as a means of delivering something else (for us, that's food), then getting copycatted on the hardware won't be as hard to deal with from a business standpoint.
Depends on your development cycle, but this is one area that startups should have an advantage over bigger competitors. We got copied on a few things (logo, tagline, product) by a bunch of people in 3, 6, 9 months time. Of course we're already working on our second model, so no worries!
That helps but you have to understand that most industrial and utilities sites hate new tech. They like proven tech that's been used in three other places before they adopt anything. And once they settle on something they want to stick with it for 15-30 years and have support for longer because everyone knows that it's going to take another 3 years to get approval for purchase of new components because the old stuff has been giving faulty readings the past year and a half which requires hard reboots, the firmware is no longer being upgraded and the guys who first used the stuff are starting to retire. Even then they just want something that fits into the same slot.
Sorry for the runon but this is a major gripe of mine. Most managers just want it to work and unless it doubles your profit, cuts failures and makes you coffee for when other stuff breaks and you're working overtime to fix it they don't want to change anything.
Well, naturally. Their job is not to use tech. It's to build something, or run something, etc.
I can sympathize, and I bet you can too. My dishwasher, my car, my garage door... I just want these things to do their job and let me get on with my actual work. I don't want the latest garage door or vacuum.
I find that kind of odd. Cooking is not a passion of mine, so i don't care about a fancy dishwasher, i agree i want something that just works. I'm not much of a gamer, but i completely understand friends who dump hundreds or thousands a year into hardware, because that is something they're passionate about.
If the whole point of the organization is to build things, it seems like they should use the best tools for building things. Now, there's a good argument for tried and true solutions, and if the new stuff isn't rock solid, you're going to have wasted materials. It really seems like they should be completely geeking out over better, shinier, fancier tools for building stuff.
Maybe the costs are so high, and the margins so thin there's no room at all for experimentation. But it can't be lack of desire. If it is indeed lack of desire, they're going to go out of business.
Being in that kind of environment is stressful. If you can't trust the person above you to have your back you're going it alone. I hate working in places you have to feel unreasonably guarded.
Isn't this the norm outside of the Silicon Valley bubble? Maybe everyone I know (including myself) all just happen to have worked for shitty companies all our careers, but I don't know of any company where I would be comfortable "venting" to my manager.
- 50% of employees have left a job to get away from a manager
- 25% of Millennials plan to quit their job in the next year.
Unfortunately, HR is who watches over these issues and are totally disconnected from the root problem (bad management issues). They focus on compliance, lawsuits, and stability. Usually their org is small too, so they have no idea what it's like to have 10 direct reports and constant pressure to ship.
