Slashdot Mirror

Is your Google broken?

Seriously, this isn't exactly a controversial point. Iran has *huge* government subsidies for the poor, but its theocracy is not otherwise popular (and even if they just stop having elections, a government needs money to exist).

[Citation Needed]

SAIC Motor this week opened a $425 million assembly plant here as part of an effort to lead China's growing market for domestic brands.
And it signed an agreement to buy bit player Etsong (Qingdao) Vehicle Manufacturing Co. Ltd and convert it into a plant that will begin building mini-vehicles by the second half this year, with an initial annual capacity for between 60,000 and 70,000 units.
GM has spent $263 million on this plant that will be used for manufacturing engines for the minicars that GM is selling in China.
"China is a natural" place to produce cars and components less expensively, Wagoner said in a interview in Shanghai, though he added that building GM cars in China for the US market would be a "relatively low priority".

What about all the users that never, you know, bought the software? Or those who installed Windows Genuine Advantage and now have a black background and MS watermark?

Nooo, you must be an idiot if auto update, windows firewall or #insert service name here# isn't started at boot. Only possible explanation.

China Daily's report is dated 2006.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-07/07/content_636244.htm

Not in the weeks immediately following 9/11. On September 13th, the UN Security Council passed yet another resolution against Iraq, even though Iraq hadn't done anything new, but members of the council were drawing conclusions because Saddam publicly praised the terrorists.

I'm just curious, which resolution are we talking about? This site lists all U.N. Security Council resolutions against Iraq prior to 2004. I don't see anything on September 13, except one drafted in 1990 regarding foodstuffs.

Perhaps this link doesn't have everything, but it seems comprehensive.

Many suggested the security council was immediately ready to approve military action against Iraq if the US wanted to pursue it.

Many? MANY?? Who would this 'many' be? Think tanks? Newspaper Op-Eds? National Security experts?

Your article suggests people were against the war in 2003, which is true. What I'm suggesting is that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, several leaders were vocally drawing links to Iraq, even though they had no proof.

Cool, I agree with this. Several "leaders" were drawing links to Iraq and they were wrong because they had zero proof.

The sentiments changed greatly because we pursued diplomacy instead of immediately charging in on trumped up charges when support was higher.

We pursued diplomacy? When? As far as I can recall, the U.S. kicked out the weapons inspectors in 2003 before the bombs dropped, because they weren't finding anything. The fact that they were on the verge of announcing that there were no WMD's in Iraq scared the crap out of the Bush administration, as it destroyed any case they had for war. This is further shown when the Bush administration changed their reasoning for war, going from finding WMD's to "ridding the world of a tyrant."

Also, while the 9/11 Panel, President Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz have publicly denied or questioned that there was any link between Iraq and 9/11, Dick Cheney is still TO THIS DAY spreading this lie in some shape or form.

The Bush Administration tried their hardest to make it seem like they exhausted all of their options, but in reality, they sent in a group of weapons inspectors, Saddam let them in, they couldn't find anything, and so Bush immediately called them ineffective and declared war.

Thanks for commenting. I got my information from here.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-09/21/content_7044535.htm

It mentioned, "The Bush administration asked Congress on Saturday for the power to buy $700 billion in toxic assets clogging the financial system and threatening the economy as negotiations began on the largest bailout since the Great Depression.". Since the word "buy" was used, I didn't think that anything would be paid back.

Thanks for commenting.

China has already demanded it. China's new national network, CERNET2, runs IPv6 - http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-12/27/content_403512.htm.

Wonder if that's why he moved to China.

FYI

1 Brazilian = 1 million US Dollars

Yeah, but why do they say that? Partly because it's not safe to question the Chinese government's policies if you're in China. But partly because the government is trying to migrate from a technological block on hostile media to convincing people that those media are biased against the Chinese as a race. If the only time the official media mention CNN is like this -

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/language_tips/cdaudio/2008-04/16/content_6621274.htm

It makes you less likely to believe CNN when they report the nasty things the Chinese government does. It's an ad hominem attack on the organisation

They do the same thing with web cafes too, by smearing them as unsafe -

http://www.clearharmony.net/articles/200210/7575.html

Essentially they want people to think that non official news sources are either run by anti Chinese racists or might burn you to death.

if I say "the sky is yellow" and everybody accepts it, it's basically a religion: one person says and everybody else agrees.

