Slashdot Mirror


Comrade, You Are So Not Getting a Dell

theodp writes "At the World Economic Forum, Michael Dell's pitch to help Russia with its computers got the cold-as-Siberia shoulder from Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. 'We don't need help,' shot back Putin. 'We are not invalids. We don't have limited mental capacity' (video — rant starts at 1:24). 'Our programmers are some of the best in the world,' Putin continued. 'No one would contest that here — not even our Indian colleagues.'"

131 of 600 comments (clear)

  1. In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    the State tells you what it needs...

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia by suso · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, ex-soviet computer scientists apparently where not happy with the former governments choice to use non-soviet produced computers and protocols. They felt that it dampened the ability for them to make their own technologies.

      Check out the history of Soviet computer technology on wikipedia sometime, its interesting. Most of it cuts off in the 60s and 70s and then they just started using IBMs and stuff.

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia by suso · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_computer_hardware_in_communist_countries

      What I mean by cut off is that they mostly just started using processors from the free world instead of making their own.

    3. Re:In Soviet Russia by 0racle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most of it was also just a carbon copy of what was being done in the US. At some point in time, intelligent people say 'lets just buy the wheel and move on to making a cart.'

      Not Invented Here slows down a lot more progress then it helps.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    4. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's just as well. They can configure the OS scheduler to divide time equally between all processes.

    5. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unless, of course, the owner of a process is a Party official.

    6. Re:In Soviet Russia by suso · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not Invented Here slows down a lot more progress then it helps.

      Maybe in the short term, but in the long term when you are talking about a whole society inventing things. The USSR, having different needs and different mindsets, may have come up with unique technologies that where not tried here. For instance, what if they would have gone the trinary route instead of binary, or if they had made their first computers more like the ideas behind the thinking machine from MIT. I think then you wouldn't be saying that it was a waste of time because their technology would show more of what is possible.

    7. Re:In Soviet Russia by samriel · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Mister SVCHost, Tear Down This Thread!"

    8. Re:In Soviet Russia by ravenshrike · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, given the nature of computing based on electricity trinary computing would have simply been higher order code, unless your talking about levels of electric power, say 0, 1/2, and 1, but then the tech would have been vastly more complicated and almost certainly more prone to breakdown for a relatively small return.

    9. Re:In Soviet Russia by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      -1, 0, 1?

    10. Re:In Soviet Russia by Unordained · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that was meant as an example only. The point being that GroupThink can hold us back. One of the arguments for capitalism is that you have N people all trying to find the best way to solve a problem, being rewarded when they do -- we're betting that it's more efficient in the long run to waste resources in the short term exploring different options and seeing which ones survive. When you see a whole group of players "give up" in a sense, and use the existing solution, you've got to be worried that there was some innovation there that just won't happen anytime soon now -- and if the idea is instilled that you should always go with the short-term efficiency of using off-the-shelf solutions, then you've got a long-term problem to deal with: entire generations raised to go with COTS rather than innovating. The bet here is that in the long term, it's more profitable to at least have some trained R&D people than an entire population of "users", dependent on others, and you can't have that without sometimes saying "no" to the salespeople.

    11. Re:In Soviet Russia by CatsupBoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's just as well. They can configure the OS scheduler to divide time equally between all processes.

      Except for the colonel of course, he always seems to get more than the normal process.

    12. Re:In Soviet Russia by chooks · · Score: 5, Funny

      -1, 0, 1?

      And of course, FILE_NOT_FOUND.

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
    13. Re:In Soviet Russia by Cyberax · · Score: 5, Informative

      USSR _did_ have successful computers using ternary math: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setun

      Unfortunately, it was abandoned in favor of copying foreign binary computers :(

    14. Re:In Soviet Russia by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When has it ever been about intelligence when Politics or politicians are involved?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    15. Re:In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, ex-soviet computer scientists apparently where not happy...

      ...may have come up with unique technologies that where not tried here.

