GOOGLE UNCOVERS THE AMOUNT IT PAID THE FELLOW WHO PURCHASED GOOGLE.COM FOR ONE MOMENT AND IT'S INSANE.

Sanmay Ved purchased the Google.com space for a moment, yet he gave his prize for recognizing a defect to philanthropy.

In October, scientist and ex-Googler Sanmay Ved stood out as truly newsworthy when he figured out how to purchase the "Google.com" space for one moment. Ved thought he was simply being adorable, however Google chose to give Ved a money related compensate in any case. At the time, Ved declined to share the amount Google recompensed him, telling Business Insider just that it was "more than 10,000."

In a blog entry Thursday, Google let the cat out of the bag.

"Our introductory money related prize to Sanmay $6,006.13 delineated Google, numerically (squint a little and you'll see it!). We then multiplied this sum when Sanmay gave his prize to philanthropy," Google composed.

Believe it or not: Ved's prize was a senseless number-based diversion. As Google notes here, Ved wound up giving his rewards to the instructive philanthropy The Art of Living India.

Google has played these sorts of number recreations some time recently. In 2015, Google guardian organization Alphabet purchased back a bundle of stock for $5,099,019,513.59 the square foundation of 26, the quantity of letters in the letter set, times a billion. In 2011, Google offer $3.14159 billion, or pi billion dollars, for Nortel licenses. That blog entry was expected to share the consequences of Google's bug abundance program, where it pays money to programmers for discovering blemishes in the inquiry goliath's administrations. Google says it paid out $2 million a year ago to more than 300 programmers and security specialists.

Another interesting story from that blog entry: The most productive Google bug abundance seeker of the year, Tomasz Bojarski, was paid out a honor since he found a security defect in Google's web structure to report security balance.

Comments

FUNCTIONS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

Function of the Holy Spirit. This list of the 70 Functions of the Holy Spirit come from her research. He leads and directs. (Matthew 4:1; Mark 1:12; Luke 2:27; 4:1; Acts 8:29; Romans 8:14) The Holy Spirit speaks – in, to and through. (Matthew 10:20; Acts 1:16; 2:4; 13:2; 28:25; Hebrews 3:7) He gives power to cast out devils. (Matthew 12:28) He releases power. (Luke 4:14) The Holy Spirit anoints. (Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38) The Holy Spirit “comes upon” or “falls on”. (Matthew 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 2:25; 3:22; 4:18; John 1:32,33; Acts 10:44; 11:15) He baptizes and fills. (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 1:15,41,67; 3:16, 4:1; John 1:33; Acts 1:4-5; 2:4; 4:8,31; 6:3,5; 7:55; 10:47; 11:24; 13:9,52; 1 Corinthians 12:12) He gives new birth. (John 3:5,8) He leads into worship. (John 4:23) He flows like a river from the spirit man. (John 7:38-39) He ministers truth. (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13) He dwells in people. (John 14:

SETTING A DIRECTION VS PLANNING AND BUDGETING

Since the function of leadership is to produce change, setting the direction of that change is fundamental to leadership. Setting direction is never the same as planning or even long-term planning, although people often confuse the two. Planning is a management process, deductive in nature and designed to produce orderly results, not change. Setting a direction is more inductive. Leaders gather a broad range of data and look for patterns, relationships, and linkages that help explain things. What’s more, the direction-setting aspect of leadership does not produce plans; it creates vision and strategies. These describe a business, technology, or corporate culture in terms of what it should become over the long term and articulate a feasible way of achieving this goal. Most discussions of vision have a tendency to degenerate into the mystical. The implication is that a vision is something mysterious that mere mortals, even talented ones, could never hope to have. But developing

ALIGNING PEOPLE VS ORGANIZING AND STAFFING

A central feature of modern organizations is interdependence, where no one has complete autonomy, where most employees are tied to many others by their work, technology, management systems, and hierarchy. These linkages present a special challenge when organizations attempt to change. Unless many individuals line up and move together in the same direction, people will tend to fall all over one another. To executives who are overeducated in management and undereducated in leadership, the idea of getting people moving in the same direction appears to be an organizational problem. What executives need to do, however, is not organize people but align them. Managers “organize” to create human systems that can implement plans as precisely and efficiently as possible. Typically, this requires a number of potentially complex decisions. A company must choose a structure of jobs and reporting relationships, staff it with individuals suited to the jobs, provide training for those who need it,

Comrade J.C Njoku's Blog

Search This Blog