This is not good at all, specially in the academic environment.

Do you have the opportunity to disagree?? ABSOLUTELY: prove it is wrong.

So, by searching the truth and trying to prove it's wrong, you MIGHT end up proving it is *really* wrong OOOOOOOORRRRRRR you might end up proving to yourself it's right.

Prove it's wrong. But don't come with "bullshit, big time bullshit!"

Perhaps it's hard to accept north-americans as the real terrorists. In that case, you might be the One who will take ALL the geopolitical academics IN THE WORLD from the path of being historically incorrect and mentally dammed. I'm not say in this or that country, I'm saying in the WORLD.

Perhaps you also don't want to recognize that the USA controls the United Nations and that there's some bacteria in south pole underground and some people thought about searching for it. They are really from the dinosaurs' epoch. Freeing those bacteria COULD be the end of the world, since they might do no harm, or might be like air-transmitted Ebola (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola). Those are possibilities. I don't have such knowledge to say what those bacteria really are. SOOO.... in face of that little problem, the scientists said "that's ok, folks, let's those things stay down there". But not the USA government.

Since the USA holds one of the chairs in the Security Council, which give USA, as the other chairs, power to block a project, blocked the non-exploitation of the Pole's underground. Any time we can die. Thanks to USA government. But this is just the tip of the iceberg.

What do you want, huh?? You want a great power, but not the responsability that cames along with the power??? Who do you think you are, a rich? Have a huge quantity of money, but is not responsible for those who die of hunger...

I bet you don't read a lot of geopolitical books.
Here's something for you to begin with: http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3818139/Chomsky_Books

Uncle SAM is goingo to save you (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-05/19/xin_27050119142492840419.jpg) from the devil nails (http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/pix/iraq_demnstrtn_cp_7433689.jpg) of the terrorists (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg) because terrorists (http://www.vermelho.org.br/admin/img_upload/crimedeguerra.jpg http://www.vermelho.org.br/admin/img_upload/terpalesti.jpg) are really bad. You, north-americans are good.(http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Abu-Ghraib-Prison-Photos11jun04p12.jpg).

Because of China's overt and explicit censorship of the news media, those outside of China (and probably those inside China, too, for that matter) can't possibly be aware of the actual sentiments of the Chinese people.

Whoever destroyed the World Trade Center killed 3,000 Americans. The decision of Cheney and Bush to have a war with Iraq has killed more" Americans than that.

See these stories, for example:

Iraq Conflict Has Killed A Million Iraqis: Survey.

The number is rapidly rising. In October 2006 the number of Iraqis killed was estimated to be 655,000.

The highest estimate of Iraqis killed by Saddam Hussein was 1 million, so the U.S. government has killed more than Saddam. See, for example, Survey: Saddam killed 61,000 in Baghdad.

All you have to do is look at what has actually happened with WalMart.

Ok let's look at what's happening with Walmart. Walmart is the world's biggest retailer, and is one of China's biggest. The Chinese seem able to afford to shop there. Or take Brazil and Mexico. Walmart has been a success in both countries. In Brazil Walmart is closing in on Brazil's largest retailer, the French company Carrefour.

they're raking in billions of $ while Medicaide or other programs pay their workers health care costs

As in other areas I'd prefer a free market in health care. I don't believe in employer provided health insurance. In the US this is a vestige from World War II. Then the US had wage control laws that prevented employers from paying employees more, instead to allow businesses to attract employees employers were allowed to offer health insurance to employees. This alone distorted the market for health care and insurance. Even today laws and regulations favor employers who provide health insurance instead of paying them more so they can buy the type of insurance they want. However as you point out with Walmart some employers don't offer insurance for employees. Because health costs are skyrocketing employers are either requiring employees to pay more or are dropping coverage. That has been a sticking point with US auto manufacturers and United Auto Workers. The companies want workers to pay more but the union won't go along. What needs to be done is to let employers pay employees more without either having to pay more taxes then allow employees to buy insurance.