      Suso, you have plenty of great things to say, but it's a bit frustrating to see simple spelling errors occur in your writing. Sure, I'm an anonymous troll, but I'm hoping that this is seen as help.

      You have been using "where" to mean "were".
      "where" = location of something ("Where is it?")
      "were" = past tense of "are" ("We were hungry.")

    16. Re:In Soviet Russia by XcepticZP · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously, back that up with more than just cliches and rhetoric. 90% seems way too high, perhaps you just pulled it out of your ass to illustrate your point?

      Secondly. Who is to say that "corporate theft and spying", or rather, the less rhetoric and hate filled "acquired by means other than inventing", is wrong? Most of the world did/does this. Not only that, but many developing nations are required to do this, else they would fall further behind the rest of the "honest" world.

      Thirdly. Did you really need to phrase things the way you did? Do you really subscribe to the "west is best" or "west invented everything" attitude? If you do, then history disagrees with you, for the most part.

    17. Re:In Soviet Russia by powerlord · · Score: 2, Informative

      For instance, what if they would have gone the trinary route instead of binary

      Actually ... they tried that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_computer

      The only modern ternary computer Setun was built in the late 1950s in the Soviet Union at the Moscow State University, and it had notable advantages over the binary computers (such as lower electricity consumption and lower production cost) which eventually replaced it.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    18. Re:In Soviet Russia by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Funny

      Even Apply dumped the commie PowerPC and went with Western capitalist x86.

    19. Re:In Soviet Russia by TheUglyAmerican · · Score: 2

      Hey guys, the USSR doesn't existing any more.

      --
      "Written on the pages is the answer to the never ending story..."
    20. Re:In Soviet Russia by damnfuct · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What I mean by cut off is that they mostly just started using processors from the free world instead of making their own.

      "Free" ;)

    21. Re:In Soviet Russia by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Except for the colonel of course, he always seems to get more than the normal process."

      That's because some processes are more equal than others.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    22. Re:In Soviet Russia by repka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hate you, SQL people. You seem to be fond of NULL but abandon it (like many other ideas) half way. And then make a living out of it.

    23. Re:In Soviet Russia by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pervasive corruption was what did in the Soviet Union.

      Stealing or cheating to achieve a group objective was
      not considered a big thing there and such practices
      were actually institutionalized.

      This can be a bit problem for ex-Soviets abroad. ...as far as "West is best goes": where would the Soviets
      be without stolen German techonology and some of the
      corresponding scientists.

            Although the same goes for the US though...

            Russia certainly has the potential. They just have chosen
      to squander much of it for the past few decades. When their
      engineers cease fleeing to London to work as waiters, things
      will probably shape up considerably.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    24. Re:In Soviet Russia by nbauman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A visitor to the USSR brought home a Soviet clone of the Apple II, which they called IIRC a "Blaht," which means apple in Russian. He wrote an article about it for Byte.

      It was a pretty clunky, unreliable device. It was kind of disappointing that the Soviets couldn't clone a western computer cheaply, something that gave the Taiwanese and Koreans no trouble.

      One theory was that the Soviets could equal western technology when they made it a top military priority, but not otherwise.

      Loren Graham, the MIT professor who probably knows more about Soviet science than any American, said that the Russians had the "blackboard theory": anything you could do with a blackboard and chalk, they could do. But when they actually had to build something, they had trouble. This was ironic for an ideology built on materialism.

      But give them credit -- they did have the first satellite in space, the first man in space, and the first woman in space. The Moscow Institute of Cardiology developed the precursor of what would turn out to be tissue plasminogen activator, which is used today to treat people with heart attacks and strokes. Graham said that one thing they did well was their education system. They educated more chemists than anybody else in the world.

    25. Re:In Soviet Russia by Metasquares · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If my gradually fading secondhand knowledge of history is still accurate, it was more the rate of the USSR's modernization that was so alarming. Stalin began industrialization initiatives that, though absolutely brutal on the people, did result in rapid modernization. They saw no alternative: "modernize or perish".

