A new feature I would like added to my web browser is the ability to ban a website from my search listings.
Just recently I have been looking something up and I visit a site which imediately does not show me what I clicked on but a full screen message asking me to become a member.
http://www.daniweb.com/
(No link as I do not want to promote them)
This just enrages me, I close the pop-up, and hit back without even reading the site. Why be an indexable site if your just going to annoy people with prompts like that. It failed to provide me with what I expected to see and in a sense tried to sell me something. How would you feel if you switched on your television and before you could watch anything you either had to click no or enter your personal details.
Grrrrrrr.
I know natural selection will allow these sites to die, putting barriers to entry is a sure fire way of killing a site. Friends reunited did exactly what facebook does now. But friends reunited tried to charge, fail.
I will be interested to see what happens when news organisations start charging for access (as Rupert Murdoc has said he would), the reporters need paying but I can only see the blog-o-sphere being the new uncensored media. Which is good and bad at the same time...
Friday, September 25, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
Executive pay, sigh...
People are looking at executive pay in the news right now and asking people about what they think:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/poll/2009/sep/14/executive-pay-bonuses
Problem with that is that its very narrow options and Bias:
Should pay be capped at 100x the average salary?
Should pay be capped at 10x the average salary?
Should pay be capped at £5,000,000 per year?
Should there be no restrictions on pay?
Clearly the last option is framed in a negative way. Personally I would choose none of the above (however that was not an option, oddly). I think a hard limit like these is unnatural. I would not like a system that penalises winners and puts them on the same level as mediocre executives.
Which might make you think that having a pay as a factor of the average would be good...WRONG... think about it in a global context. China could have a director earning £10,000,000 per year and paying an average employee salary of £1,000 per year. Where would you rather work if you were a director and good at your job? Which would leave England with mediocrity...look forward to that.
At the end of the day democracy is built into businesses via shareholders, the government need not get involved. Shareholders (you and me if we care enough) should decide the compensation to executives and just make it so that shareholders decide AFTER directors have done well, not before as the system is setup now. Shareholders have Annual General Meetings (AMG) in which these things could be voted on.
Job done, no need for newspapers, politicians or anybody else. I should run for Prime Minister!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/poll/2009/sep/14/executive-pay-bonuses
Problem with that is that its very narrow options and Bias:
Should pay be capped at 100x the average salary?
Should pay be capped at 10x the average salary?
Should pay be capped at £5,000,000 per year?
Should there be no restrictions on pay?
Clearly the last option is framed in a negative way. Personally I would choose none of the above (however that was not an option, oddly). I think a hard limit like these is unnatural. I would not like a system that penalises winners and puts them on the same level as mediocre executives.
Which might make you think that having a pay as a factor of the average would be good...WRONG... think about it in a global context. China could have a director earning £10,000,000 per year and paying an average employee salary of £1,000 per year. Where would you rather work if you were a director and good at your job? Which would leave England with mediocrity...look forward to that.
At the end of the day democracy is built into businesses via shareholders, the government need not get involved. Shareholders (you and me if we care enough) should decide the compensation to executives and just make it so that shareholders decide AFTER directors have done well, not before as the system is setup now. Shareholders have Annual General Meetings (AMG) in which these things could be voted on.
Job done, no need for newspapers, politicians or anybody else. I should run for Prime Minister!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