In any case you sound like you've swallowed the whole 'there is an evil liberal agenda to have all powerful government'.

On whether or not there's any agenda or not doesn't matter to me, but if there is one it's not liberal. Liberals, real ones not fakes, want liberty and small government.

It is crap. It is Corporatist propaganda.

Looks like you've missed where I've railed against corporation. A number of tymes I've stated corporations should have their Corporate Charter revoked if t hey no longer served to public good. The very first corporation, the Dutch East India Company, was granted a corporate charter for this very reason in 1602. Two years later the Honourable East India Company was granted a charter for the same reason, to serve the public good. If corporations today were treated the same it wouldn't be a problem. Thomas Jefferson said "I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of their country."

while the Republicans have given loads of lip service to shrinking government, they've failed utterly to live up to their word.

Republicans have never done anything to shrink government. Two of past 3 Republican presidents increased the size of government. What's ironic is that the republican president that warned of the military industrial complex, Dwight D. Eisenhower, actually made it stronger. Many Americans believe it was Kennedy who first sent US troops to Viet Nam, but it was actually Ike who sent Colonel Edward Lansdale to undermine a vote on whether North and South Viet Nam would re

There are much more interesting photos to be found in the link to a Chinese news article below. There are 3-D lunar images to found on pages 2 and 3 of this report. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-12/03/content_6294146.htm

Those old electronics units are full of lead! By now China is probably running out of lead to paint children's toys with! The scary part is that it's almost true.

Sorry, but that's not super fair. If you have been following the stories, Chinese toy makers are now suing Mattel for damaging their reputation. The toys that were recalled were built completely to spec with the designs Mattel gave them. When a toy contains many small magnets that can be swallowed, how can you blame the manufacturers, and not the designers?
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/language_tips/cdaudio/2007-11/06/content_6234061.htm

Also, the latest round of recalls came from Mexico.
http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/business_agriculture/story.html?id=6bbd57b0-e1d3-48d9-9a14-ebe3e6b24c04

China can make high quality electronic equipment, and they can also make low quality toys. You can't really blame them for making what they were paid to make.

I say they were HOBBITS. The tracks are their HOBBITRAILS... these were the precursors to the hunter-killer packs. These had highly-modifiable feet.

More at:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2007-09/21/content_6124873.htm

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1027_041027_homo_floresiensis.html

(wink, wink)

I could thing of a few other reasons to boycott.
Corruption has other ways of expressing itself...

water...
http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2005-07-04-pollution-china-cover_x.htm
land....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6582571.stm
air...
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/01/70107

effect of being there ... Oh hey they noticed... And you thought global warming a disaster... they could at least cut back on the cancer causing shit.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-04/16/content_434747.htm

Thanx for the info. It is always good to get differing viewpoints. I try to flip every so often through a couple of chinese news sites, but these are like reading Fox news or Pravda; You know that about half of it is gov. propaganda.

Chinese labour code link:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2006-05/08/c ontent_584125.htm

According to a recent China Daily article, China has 122 million broadband users and another 40 million dialup and mobile internet users, while the US has 211 million users. At the same time, the US produces 19.6% of Spam while China produces 8.4% (China's figure wasn't given in the linked article but the original source from Sophos has more details).

Even assuming that all of these 211 million users have broadband, the US has only 1.7x as many broadband connections as China but it still produces 2.3x as much spam. The reason for this is most likely that what passes for broadband in China is usually still only 1Mbps, so a compromised US machine will be able to pump out a lot more emails than one in China.

Most wanted sperm...
I believe that coming in second in the list of most wanted sperm has to be a more painful blow for Bill. In China, where the piracy rate is so high, there is probably already cheap knock-offs of his semen. Bill Gates Formula 401, 1.25 cents on the open market. It's sad really.