      Then there was Sputnik... imagine seeing that (the booster was essentially the first ICBM) in 1957 and then hearing that the USSR was building missile bases in direct striking distance of the USA five years later. It would have certainly freaked me out, and secondhand as my knowledge of the Cuban Missile Crisis may be, I'm old enough to remember the air raid drills that still took place three decades after it ended.

  2. And Michael Looked Back by LordKaT · · Score: 5, Funny

    and said "Well ... ok then."

    1. Re:And Michael Looked Back by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, Putin is actually also correct to be worried. The 90s was full of foreign consultants coming over to Moscow and giving unbelievably bad advice that lead to premature loosening of all controls and a kleptocratic oligarchy shortly after that.

      Now imagine that combined with a foreign profit seeking company offering to do the helping. I'm not entirely surprised Putin reacted as you would if Bill Gates came over to your FOSS startup and asked if you'd like an MS sales team to give you some free help and advice. Quite how naive do we assume Putin to be here? Russia isn't some failed state that cannot run it's own programs and make it's own choices. Authoritarian, yes, but competent at it.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    2. Re:And Michael Looked Back by El+Torico · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    3. Re:And Michael Looked Back by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't give them too much credit. Now that the petrodollar tap has been turned off, Putin is terrified of any real decline in standard of living. Like China, authoritarianism works on a population accustomed to it and enjoying a rapidly rising standard of living. Manufacturing brought this to China, and oil exports (and some raw materials exports) brought this to Russia.

      With the collapse in oil prices and raw materials demand, Putin is in a tough spot. His currency sucks and they've wasted a ton of money trying to defend the ruble, pissing away a lot of their foreign currency reserves in the process. The stock exchange has been closed down a number of days due to declines.

      If a bad global economy wasn't enough, the little tete-a-tete they had with Georgia made a lot of nervous investors even more nervous and they pulled a lot of resources out of Russia fearing all the usual problems that come with a nationalist thug like Putin.

      We've seen what the USSR could accomplish as a go-it-alone economy, and it wasn't enough. Having a nominally capitalist system will help, but Putin needs to stop with the saber rattling and the blind nationalism.

    4. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Bearhouse · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Authoritarian, yes, but competent at it.

      Bollocks. Competent at being authoritarian, yes, as you'd expect from a bunch of Chekists.

      Oil production (output) has fallen since the re-nationalisation by Putin and his cronies, and now that oil prices have fallen, the dependance of the Russian economy on commodity exports, and - shock - foreign investment has been revealed.

      Make no mistake, they're in big truoble just like the other major world economies.

    5. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Beware of geeks bearing gifts.

      Fixed that for you.

    6. Re:And Michael Looked Back by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Make no mistake, they're in big truoble just like the other major world economies.

      If this state is shared with the other large economies, it would fail to support your argument that the Russian government is not in fact reasonably competent. Other than that I would have to infer that you are claiming that all governments are incompetent. While I appreciate that this is a popular position for the Norquist/Libeterian crowd, I do not agree.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    7. Re:And Michael Looked Back by ibsteve2u · · Score: 2, Informative

      With the collapse in oil prices and raw materials demand, Putin is in a tough spot.

      Not quite as tough a spot as those European nations who are dependent upon Russia's natural gas, I don't think.

      --
      Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
    8. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Arthur+B. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If price fell, it's good management to cut down production.

      At least the Russian government is smart enough to steal money making industries as opposed to the US which bails out money losing businesses.

      --
      \u262D = \u5350
    9. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Jabbrwokk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not just nationalism. It's hubris. That has been a part of Russia's collective psyche for at least the past 100 years. They're not going to let anyone tell them what to do, and they balk at receiving help from anyone - it's a sign of weakness. They have a strong "us and them" mentality which has not faded away one bit since the end of Communism.

      I can't really fault Russians or Putin for that, other countries are loud and proud of themselves and can also be a bit protectionist from time to time. But in Putin's case, it could be incredibly self-destructive, although I would bet that his people will support him even if it means economic disaster.

