4 ms·

In the year before the devices were installed, the company paid out $1 million in claims related to injuries caused by the saw. In the year after the gadgets we

by sdfx 16y ago

In the year before the devices were installed, the company paid out $1 million in claims related to injuries caused by the saw. In the year after the gadgets were installed, it paid out $7,000. This is unbelievable - he saved them millions, jet they were not willing to pay him the $4M he asked for.

sabat 16y ago
We live in an era where the sole purpose of business is to maximize revenue streams.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Profit, not revenue. Revenue would be the same regardless of whether they paid this guy for the saw guard or not.
- xenophanes 16y ago
  Which getting sued for 25million doesn't do...?
- ars 16y ago
  And? That IS the sole purpose of business. It just so happens that when business does that, it has lots of other benefits - like making things people want, and giving people employment. But don't for a second loose sight of the goal: maximize revenue. There are other entities, like non-profits, and co-ops, which may have other goals, but run like businesses. Edit: I think I mis-read you. Was your comment a reply, or a complaint? If it was a reply, then I apologize for the downmod which I can not reverse. But if it's a complaint, then it's not a valid one - that has always been the goal of a business, our era is not in the slightest different.
  - pwhelan 16y ago
    The sole purpose of a business is to represent the interest of the owners. That almost exclusively means maximizing profits over the long term. This is a slightly different but important distinction. I agree with Warren Buffet when he says there is more than enough money to be made ethically and without cutting corners. Don't worry about the downmod ars, I got him.
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    Indeed, but that end does not automatically justify whatever means are employed, a key reason for the lack of well paying ninja jobs. In this case, Home Depot management's short-term greed has resulted in an extra $21 million of liability for the firm's shareholders. In any case, while maximizing revenue is certainly the primary purpose of business as distinct from charitable work, it's not exclusive of other purposes which the founders may decide to pursue in parallel; it's just the easiest outcome to measure.
  - sabat 16y ago
    That IS the sole purpose of business. That's the cynical view of this age. If you study history, you'll find that business was considered something that was supposed to benefit society and business owners. Society, the social good, came first.
    - edge17 16y ago
      huh? please elaborate on the specific portion of history you're referring to. If you're referring to any of the historical industrial revolutions, worker conditions tended to be terrible.
axod 16y ago
It's a saw guard... Personally, I don't think they should really have to pay anything to an 'inventor' of a saw guard. Link to the patent: http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=PhR3AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=PhR3AAAAEBAJ&printsec... It's trivial and should never have had a patent granted IMHO. Comprises of a couple of spring loaded clamps to hold the wood, and a cover which hides the blade and collects the dust. wow must have taken a whole afternoon to think up.
- jemfinch 16y ago
  > wow must have taken a whole afternoon to think up. A whole afternoon in 2006, approximately 6,000 years after the birth of civilization and before anyone else had thought of it.
  - axod 16y ago
    How can you be in any way even remotely sure that no one else had ever thought of it. That seems extremely unlikely. I'd bet there are countless examples of spring loaded clamps holding wood in cutters, and countless examples of blade hiding/dust removal boxes. This isn't rocket science. I think you mean "... and before anyone else bothered to patent it and try and get people to pay royalties".
- noonespecial 16y ago
  He did more than "think it up in an afternoon". Its a specific type of saw the guard is for. He measured it all out, built one, tested it, built 8 more, and loaned them all to the Home Depot (probably for free) to show them that it would reduce injuries. It did so magnificently, so they stole it like rotten little children. I'm all in against "thought patents" like software and "business methods" where the inventor does nothing but think of a way to phrase a generic activity that many people already do, but the physical device patent is still a useful thing. In general it still works like the founders intended more often than it doesn't. Its friggin hard to build real things. This guy spent real time and effort perfecting this device that really does help people. He deserved better.

by sdfx 16y ago

sabat 16y ago

We live in an era where the sole purpose of business is to maximize revenue streams.

philwelch 16y ago
Profit, not revenue. Revenue would be the same regardless of whether they paid this guy for the saw guard or not.
xenophanes 16y ago
Which getting sued for 25million doesn't do...?
ars 16y ago
And? That IS the sole purpose of business. It just so happens that when business does that, it has lots of other benefits - like making things people want, and giving people employment. But don't for a second loose sight of the goal: maximize revenue. There are other entities, like non-profits, and co-ops, which may have other goals, but run like businesses. Edit: I think I mis-read you. Was your comment a reply, or a complaint? If it was a reply, then I apologize for the downmod which I can not reverse. But if it's a complaint, then it's not a valid one - that has always been the goal of a business, our era is not in the slightest different.
- pwhelan 16y ago
  The sole purpose of a business is to represent the interest of the owners. That almost exclusively means maximizing profits over the long term. This is a slightly different but important distinction. I agree with Warren Buffet when he says there is more than enough money to be made ethically and without cutting corners. Don't worry about the downmod ars, I got him.
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  Indeed, but that end does not automatically justify whatever means are employed, a key reason for the lack of well paying ninja jobs. In this case, Home Depot management's short-term greed has resulted in an extra $21 million of liability for the firm's shareholders. In any case, while maximizing revenue is certainly the primary purpose of business as distinct from charitable work, it's not exclusive of other purposes which the founders may decide to pursue in parallel; it's just the easiest outcome to measure.
- sabat 16y ago
  That IS the sole purpose of business. That's the cynical view of this age. If you study history, you'll find that business was considered something that was supposed to benefit society and business owners. Society, the social good, came first.
  - edge17 16y ago
    huh? please elaborate on the specific portion of history you're referring to. If you're referring to any of the historical industrial revolutions, worker conditions tended to be terrible.

axod 16y ago

It's a saw guard... Personally, I don't think they should really have to pay anything to an 'inventor' of a saw guard. Link to the patent: http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=PhR3AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false http://www.google.co.uk/patents?id=PhR3AAAAEBAJ&printsec... It's trivial and should never have had a patent granted IMHO. Comprises of a couple of spring loaded clamps to hold the wood, and a cover which hides the blade and collects the dust. wow must have taken a whole afternoon to think up.

jemfinch 16y ago
> wow must have taken a whole afternoon to think up. A whole afternoon in 2006, approximately 6,000 years after the birth of civilization and before anyone else had thought of it.
- axod 16y ago
  How can you be in any way even remotely sure that no one else had ever thought of it. That seems extremely unlikely. I'd bet there are countless examples of spring loaded clamps holding wood in cutters, and countless examples of blade hiding/dust removal boxes. This isn't rocket science. I think you mean "... and before anyone else bothered to patent it and try and get people to pay royalties".
noonespecial 16y ago
He did more than "think it up in an afternoon". Its a specific type of saw the guard is for. He measured it all out, built one, tested it, built 8 more, and loaned them all to the Home Depot (probably for free) to show them that it would reduce injuries. It did so magnificently, so they stole it like rotten little children. I'm all in against "thought patents" like software and "business methods" where the inventor does nothing but think of a way to phrase a generic activity that many people already do, but the physical device patent is still a useful thing. In general it still works like the founders intended more often than it doesn't. Its friggin hard to build real things. This guy spent real time and effort perfecting this device that really does help people. He deserved better.