The average yearly income of a resident living in rural China is about $315 per year. (2004 numbers). Urban residents like those in Beijing make about 5 to 10 times that amount. Which, compared to America, is still not a lot.

I wonder why they did this at all since China already had an Official Disney Theme park. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-09/1 2/content_477116.htm

China can't stop an orbital nuclear attack, or even ICBMs or sub-launched nukes.

China has no Navy - not one that can survive a handful of US subs. Our cruisers can take them out from beyond visual range.

** That's why they haven't even invaded little baby Taiwan. **

We know where all their major production factories are and can be done with them with a handful of strike bombers that they can't even see, much less shoot down. Failing that we can hit them from orbit.

What is more likely is that China, if sufficiently provoked, will fsck us up economically. But they'll play that card ONCE. That will bring the offshoring universe crashing down as Americans learn how vulnerable it makes us. We'll not make that mistake twice and China will lose its biggest customer. We'll produce our own stuff from then on and China will choke and asphyxiate and get sick and die in its own industrial filth.

We could move in and take over, although the pollution clean-up and dead body disposal might make that unfeasible for decades. :)

Oh and for those stupid enough to argue with me:
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/200 6/06/06/pollution_problems_cost_china_over_200b_a_ year/
http://www.forbes.com/logistics/2006/03/21/america s-most-polluted-cities-cx_rm_0321pollute.html
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2006-01/1 1/content_511271.htm
http://www.dbc.uci.edu/~sustain/suscoasts/krismin. html

Then you are a racist, as the original poster. You are trying to claim that the US is more responsible with nuclear weapons, even though they are the only country to have ever used them in war. This position doesn't even require me to argue against it - it is fundamentally flawed in itself, and this flaw is obvious.

You are making several implicit assumptions. First, that nuclear weapons cannot be used responsibly ever. I already gave an example of when (IMHO, of course) they were used responsibly. Second, somehow I am "racist".

Therefore the US is the more reckless. Not only that, they only claim to be. They have already stated that they consider it their right to use nuclear weapons to destroy a civilian nuclear power plant. This is the height of arrogance and recklessness. And you, being a supporter of US foreign policy, are far worse a racist religious fundamentalist than the people you are suggesting we attack.

A "civilian" nuclear power plant that produces weapon-grade material for nuclear bombs by a regime that no one trusts is not "civilian". And some of the purported facilities are buried deep underground.

From the linked article:

Iranian officials said the main enrichment facility at Natanz was built more than 18 meters (54 feet) below ground due to "security problems."

Defense experts say this is a precaution against possible aerial attack by the United States or Israel, which have vowed to stop Iran acquiring nuclear arms.

Approaching the complex, ringed by arid mountains, journalists counted at least 10 anti-aircraft batteries.

Pathological effort for a civilian nuclear program, but just about right for a nuclear weapons program. The depth also precludes all known conventional weapons aside from really fancy stuff like dropping large tungsten rods from orbit.

There is no way wahtsoever that a guy armed with a knife only can put down 30 healthy teenagers or 20somethings.

This middle aged guy in China got 10 people with knife and ax.

Richard Speck strangled and stabbed eight people in one gruesome night.

The Hutus were able to kill a hell of a lot of Tutsis with machetes - i.e., big knives.

Petar Brzica is said to have knifed 1,300 people in one night, though concentration camp inmates were obviously easy targets.

Somebody trained, with quality knives (including big knives such as swords or machetes), against 30 untrained panicing young people, divided into a few smaller groups in classrooms? Quite possible.

There's a reason that sword-wielding tyrants and conquerors, from the generals of Athens to the shoguns of Japan, were able to succeed: if I have a big knife and you don't, I'm in charge or you're dead. Even if there's a dozen of you.

But, we do need to recall that while this incident was the worst school shooting, it was not the worst school mass murder: the Bath School disaster killed 45 people. For mass murder, fire and explosives are the way to go.