      I'll probably get modded troll for that second paragraph, but just remember, in post-Soviet Russia, troll mods YOU.

    10. Re:And Michael Looked Back by jgalun · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If the advice of foreign consultants was so bad - why has it worked fine for the other members of the Eastern bloc? If the fault is of the foreigners coming up telling Russia what to do, then how did Poland end up democratic and prosperous while Russia is autocratic and at the whim of oil/gas prices?

    11. Re:And Michael Looked Back by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "Like China, authoritarianism works on a population accustomed to it and enjoying a rapidly rising standard of living."

      This is surely incorrect. The USSR functioned for almost seven decades. The people of the Ukraine clearly had a falling standard of living as Stalin starved them but failed to successfully revolt or change the system. Likewise in China, the cultural revolution was not something associated with a huge rise in living standards but Communism survived. Or the Castros in Cuba after the fall of the USSR and resultant drop in subsidy. Or Afghanistan moving from Soviet subsidy to Taliban control. Or the long reign of Pinochet in Chile. Or, indeed, the continued existence of Zimbabwe as a state.

      I would suggest that authoritarianism does not require a rise in living standards to keep on going, and indeed I would suggest that a perception of danger and mass insecurity in the face of either economic or military threat is what often creates it in hard times. If you are American you have surely just lived through a period where the political utility of the perceptual emergency was clear.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    12. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I appreciate that this is a popular position for the Norquist/Libeterian crowd, I do not agree.

      Well, never though of myself as a Libertarian...
      To clarify my thoughts; well, all G7 Govs. seem to have dropped the economic ball - in some way or another - in recent times, so we may, I suggest, reasonably claim that they're all incompetent in that regard.

      Let's turn to the main point, to whit Putin. He has ruthlessly and systematically concentrated power just as much as any Tzar, (to be fair, so have others - think Burlusconi, Chavez...) I suggest it is therefore reasonable to assign the current condition of the Russian economy and state pretty much to him.

      Now, do you seriously suggest that those two things are in good shape? Major western economies are in the toilet, for sure, but on all other criteria (democracy, corruption, life expectancy...) we're way ahead. My concern is that the signs are not good for progress in Rusia on ANY front.

    13. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Bearhouse · · Score: 4, Informative

      They did not cut production. During 2008, a time of record high oil prices, in case you have forgotten, production fell by nearly 1%.

      Historically, major increases in production had been achieved with the investment and expertise of western companies, working with Russian (OK kleptocratic) private organisations.

      Putin then threw them all out / locked 'em all up. (By the way, where the money goes now is fairly obscure...Gazprom, for example, has subsidiaries in such oil-rich nations as the Caymen Islands, Cyprus...)

      Surprise, surprise, production then fell. Was not reduced, just damn fell. Reminds me of, well, Venezuela, for example?
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/3183417/Venezuelas-oil-output-slumps-under-Hugo-Chavez.html

    14. Re:And Michael Looked Back by eln · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed. Capitalism is the system that requires a steadily rising standard of living to survive. Authoritarian states are created and thrive when standards of living are low.

      In fact, if a Capitalist states endures a falling standard of living for long enough, it will often end up being replaced by force with an authoritarian controlled economy.

    15. Re:And Michael Looked Back by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Let's turn to the main point, to whit Putin. He has ruthlessly and systematically concentrated power just as much as any Tzar, (to be fair, so have others - think Burlusconi, Chavez...) I suggest it is therefore reasonable to assign the current condition of the Russian economy and state pretty much to him.

      Now, do you seriously suggest that those two things are in good shape? Major western economies are in the toilet, for sure, but on all other criteria (democracy, corruption, life expectancy...) we're way ahead. My concern is that the signs are not good for progress in Rusia on ANY front.

