Talk:Zyvex
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Tom Cellucci controversy
Some anonymous contributor's beef with Tom Celluci is threatening to turn into an edit war. I haven't been following Zyvex's business closely, so I personally don't know what's true and what's not. Please provide some sources and discuss here on the edit page instead. Thanks! Ehn 15:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] amen!
I've been cleaning up the vandalism as I find it on this entry, and I agree that it's getting to be annoying. The perpetrator(s) is using the same 4 or 5 blurbs and just tacking them onto the end of the article w/o any sources. Please leave the commentary in the blogs and not in the wiki entries.
[edit] Interesting
It's interesting that Zyvex has never been able to refute anything posted in the history here about the bungling of the company by its ex-president (and by their inaction, the CEO and the rest of the management team), other than to just restate the rhetoric that stopped being true years ago. They still advertise themselves as a nanotechnology company, but anyone in the know can describe in detail about how they are simply just a tool company (comparable to Veeco, PolyTEC, Hitachi, 3rdTech, and so many others). Of course they did learn to jump on the nanotechnology bandwagon earlier than most, when others were calling their tools micromanipulators......but it's the same thing. They have a materials side but what they do for nanotechnology as far as materials do, most people would call composites or fiberglas, which have been around for 100 years.
[edit] Re: Interesting
Chemistry has been around for millenia. Does this mean that modern day chemists or chemical engineers are doing what cavemen did? No. The use, or misuse, of "nanotechnology" as a buzz word is regrettable. It's become so pervasive that it's almost impossible for it to have any meaning at all anymore.
At the end of the day, Zyvex's nanomanipulation solutions DO give macro scale users the ability to thoughtfully and directedly interact with nano scale systems. Their nano materials offerings DO use precisely designed molecules to harness other highly ordered molecules' abilities to augment common materials. Their may not yet be robots swimming in people's blood, fighting cancer cells, or an economical way to yet build atomically/molecularly precise structures, but this does not mean that other, more short term technologies are any less "nanotech".
Artificial intelligence designers haven't yet made a sentient program. Does this mean that advances in chess programs or other predictive algorithms aren't AI?
[edit] Edit:
I guess the management at Zyvex agrees that their company has been destroyed with little hope of recovery by its previous management and by their apathy, the current management.
[edit] Edit on October 26
The list of people that have left Zyvex in the last year or so was revealing. For an early stage company claiming to have 65 employees, to have a yearly turnover rate of 50% is ridiculous. Also, there's a few more names that could have been included on that list since they resigned but rescinded their resignations when a certain Thomas A Cellucci PhD was canned. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.243.217.178 (talk • contribs). 06:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Names
The list of names previously included was uncited and unverifiable. In addition, the inclusion of the names is clearly a continued vandalism attempt. Comments regarding turnover rate can be factual, IF based on verifiable sources. CommentARY on the meaning of the facts, especially as presented by one, obviously personally motivated individual, is not factual and has no place in a Wikipedia entry. If you've got a complaint, make a myspace post about it, or put up a billboard, or tell people on the street, but leave it out of this entry.
[edit] Re: Names
Cleaning up vandalism? Or an attempt to whitewash the bungling of a company in the process of destroying itself. The list of names was accurate (as far as I can remember) but only the company records could be used to prove it so. Don't hold your breath waiting for them to open their personnel records for open examination.
[edit] Whitewhashing
What you call whitewashing, others would call a return to facts. In contrast, the redurring vandalism on this entry is obvious to everyone, even those that have no personal information regarding Zyvex. If you spray paint your best guess of a person's height, weight, and age on the side of their car, it's still vandalism. Even if you used to know that person and used to help them measure themselves. Even if the person got mad at you, for any reason, and ended their relationship with you.
The conclusion is still the same: If you've got negative, anecdotal opinions of Zyvex, Wikipedia is not the right forum to air them.
