At the risk of beating a dead horse, this is going to be (and rightfully so) a fairly big story as an example of the problem of executive compensation and Apple will be tarnished by it. Now, it would be one thing if this was $80MM for Steve Jobs' jet (or whatever the number was) or megabucks for Ives or Cook--or even the former head of retail (who, you know, actually built out those stores that are aethetically and financially the envy of the world), but it's not. It's an insane amount of money for 5 years work for a relative unknown in a relatively low-profile executive position.
Don't get me wrong, I love Apple and I'm a huge supporter of the management team, but this just smells bad. The compensation committee of the board should have put the kibosh on this and slapped Cook's hand. It's not Tim Cook's money; it's Apple's money. The BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to keep management honest consistently. Seriously, the guy wouldn't have taken the job (and felt richly rewarded and appreciated) if he's been offered half that amount? A fifth? There are great people who would sell their [something valuable and personally significant] for the opportunity to have that job just be part of the most successful corporation in the world (with the understanding that they'd get theirs one way or the other after they have succeeded in the job).
Wow! You want the government to step in and regulate Apple's hiring practices, and then you complain when AI steps in and regulates your post? Do you see the irony here?
I certainly see the irony but there is a difference which I hope you see. One is about regulating out of control executive pay. The other is censoring swearwords in a tech forum.
I don't see why AI needs to censor posts - this is a fairly grown up forum and I think we all can take the odd swear word. When posters go overboard other posters tend to put them right. But we know that the marketplace is incapable of regulating itself and that is why we have silly wages and bonuses and such for top executives. I don't want the government to regulate Apple's hiring practices specifically, but I think regulating top pay excesses is exactly the kind of thing government should do. I understand all about 'what the market commands' but to me it is nuts that normal people think it is OK that somebody - anybody - gets paid these astronomical sums, regardless of circumstances. I have more tolerance for athletes who have a very limited career span, but even there the inequity is nuts. I am not against wealth, just obscene indecent unfair wealth. So yeah, I see the irony as both are moral questions. But common sense is the mitigating element.
Edit: And yes TS, I know the censoring is automated but that is irrelevant, don't you think?
Edit: And yes TS, I know the censoring is automated but that is irrelevant, don't you think?
I was just clarifying that no one went in and edited the stuff out manually. I don't know of any policy change about that; it's probably something we just didn't notice in the change.
Wouldn't this money be better spend hiring some programmers to fix lion's growing issues with memory management, to work on open cl as well as debug iTunes? Does apple think at its current stage of evolution the same teams moved back and forth between iOS and os x to help out the respective core devs of each one are suffient? Does apple think that at the moment when everyone is offering Dropbox type storage and the iCloud starts more and more to look like a more reliable but far less capable in some core functions such as shared cloud storage MobileMe that they don't need to hire maybe more talent for that too? Iwork has been apparently left to rot for so long. Surely the people who supported the suite deserve a bit better.
I have also long supported the suggestion of some sponsorship taking place in the app store too. That's what curating is about, not just getting $100 from everyone flat, but actually investing some money to help out apps that they think aren't selling that well but have a lot of good ideas and potential. Some individual devs have put a lot of bread on apple's tables and are struggling. These little guys if they had 1/100 of what the dixons guy is getting spread amongst them would jump for joy, and give 100/1 times back.
Are they planning a major overhaul of their stores that I am unaware of? Because from the outside I can't see how the maintenance guy because that what this guy is (and looks like) has any work ahead of him that requires such ridiculously high amounts of money.
<p> At the risk of beating a dead horse, this is going to be (and rightfully so) a fairly big story as an example of the problem of executive compensation and Apple will be tarnished by it. Now, it would be one thing if this was $80MM for Steve Jobs' jet (or whatever the number was) or megabucks for Ives or Cook--or even the former head of retail (who, you know, actually built out those stores that are aethetically and financially the envy of the world), but it's not. It's an insane amount of money for 5 years work for a relative unknown in a relatively low-profile executive position.</p><p> </p><p> Don't get me wrong, I love Apple and I'm a huge supporter of the management team, but this just smells bad. The compensation committee of the board should have put the kibosh on this and slapped Cook's hand. It's not Tim Cook's money; it's Apple's money. The BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to keep management honest consistently. Seriously, the guy wouldn't have taken the job (and felt richly rewarded and appreciated) if he's been offered half that amount? A fifth? There are great people who would sell their [something valuable and personally significant] for the opportunity to have that job just be part of the most successful corporation in the world (with the understanding that they'd get theirs one way or the other after they have succeeded in the job).</p><p> </p><p> Bah.</p>
After Steve died the current SVP's were given hefty stock awards presumably to keep the around for a while. At least in that instance they all have a track record to go off of and you can clearly see where they've contributed to the success and wealth of the company. What has Browett done to deserve it? How about pay for performance?