      I would agree that the West is indeed ahead on all fronts (including economically, in fact) but it is important to bear in mind the legacy that Putin came into power with. It is not entirely propaganda that makes people compare him positively to Yeltsin, I would say. The Russian body politic looks at Putin and compares him to Gorbachev's dismantling of the USSR and Yeltsin's disposal of the assets of the state for pennies on the dollar and loss of societal control. It is therefore not surprising that a program of controlling the oligarchs and bringing them under Kremlin control is popular. The Russian economy was starting to diversify, but was indeed focussed in energy. I think it is however fair to say that the economy did better under Putin than under any Russian leadership for at least a generation.

      In terms of democracy, it is of course going backwards. I am however not entirely sure that's not what Russians as a body politic (which is very different from the urban intelligentsia) actually wants. It's a problem. I would also say that in a country where Stalin almost won a greatest Russian poll (while being Georgian, oddly enough) Putin's centralisation of power is not only not as big as any Tzar's but actually quite restrained. The rule of Stalin was essentially that of a Communist Tzar, and he killed millions.

      The counterargument is that Putin's air force almost bombed me in Gori, Georgia. I was however mildly amused by this.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    16. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      Beware of geeks bare in gifs?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      Putin is actually also correct to be worried. The 90s was full of foreign consultants coming over to Moscow and giving unbelievably bad advice that lead to premature loosening of all controls and a kleptocratic oligarchy shortly after that.

      I guess that is cause for him to worry. After all, the only person allowed to be kleptocratic oligarch is him!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Quite. I can see why Putin's nationalist bluster about not needing the outside world might appeal to Joe Vodkabottle types in the sticks in Russia, but I'm surprised it appeals here on /.

      If an American President had said it, you'd be mocking him.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    19. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      if a Capitalist states endures a falling standard of living for long enough, it will often end up being replaced by force with an authoritarian controlled economy.

      You mean when shove comes to Putch?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    20. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually I think China and Russia have always been authoritarian apart from a few brief interregnums. Like the joke about women who date nice guys only when they are 'between bastards', China and Russia only have reformist governments when they are between tyrants. Typically those reformist governments collapse under attack from multiple would be tyrants. One tyrant wins and things go back to normal.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    21. Re:And Michael Looked Back by 0xABADC0DA · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not just nationalism. It's hubris. That has been a part of Russia's collective psyche for at least the past 100 years. They're not going to let anyone tell them what to do, and they balk at receiving help from anyone - it's a sign of weakness.

      Russians are Klingons. They are belligerent and drunk all the time, use brute force whenever possible, would rather die that surrender. Yet somehow they are a spacefaring society that always ends up saving the day with their cargo ships and scrapped together heaps. It defies logic.

    22. Re:And Michael Looked Back by quarterbuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We've seen what the USSR could accomplish as a go-it-alone economy, and it wasn't enough. Having a nominally capitalist system will help, but Putin needs to stop with the saber rattling and the blind nationalism.
      We have so far seen what a large communist economy can accomplish in USSR. We have seen what a minimally capitalist Russia can do. But from the way Putin has been moving, he is not planning to stop there. It seems like he wants to be a monopoly player in any sector Russia has the power to do it. He is playing a game of chess with eastern Europe as his chessboard when it comes to oil pipelines. Attacking Georgia was a case of sacrificing a pawn to make a move on the queen - The BTC pipeline is the pipeline that will break Russia's monopoly on gas and Russia just made a move on it.
      The same thing goes for any natural resources, Aluminium to Manganese -- Russia lets the oligarchs consolidate the industry with no regards to monopoly issues and at the last minute captures them back from them (or gets enough power to control the exports). You can't fault Russia for lack of extreme capitalism.
      That said, it works for natural resources, but lack of protection for entrepreneurs has been a disaster in all other fields. Their productivity is actually falling in most sectors and they have been able to export limited number of branded products. If I were Putin, I would have asked for help in developing entrepreneurial culture,

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    23. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Pollardito · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would suggest that authoritarianism does not require a rise in living standards to keep on going, and indeed I would suggest that a perception of danger and mass insecurity in the face of either economic or military threat is what often creates it in hard times. If you are American you have surely just lived through a period where the political utility of the perceptual emergency was clear.

      military threats and economic threats are pretty different. military threats are generally external and so they don't seem to always damage the regime that's in power, but economic threats generally are perceived to be due to an internal problem and so people want a change to rectify that problem. Right now Putin is trying to emphasize that he thinks that the economic problem was caused by the US and not their own system, so that he can avoid just that problem.