Guns may be outlawed in Japan, but school violence continues. Didn't some lunatic stab 7 kids to death in a Japanese school a few years ago? Ahh, yes, here's the story: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2001-06/08/con tent_62607.htm Guns are outlawed in the UK too, but there was a triple shooting in a Birmingham pub a couple weeks ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_mi dlands/6559035.stm Sorry to say it, but there's no such thing as complete safety. Banning guns might make you *feel* safer, but it's just security theater.

I agree. Unfortunately, there is not much one can do about it. Advertising is a way to make a product cheaper and the people want things to be cheep. We are slowly turning into an ad based economy where payment is now offered in the form of ad space. People are already selling their bodies as ad space. I admit it is getting rather ridiculous. But we will continue on this path until we can find a more profitable solution. Companies do follow the profits you know.

Let's talk about investor rationality and that "3% correction" you speak of.

What prompted that correction? Was it a well-reasoned analysis of market exposure, followed by an orderly transfer of assets from the stock market to another form of investment?

No. The stampede in Shanghai was caused by "a rumor about capital gains tax." Apparently, an unfounded rumor.

The dive in the Chinese market prompted a corresponding selloff in the U.S., the large volume of which prompted a technical "glitch" in the NYSE's messaging system. That glitch caused an apparent instant freefall in the DJIA (apparently, backlogged trade messages from over an hour's worth of trading processed suddenly in 3 minutes)--which prompted panic selling.

So, no, I see very little to commend the cool nerves and clear thinking of the investing community.

The markets are fueled, first and foremost, on the tension between greed and fear. Never forget that.

That trick with diapers is also done in China to avoid the toilets in overcrowded trains with long journey times. Going by state of some train toilets in the UK, and the risk of someone nicking your seat if you walk over to somewhere like the buffet car to get a drink/sandwich I can't blame them.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-05/2 4/content_445129.htm

Hi-tech waste being smuggled into China has caused big pollution because the method used to recycle them. Recycling is a generally good thing, but not so if the process actually causes harm to the local residents.

I think those waste exporters in developed countries are rather selfish in moving the problem to China and India, although it comes at no surprise to me in that the west is always doing so and pointing fingers at the developing countries.

The SJTU's researcher is doing a good job. Congratualtions! Keep it up!

Say Hello to your ignorance. India has never invaded other country including Pakistan. Both Pakistani and Indian government know that they cannot attack each other. Any issue (Kashmir) is alive because of Pakistan's flaky democracy and rise in Islamic fanaticism. And America has more responsibility in promoting it than anyother country, because they stand for the statements of 'founding fathers'. There are more terrorist organisations aimed at USA than any one. America for the whole world including Europe, stands just for hypocrisy.

That wasn't what I was talking about. I was talking about the chance that neither India nor Pakistan will be around in 10 years.

India and Pakistan have more than once nearly launched nukes at each other. Heck, they've been trash talking and engaging in some downright puerile nuclear penis waving for quite a while.

Now, let the facts speak for me. And no, nothing in here contradicts what I just told you. Let's cut off that avenue of weaseling out now before you try it.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/south/01/08/ pakistan.india/

Hmm... you come up with ideas but don't have anyone to execute it. We have people but don't have any money to buy food, they will think about food than intellectual property. We do business. Big deal? Welcome again to ECO101.

You keep referring to Econ 101. NEWS FLASH: humanity is more than the sum of its capitalist rhetorical skills. You passed neo feudalist rhetoric regurgitation 101 but you flunk out on the concept of seeing anything beyond dollars and cents.

For instance, America has plenty of people to execute our ideas. When we come up with ideas, we start them here, with American workers, and thanks to the corporate statists who should be swinging from trees by now, we fire them and send the work overseas.

America is one of the most productive nations in the world. Few nations top us even in per hour stats. Even the Chinese recognize that: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-09/01/con tent_260191.htm

We execute our own ideas, and we're darned good at it. Kaboom goes another one of your America-bashing arguments.

Now what's next? Let's see...

