34th Chaos Communication Congress Live Streams
streaming.media.ccc.de
streaming.media.ccc.de
EDIT: Just saw that there is a talk by Maxim Goryachy and Mark Ermolov: Inside Intel Management Engine [3], can't miss that one.
[1] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/9021.htm...
[2] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/9075.htm...
[3] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/8762.htm...
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/8782.htm...
There’s a stream recording here while we wait for the video release: http://streaming.media.ccc.de/34c3/relive/9021
Let me know if anyone has questions.
It's like they don't want people discovering it, I can't figure out why they don't have a more accessible marketing website.
That said: https://tickets.events.ccc.de/34c3/
Almost all work is done by the participants (I think toilet cleaners are paid, but that's it) and there is very little sponsoring, so it works out. Not sure what more money would help with.
Your best bet is to source one through some affiliated group, if you know of one, otherwise spend a few hours familiarizing yourself with the ticket app, and have at least 2 browsers with at least 10 tabs each open on the app ready for the second a release happens
That said, it is frustrating that they don't release the schedule weeks ahead. I was seriously thinking about attending but did not go through because conferences these days tend to have far less technical content than they used to.
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/wiki
And they announced CFP on the blog, where they communicate a lot of news:
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=34c3%20cfp
Given that they manage to attract thousands of hackers anyway, I guess it's just not their priority to make this clear.
> The Congress takes place at the Messe Leipzig / Congress Center Leipzig (CCL) near Wiederitzsch and Eutritsch
> Given that they manage to attract thousands of hackers anyway, I guess it's just not their priority to make this clear.
I guess that's exactly the reason.
It grew by word of mouth to, IIRC, 12.000 attendees last year; it outgrew several locations and is now at a size where it is actually hard to find a location that can house the event.
Maybe it is not "shitty marketing" but an attempt at crowd control ;)
As the demand for tickets is always very high, tickets were first distributed only to local groups, hackerspaces and people who helped out the last years with a viral system. You could only buy a ticket with a voucher, which then granted you another voucher to give to a friend. The presale for everyone was in October/November at some fixed times, but the tickets were sold out within minutes.
Please use this instead of versions people are dumping on youtube and monetizing them and then the nicely cut versions not being found anymore because the algorithm thinks the official CCC version is a reupload.
Corporations were invented. Could we invent something better?
Or is it just human nature to devolve into the current state of affairs?
What do you do with the assets? Liquidate them? If so, you’ll just periodically kick out minority shareholders (or promote consolidation).
How about making just a small tweak to the limited liability corporation legislation/rules? Currently the main purpose of a corporation is to maximize the (long term) shareholder value. What if the purpose was to maximize the long term goods sold, taxes paid or salaries paid instead? Note that you would still need to pay a decent return to shareholders in order to maximize these other things, just like currently you need (usually) to sell goods, pay a salary and pay your taxes to maximize the shareholder value.
(This may sound like a joke, but I am actually serious. Nobody has been able to justify so that I would have understood why it is the common stock holders whose value a corporation maximizes instead of other stakeholders. After all, the original reason limited liability was invented was to enable projects that bring good for the society, but are so damn risky that nobody is willing to take the full liability.)
No, you would still need to grow to a large company with lots of revenue, but if the metric to optimize is salaries paid, then paying shareholders anything at all is in direct conflict with paying salaries to workers. The problem here is designing set of incentives that would encourage appropriate results, and the difficulty is that not all incentives work equally well, or even at all.
Paying workers anything at all is in direct conflict with generating shareholder value.
Key is "long term". If you want to maximize long term salaries, you must pay a decent return to equity.
On the other hand, there's absolutely no need to pay anything to shareholders for a company to operate, other than legal obligation. Shareholders going on strike makes absolutely no difference for the company.
you need to get funding in order for company to continue operating. If you don't pay a decent return for the funding, you just won't get funded.
> Shareholders going on strike makes absolutely no difference for the company.
This applies only to companies that do not require capital to operate/grow.
Of course, if you get yourself a reputation of not returning money to investors, you'll unlikely to get funded the next time, and if the investors have no way to force the company to pay dividends, they will fund few companies in the first place. The point is, maximizing salaries paid is a terrible metric, precisely because of bad incentives it creates.
> This applies only to companies that do not require capital to operate/grow.
But when they require capital to grow, you aren't returning the money to investors anyway -- what would be the point of that? The investors only expect the dividends once the capital needs of the company are satisfied, and once that happens, the company no longer needs the investors.
It wouldn't fix everything, but it would guarantee more competition and hopefully keep corporations comprehensible.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
[2] Vsauce2 has a good introduction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2qjRG6iV8M
[3] Why 80%? To allow room for family/etc. This number is merely a suggestion; better values require actual research.
If you missed a talk they are at https://streaming.media.ccc.de/34c3/relive
This particular talk by Charles Stross is at https://streaming.media.ccc.de/34c3/relive/9270
Everyone who is here is a "normal" techie. Sure, skill levels and focus areas vary but there's common shared interests.
Actionable things come out of the conference when someone who listens to a talk starts thinking and discussing and forming ideas for starting or contributing to a project. There's no formula to guarantee "success" for that.
In this case 'someone who is going to the 34c3' vs. 'someone who is not'.
Quite similiar 'someone who is doing a talk' vs. 'someone is not doing one'