    24. Re:And Michael Looked Back by AlXtreme · · Score: 2, Interesting

      how did Poland end up democratic and prosperous while Russia is autocratic and at the whim of oil/gas prices?

      Naomi Klein answers (among others) this question in The Shock Doctrine. The Poles are where they are despite the 'foreign consultants' and have had a very rough time.

      An excerpt from a NY Times review:

      Even the shock of 9/11, she said in an interview, was "harnessed by leaders to end the discussion of global justice."

      Nor are democratic governments exempt. Solidarity in Poland in 1989, she writes, was forced to reverse positions on which it was elected -- i.e., backing worker cooperatives -- and impose a state of emergency after being strong-armed by the I.M.F. and other lenders that refused to extend aid and credit unless Poland adopted a radical free-market program.

      "We did not lose the battle of ideas," Ms. Klein likes to say. Alternatives to the free market were "crushed by army tanks and think tanks."

      I highly recommend Shock Doctrine, a good antidote against Friedmannism. She makes some comparisons I feel uneasy about, but overall a worthwhile read.

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    25. Re:And Michael Looked Back by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nein. Sie haben das nicht gemacht.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. The Cold War Called ... by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We don't need help. We are not invalids. We don't have limited mental capacity. Our programmers are some of the best in the world. No one would contest that here -- not even our Indian colleagues."

    Failure to address the real issues (corruption, economy, etc) plaguing your society? Check.

    Playing up a sense of extreme national pride, isolation and bullheadedness? Double check.

    Burning a bridge? Triple check.

    Putin, you would have made a fine leader during the Cold War for either side.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:The Cold War Called ... by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not going back far enough. The Russian fear of being perceived as backass country folk goes all the way back to the Tsars. Russia really wanted to be counted among European nobility, but could never really cut it, so they are hyper-sensitive to anything indicating that they are not up-to-date/cutting edge. AFAIK, "nekulturny" (literally, uncultured) is still the highest insult you can throw at a Russian.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:The Cold War Called ... by X.25 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Failure to address the real issues (corruption, economy, etc) plaguing your society? Check.

      Playing up a sense of extreme national pride, isolation and bullheadedness? Double check.

      Burning a bridge? Triple check.

      Putin, you would have made a fine leader during the Cold War for either side.

      I'm sorry - what country are you talking about, because quite few fit into this profile.

    3. Re:The Cold War Called ... by freedomseven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cheap shots at Bush are tired and old. The guy was a bad president. We get it. The thing that you need to worry about is the God like persona that the media is painting Obama with. He may wind up being a good or even a great president, but no one is going to be able to live up to the hype that is being heaped upon him.

    4. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...the highest insult you can throw at a Russian.

      Not a shoe?

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    5. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Chabo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Speaking of God-like personae...

      He Must Be Like Putin

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    6. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I couldn't have said it better. Bush is gone, now everyone please shut up and move on.

    7. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bush is gone...

      But his mess isn't.

    8. Re:The Cold War Called ... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sounded like a clumsy translation more than anything... that translator is working on the fly in a literal word-for-word sense. Get a spin-meister on the transcript and you'll get something out like "Thank you for your generous offer Mr. Dell, however, Russia is a proud and self-sufficient nation who can provide for her own IT needs."

    9. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Spatial · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's an unreasonable expectation. If you fuck up for eight years in a row, you don't simply stop hearing about it a few weeks after you begin to stop.