Not putting up any point but giving facts to point out how people are inferior because they are from East India, and then calling them racist. Are you surprised when you don't get the 'respect'?

I didn't say you were inferior.

By the way, what product USA produces? America is rich because they sold weapons, NOT intellectual property. You have money and WE have product. That is something you said yourself.

That's the whole point. We've sold out to globalism and put factories around the world instead of employing our own people to make it here.

I say we bite the bullet and go back to producing our goods here in America. We can do it, and we have been doing it for a hundred years.

We mass produced (for you semantically challenged trolls out there, mass produce != invent) cars, computers, the internet, everything we consumed, we made here. Until the globalists came along and put our collective economic gonads in a pickle jar.

Sorry, dude, but it won't be the end of the world if you embargo us and refuse to produce for us. In fact, I and future generations of Americans would clamor to go back in time and kiss your stinky feet if you did that to us. The nation which mass produced airplanes, cars, computers and which invented the internet, would go right back to providing for ourselves. The job explosion would be utterly miraculous.

I'm sure you could manage without our import money. Yay you.

Hint: America taking care of its own for once, doesn't qualify as hating you or attacking you.

A country that can't keep from polluting their own land, how can we expect them to not pollute space..?

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2006-01/1 1/content_511271.htm
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-05/30/cont ent_604228.htm

A country that can't keep from polluting their own land, how can we expect them to not pollute space..?

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2006-01/1 1/content_511271.htm
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-05/30/cont ent_604228.htm

Since July 2006.

http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/gyzg/t141754.htm

With tougher-yet standards coming in 2008:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-07/0 7/content_346332.htm

All your post makes tons of sense. Well, almost all. This paart is not real:

[India] don't seem to have an appetite for superpower status

Actualy they have.

Those who want to be superpowers have aircraft carriers. India has some and is building more. Se:

India as a superpower:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_as_an_emerging_ superpower

Indian Navy carriers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier#Indi an_Navy

List of Indian carriers:
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/india.htm

India begins construction of aircraft carrier
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-04/1 2/content_433517.htm

"Moscow and New Delhi today signed a $1.6 billion deal finalizing India's purchase of a refurbished Russian aircraft carrier, fighter jets, and helicopters. Observers say it's a sweet agreement for both sides, allowing Russia to bolster its sagging arms industry and India its regional strategic capacity. "
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/mo dele.pl?prod=32130&session=dae.23771315.1164583691 .RWojC8Oa9dUAAHETeZY&modele=jdc_1

Grand Delusions: The Psychology of Aircraft Carriers
http://hir.harvard.edu/articles/1068/

India's Military, from CIA's factbook:
https://cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in. html#Military

Peace!

This is why:
http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/attachments/month_060 3/americaworld_80kOI5keofyw.gif

Under the new rules, travelers press their index fingers onto an inkless scanner and then have their photograph taken as they make their way through customs.

The security checks target foreigners entering the 115 U.S. airports that handle international flights, as well as 14 major seaports. The only exceptions will be visitors from 27 countries -- mostly European nations -- whose citizens are allowed to come to the United States for up to 90 days without visas.

Also exempted will be most Canadians, because they usually are not required to get visas, and Mexicans who are coming into the country for a short time and not venturing far from the border.

Chernobyl, Windscale, Three Mile Island.

Chernobyl was a very serious incident. WHO attributed 56 direct deaths and possibly as many as extra 4000-6000 cancer deaths in the long term. (source 1), (source 2). However, you can't compare the Chernobyl reactor to western reactors of that day and age and certainly not to new types of reactors with passive safety. Three Mile Island is considered to be worlds' second worst nuclear accident. The death toll? 0. Compare that to the thousands of people that die in Chinese coal mines every year. (source)

We're told that current nuclear plants are safe, and not like the ones that exploded or went up in flames. At the time the plants which are now acknowledged to be dangerous were being constructed, the public were also told that they were completely safe. The public can be forgiven for not believing that an industry with a history of serial lies on safety is now both safe and
truthful about it for once.

Also, I don't suppose they were actually intending to have any accidents, or for some of the radioactive leaks - though BNFL's own propaganda admits they deliberately discharged nuclear waste into the sea. Humans make mistakes, which is another reason nuclear isn't trusted.

Thirdly, terrorism. You don't get coal-fired suicide bombers.

Actually, the Chinese are planning on heavily embracing IPv6, as are the S. Koreans and Japanese.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-12/2 7/content_403512.htm

This says all you need to know about agent orange http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-02/0 5/content_303315.htm

Looks to me like TechFreep doesn't deserve to be slashdotted.
The article they are referring to was last updated on 2006-02-06! Which also means TechFreep edited the story considerably to add mention of recent dates. They even used the same Febuary photo.
Therefore I would not be trusting any information from this source.

>Kind of a long commitment, especially considering that Hawking has ALS and could croak at any time -- the fact that he has been living with a disease that
>kills 95% of its sufferers within 5 years of diagnosis for 45 years vastly increases the chance of him dying at any moment.

A friend of mine, which now is an old man got myasthenia gravis many years ago. This is a muscle weakening disease somewhat similar to ALS which originally was as bad as ALS - you gradually lost muscle control until you died. However, many years ago, they managed to come up with a medicine, which could keep the symptomes mild, and the doctors told you had to take the medication for the rest of your life. But it turned out that my friend eventually has gotten rid of his case of myasthenia gravis now for more than 25 years which probably is much longer than the typical temporary remission of the disease in some few cases, mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

Since Stephen Hawking is alive, (though not so well) so many years after he should have been dead, it tells us that Stehpen Hawking doesn't have a typical case of ALS. When I was a child, we also learned that HIV was an absolute disease, if you first got it, you couldn't get rid of it, and eventually you would develop AIDS and die. Again it turned out, that this was not so absolute either - scientists discovered that some people are immune to the HIV-virus. The more we learn about the nature, the more we see that things we thought were absolutes, really not are that, so I would trust that Stephen Hawking could live for even some more years. One would expect too - that he is given a top notch medical treatment to prevent him getting sick. For example, he is probably vaccinated against the flu, and also is given medication like Tamiflu or antibiotics when the threat of getting sick is enlarged, as lung diseases easily kills people who are extremely paralyzed.

So if you easily get the cough in the winter time, this is not the job for you!

Show me a passage in any lawbook that equates copyright infringement with theft.

Chapter IIIa of Prosecuting Intellectual Property Crimes (my copy is in dead-tree form, but it's also available online: http://www.cybercrime.gov/ipmanual.htm), by David Goldstone: "the criminalization of large-scale copying even in the absence of economic motivation by the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act, Pub. L. No. 105-147, 111 Stat. 2678 (1997). . .

Also, in many jurisdictions copyright infringement is a tort, not a crime.

In the U.S., all copyright cases are Federal, and controlled by the United States Code and stare decisis in the Federal District and Circuit courts, and the Supreme Court. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html#301 17 USC 301. Under the United States Code, copyright infringement can be (depending on the factual circumstances present) either civil or http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506 criminal (17 USC 506).

Many extra-territorial jurisdictions treat, or can treat, (c) infringement as criminal.

U.S.: http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/06/28/1699696.h tm

Viet Nam: http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/showarticle.php ?num=06SOC080706

New Zealand:http://www.times.co.nz/cms/news/2006/07/ar t100012268.php

China:http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-07/1 6/content_641731.htm

Special Chinese District of Hong Kong:http://www.thestandard.com.hk/weekend_news_de tail.asp?pp_cat=30&art_id=22887&sid=8816949&con_ty pe=3&d_str=20060715

I saw something in my news clipping service about a recent -- last week -- India conviction and six month jail sentence for (c) infringement, but can't find it on news.google.com.

Consider that:

1. The United States is responsible for a greater portion of the arms trade than all other "players" combined

2. The arms trade as a whole is in decline while America's total business is increasing

Source
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-08/3 1/content_370440.htm