• 0 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle





  • For my personal devices:

    • Microsoft products from MS DOS 6.x or so through Windows Vista
    • Ubuntu 6.06 through maybe 9.04 or so
    • Arch Linux from 2009 through 2015
    • MacOS from 2011 through current
    • Arch Linux from 2022 through current

    I’ve worked with work systems that used RedHat and Ubuntu back in the late 2000’s, plus decades of work computers with Windows. But I’m no longer in a technical career field so I haven’t kept on top of the latest and greatest.







  • I wouldn’t describe it as a reversal, the actual serenity prayer as stated already has the “courage to change the things I can,” so anything that is within the speaker’s ability to change should already be covered. And the last part, the wisdom to know the difference, already asks to have the ability to discern the two categories, and seeks to avoid accepting the things that can be changed.

    It’s clever, but doesn’t actually say anything the serenity prayer itself doesn’t already say.



  • In 2003, there were very few websites where what you saw depended on your login information. For the most part, the entire web was a bunch of stateless pages where what you saw at a URL was what I saw at the same URL. There was no real opportunity for interaction with sites in the browser (anything like that required a browser plugin to run java applets or flash/shockwave content).

    RSS was such a game changer in that it really did change the way people consumed content. I could load a blog and it would only show me the posts I hadn’t already read, instead of naively showing me the whole thing. Suddenly there were states, and things could be marked as read or unread.

    And when someone realized how to combine RSS with actual audio or video media, that was the first real semblance of “on demand” content where anyone could press play on current, timely content at their own schedule. DVRs had basically just been invented, and cable on demand content wasn’t widespread yet. YouTube didn’t exist, and the best place on the internet to watch a trailer for an upcoming movie was apple.com, where they used movie trailers to try to persuade people to download QuickTime to play those videos.

    So yeah, automating a download to your computer to automate pushing content to your iPod was a huge step forward, and basically sold itself.




  • What does “maximize shareholder value” mean if not profits? You can dress it up how you like but that’s the way businesses treat it.

    It doesn’t mean short term profits over long term profits, or dividends/buybacks over reinvestment, or anything like that.

    The Delaware courts have repeatedly confirmed that majority shareholders, officers, and directors are allowed to do things like pay their employees bonuses, give corporate money to charity, demand less than the market-clearing, profit-maximizing prices, etc., even over minority shareholder objections that the corporation isn’t properly maximizing shareholder value.

    eBay v. Newmark doesn’t change that. That was a fight about shareholder rights to buy or sell shares (or majority shareholder powers to prevent minority shareholders from acquiring or selling shares without the majority shareholders’ approval), which directly affects the value of the shares themselves (without getting into the question of the corporation’s obligation to grow that shareholder value in business operations). It’s one step removed from what we’re talking about, about the directors’ power to control shares, rather than the directors’ power to control the company.


  • That’s not a requirement of publicly traded companies. Any corporation has the same obligation to put shareholder interests first, whether it’s closely held (like Valve) or publicly traded but still under the founder’s control (like Facebook) or publicly traded with no one owner that exercises significant control (like IBM). The court case that established that corporations have a duty to shareholders above everyone else (Dodge v. Ford Motor Company) involved a closely held corporation (not public) and also confirmed that the corporation’s management can exercise its own judgment and discretion in prioritizing long term over short term gains, or vice versa.