    10. Re:The Cold War Called ... by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, those annoying conservative types and their spending. What we need are some good liberals in Congress and the White House to cut spending. Especially in times of recession. Prime example of cutting spending, of course, is the current Democrat-formed stimulus bill!

      Sarcasm aside, if you look at past recessions (even CNN did this), Reagan's presidency/Congress got the US out of a recession that apparently Carter put us into. Reagan did spend, but certainly not like FDR spent. It seems that most liberals/democrats (I realize there is a different, but they tend to go together in practice) like FDR's version better - spend more, bigger government. Cutting taxes always seems to bring the outcry of "But the government doesn't have enough income to CUT taxes!" ... but then they want to spend MORE.

      Obama is different, one might say? Well, he doesn't seem particularly interested in cutting spending, so far. He's trying to get Republican/Conservative support on basically a spending bill (the "stimulus" plan). I haven't seen him pushing democrats to cut spending yet. And I haven't heard any reform of the programs yet, either. Just more money. Wonder where the money will come from.

      Great way to get the US out of a recession is to go further into debt. Yay.

      And by the way, Clinton economics led TO a recession, not out of a recession. Recessions don't happen overnight, as seen with this one. Am I defending Bush II? Not exactly, although we DID get out of the recession that occurred right after Clinton's presidency (dot-com bubble bursting). But one also happened at the end of Bush II, and IMO he was far too spendy. But if he, a republican, was spending too much, I can't imagine what we're in for now.

    11. Re:The Cold War Called ... by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Reagan's great innovation was figuring out that if you fill people's pockets, they love you for it, even if the money is just a loan taken out in their name.

      Last night npr had a story about Obama's huge stimulus plan being the first real test of Keynesianism, and how conservatives (they quoted somebody from the Cato Institute) hated it.

      I thought, Huh? It was Reagan who ushered in the modern era of huge government spending to juice the economy. Both Bushes did it too, with Jr taking it to new heights.

      The main difference I see with Obama is that less of the money will go to the military-industrial complex and tax cuts for the rich, and more into infrastructure and services that benefit greater number of people. I think that's potentially good, but doesn't change the fact that the federal budget deficit is downright terrifying and unsustainable.

      As for Reagan breaking up the Soviet Union, give me a break. Communism never works, with or without Reagan. It was Clinton who was smart enough to reap the peace dividend by closing bases and bring a govt. surplus, which Reagan never would have done.

    12. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean like all the Republicans "moved on" after Clinton left office? Because we sure didn't hear anything about that guy after he wasn't acting president anymore...

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    13. Re:The Cold War Called ... by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Obama is that less of the money will go to the military-industrial complex and tax cuts for the rich, and more into infrastructure and services that benefit greater number of people. I think that's potentially good, but doesn't change the fact that the federal budget deficit is downright terrifying and unsustainable.

      I have no argument that Bush (and both GOP/Democrat congresses) spent way too much, but the current "Stimulus/Recovery/Whatever-the-hell" bill is good money after bad. A significant portion of the money goes into Medicaid, Medicare, and "state-aid".

      Cover state budget holes, and state legislatures will spend the money on something else. Meanwhile, the federal budget gets a new, higher, $1 trillion dollar deficit a year floor.

      You want Keynesian Stimulus? Spend $200-400 billion on infrastructure. You want Reagan Stimulus? Spend $200-400 on infrastructure, and another $200-400 on pro-business tax cuts.

      The current bill is neither of those things, pays a small amount towards national 'capital' assets, and borrows a vast amount of money to fill structural holes in state budgets.

      *shrug*

      I don't think you can stimulate the economy, or fix long-term structural budgetary problems, by kicking funding for schools, healthcare, and other transfer payments down the road 2 years (which is *exactly* what this bill does). So; Pell Grants get $20 billion for 2009-2010? What about 2011? Not only does the shortfall get bigger, but then we have to cope with the additional interest on the borrowed money to fill today's budgetary hole.

