Someone actually looked at my website? By Tony Green

A year ago I started my personal website partly because, at the time, creating a website seemed like a neat thing to do and I had seen some other good personal websites and technology has made it easy to get a site up in a small amount of time.

The idea was to make information available about myself which may not come across during a job interview. I wrote the content in attempt to capture the highlights of my life, professional work history, and my ideas and interests.

I tried to utilize the principles of search engine optimization (SEO) to make my name appear as high as possible in the rankings. Additionally, I launched a Pay-Per-Click (PPC) program with the aim of getting the name Tony Green to the top of any searches in case building my ranking too longer than I had planned.

Unfortunately, I neglected to update the content as often as I should by neglecting to add new content which is required to keep your rankings high. In any case, since I am looking for employment I have less time to work on the original content which the Google spiders love to index. The key is to contain enough content in place at any one given time to ensure an online presence is established.

Many employers are trying to find out about their prospective employees by running their name through a Google check in attempts to try and find out more information about a candidate. I discovered one of my prospective employers found my website through Google. The recruiter I was working with reported they were impressed with what they found. It convinced them I was someone they wanted to add to their team.

As a result my new employer identified the possibility of other assets I could provide value for the company. (Other than the sales job I was trying to be hired for) I shouldn’t complain though, if no one checked your site how good is that?

Will Big Brother be monitoring your thoughts? by Tony Green

I was reading an article in Inc. magazine about a company who is producing a product which reads the emotion from sensors placed on your head under your hair and uses those signals to issue commands to perform remote activities such as moving a block across a room.

The product uses a piece of headgear with 16 electrodes pressed on your scalp and monitors the electric signals produced by your brain during its thinking and emotion processes.   Furthermore, pounds of gel like materials are required to ensure a good electrical connection is maintained between your skin and the sensors.

It could be possible in the future to convert these signals to perform such activities as surgery or cooking with the use of sophisticated software to translate the signals to commands with the intention of being executing them remotely.

I was even more surprised to read other companies were attempting to produce products utilizing the same technology. It is likely one of these companies will begin to sell a product offering this technology sometime within the next year.

The article made me think, for instance, if these signals were read and interpreted what would stop the signals are stored and used to track a person’s thoughts in real time of transmit them to storage medium for analysis later? The recent advances in wireless technology make this a real possibility. 

Who says at some point in the future your brain’s processes would not be used to evaluate your character by measuring your thoughts and not our actions? Would you want your every thought being intercept and recorded?

A long time has passed since George Orwell’s 1984; will technology make the concept of “Big Brother” move from a novel to becoming a reality?

A great deal by Tony Green

I was reading the Wall Street Journal one morning about the three CEO’s of the Automotive big three, Chrysler, General Motors, and Ford trying to get a rescue package(bailout) from the government to prevent the companies from going into bankruptcy.

As part of the package Congress requested details how the CEO’s would use the money. Two of the three mentioned they would take a salary of $1 each if the bailout was passed.

Sounds like a good deal to be able live off a dollar year. Of course, these three all have millions of dollars in the bank to cushion the loss of one year’s salary.

How does this occur? Without rehashing the past history of excessive executive compensation where even if the companies had poor results and the CEO was ultimately replaced with a large severance package after I read Jack Welch’s book “Winning” my view changed.

Normally when a position such as CEO becomes available, similar to any other job where are the most qualified applicants? In transition between positions? Certainly when times are tough executives may be available for hire, however, usually they are currently employed. Furthermore by the time someone is screening to be CEO they are already at the Vice President, EVP or C-suite level. They are like in good position with good companies with strong compensation packages.

Most times the reason a company is looking for a new Chief Executive is because of some problem with the business/results. Who would want to take on are rebuilding project which could potentially fail if they are in a stable position?

Therefore, the idea is to sweeten the pot so that taking the position is a no lose situation for the prospective CEO. This includes exit clauses that if the CEO fails. Most high caliber executive have risen to the top by succeeding not failing, however, when measured in relation to the reward most people received for losing their job the exit package it still seems like a great deal.

Photo courtesy of http://www.freefoto.com/