Comments
At the risk of beating a dead horse, this is going to be (and rightfully so) a fairly big story as an example of the problem of executive compensation and Apple will be tarnished by it. Now, it would be one thing if this was $80MM for Steve Jobs' jet (or whatever the number was) or megabucks for Ives or Cook--or even the former head of retail (who, you know, actually built out those stores that are aethetically and financially the envy of the world), but it's not. It's an insane amount of money for 5 years work for a relative unknown in a relatively low-profile executive position.
Don't get me wrong, I love Apple and I'm a huge supporter of the management team, but this just smells bad. The compensation committee of the board should have put the kibosh on this and slapped Cook's hand. It's not Tim Cook's money; it's Apple's money. The BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to keep management honest consistently. Seriously, the guy wouldn't have taken the job (and felt richly rewarded and appreciated) if he's been offered half that amount? A fifth? There are great people who would sell their [something valuable and personally significant] for the opportunity to have that job just be part of the most successful corporation in the world (with the understanding that they'd get theirs one way or the other after they have succeeded in the job).
Bah.
vBulletin has that feature as well but the default is off. So is the feature on by default in Huddler or is it a new AI policy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
If AI made a change in your original comment it should be made clear (by AI) that the comment is changed and in what way.
Swearing isn't nice to read but I think it's the responsibility of the writer not AI.
Huddler automatically censors swearing. We didn't do anything.
Making the internet safe for 8 year old Sunday School girls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckman
Wow! You want the government to step in and regulate Apple's hiring practices, and then you complain when AI steps in and regulates your post? Do you see the irony here?
I certainly see the irony but there is a difference which I hope you see. One is about regulating out of control executive pay. The other is censoring swearwords in a tech forum.
I don't see why AI needs to censor posts - this is a fairly grown up forum and I think we all can take the odd swear word. When posters go overboard other posters tend to put them right. But we know that the marketplace is incapable of regulating itself and that is why we have silly wages and bonuses and such for top executives. I don't want the government to regulate Apple's hiring practices specifically, but I think regulating top pay excesses is exactly the kind of thing government should do. I understand all about 'what the market commands' but to me it is nuts that normal people think it is OK that somebody - anybody - gets paid these astronomical sums, regardless of circumstances. I have more tolerance for athletes who have a very limited career span, but even there the inequity is nuts. I am not against wealth, just obscene indecent unfair wealth. So yeah, I see the irony as both are moral questions. But common sense is the mitigating element.
Edit: And yes TS, I know the censoring is automated but that is irrelevant, don't you think?
George Carlin censorship test: George Carlin's seven dirty words
Of the seven, only the third and fourth were redacted.
Interesting because the sixth word contains the third word and it was allowed to be displayed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
And yes AI is a lot slower on the iPhone and iPod and not completely compatible with Safari on iOS.
J.
I don't find it particularly slower - just impossible to read. I wish I could set the font size as 'READER' doesn't work.
Two words...
Paper
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Edit: And yes TS, I know the censoring is automated but that is irrelevant, don't you think?
I was just clarifying that no one went in and edited the stuff out manually. I don't know of any policy change about that; it's probably something we just didn't notice in the change.
I have also long supported the suggestion of some sponsorship taking place in the app store too. That's what curating is about, not just getting $100 from everyone flat, but actually investing some money to help out apps that they think aren't selling that well but have a lot of good ideas and potential. Some individual devs have put a lot of bread on apple's tables and are struggling. These little guys if they had 1/100 of what the dixons guy is getting spread amongst them would jump for joy, and give 100/1 times back.
Are they planning a major overhaul of their stores that I am unaware of? Because from the outside I can't see how the maintenance guy because that what this guy is (and looks like) has any work ahead of him that requires such ridiculously high amounts of money.