      I'm all for targeted tax cuts that increase future tax revenue (capital gains taxes). I'm all for infrastructure funding that either reduces future budgetary needs (energy efficiency can do that), or increases economic activity (better ports, internet, and highways ->more business->bigger tax base).

      But if we spend/borrow $1 trillion, and don't get a significant amount of long term growth out of it, we're just digging a deeper hole, and that's exactly what the big O is planning to do.

      I've told other people, and I'll post it on Slashdot, for which I'll get ridiculed. Unless there are some dramatic sunset provisions in this bill, or the economy starts magically growing at 4-5% a year, people will remember the days of Bush as "The Good Old Days", when budget deficits were no more than a few hundred billion, and the national debt was under $20 trillion. When spending $600 billion on a war over 5 years was considered profligate waste.

      We've pole-vaulted over the $1 trillion dollar per-year deficit level, and we don't even have anything cool to show for it (like, I dunno, space factors, a city on the moon, or Nuclear Fusion).

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    14. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Perf · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's an unreasonable expectation. If you fuck up for eight years in a row, you don't simply stop hearing about it a few weeks after you begin to stop.

      You talking about 'W' or Clinton? ;-)
      (You DID mention the 'F' word.)

    15. Re:The Cold War Called ... by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "In that case Russia should just join the EU like everyone else is doing. Then they can truly consider themselves "european" in not just name, but also fact. An EU extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific would make the U.S. shake in fear, and at last Europeans could restore their colonial-style hegemony over the entire world."

      Ahh, but now you bring up the second Russian socio-political hangup from Tsarist times - fear of being invaded, of having their territory taken away, of being manipulated. they have good reason, as well - they HAVE been invaded a number of times, and it cost them dearly. But it's become a blockade to better relations - they see ALL interaction with the West as potential to lose something - territory, prestige, resources.

      I saw a map by a Russian political thinker which shows the US split into 4 regions, with Canada taking the North Central states, Mexico taking South Central over to Florida, China taking the West Coast, and the EU taking the East Coast. The map was wholly preposterous (can you imagine SC and NY in a voluntary political union?), until you looked at the cultural background of the author. The Russian's greatest fear is being invaded by outsiders and parceled up. So they projected that onto the US, looking at the States as territory and not individual political entities.

      Besides which, I already know how it will go after the USA falls apart: the New England states will form the nation of...New England; NY will go their own way, California will split into 3, and the Confederacy will rise again.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    16. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Cyberax · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, you're wrong (I'm Russian, BTW).

      Russians are not very hypersensitive about _everything_. Only about things in which Russia was the best :)

      All engineers here realize that USSR was far behind in electronics/computing - "Soviet microcomputers are the biggest microcomputers in the world!"

    17. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem is that their culture and everything else is diametrically backwards from the rest of the western world. Someone reading Russian literature will notice the extreme difference from western, same with lots of other things. a couple of my Russian friends were able to crack the encryption on a Home automation systems software encryption in literally minutes. It would have taken me days to do it. They try to explain it to me but you have to "think Russian", as they put it to me, to understand it.

      Backwards and different is not a bad thing, I think it's a great thing... But their desire to be "like us" is nuts. Be yourself instead.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:The Cold War Called ... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

      the federal budget deficit is downright terrifying and unsustainable.

      Unsustainable, yes, but at the current interest rate they are paying, they'd be silly NOT to borrow. Now, that is all starting to change... yesterday they had to pay out more interest than expected to sell some 5-year treasuries. I expect that this will only get worse, so borrowing is about to get expensive.

      As for Reagan breaking up the Soviet Union, give me a break. Communism never works, with or without Reagan. It was Clinton who was smart enough to reap the peace dividend by closing bases and bring a govt. surplus, which Reagan never would have done.

      It's about being the right guy at the right time in history. Clinton NEVER would have won the election in 1980... and I doubt Governor Reagan would have won post-Cold War. Reagan almost certainly hastened the fall of the USSR, even if a fall was inevitable in the end. