55 karma · joined December 10, 2010
It pretty much depends on what are you looking for: a procedural executant or a project developer. A project developer can execute very well for the first couple of times, but expect from one to get bored with the same speed.
You have to find the right tasks for these "very smart people" instead of hiring them to do the wrong job. The alternative is to hire really dumb people, at least they'd never be able to do anything more or better than what they're told.
Now as Apple’s a defendant, win or lose, it doesn’t matter.
I believe it's not necessarily a troll patent issue that Marco was talking about, this is what trolls are meant to do, anyway; I think it's an issue with the law itself and its enforcement.
Could you believe this some 40 years ago: "I'm going to pay this parasite tax just because I cannot be protected by anybody"? Try "associate with" instead of "protected by"!
In plain English: because Apple bought the patent from Lodsys, Lodsys cannot ask for any benefit that might be related to the patent. Period.
Let's say there here's a table index and there's some query asking for things the index doesn't contain. How do you calculate "relevancy" out of no-answers?
Or let's put it another way: people are asking, the machines are answering. Do you really think a machine is able to answer any type of questions a human person can ask? What would a machine answer to "Who's the most beautiful of them all?" "Snow White" or "the evil Queen"?!
Although it doesn't seem, people don't usually want to know existing answers that are already indexed somewhere; they want to know "How will the weather be tomorrow?". Google will answer to that question by looking up words, ranks, links and so on and it'll provide you the most "relevant answer". For Google, not for you. You are left with taking this answer for granted, although it comes out of Google's bellies exclusively. More than that, the answer tends to become "correct" although it cannot bear this value.
A search engine that's not already containing the answer (truth-bearer) will only offer opinions (non-truth-bearer); these "opinions" are never true or false, so they cannot be part of any reliable judgement. Google says these answers are to be trusted because they're relevant, not because they're true. But this relevance is not dependent on me, the one asking the question, but on Google's bellies! And you have any doubt that a search engine is designed to be 100% human intervention free?? (here is a more detailed article on this issue: http://utestme.com/post/2745142659/the-search-of-doom )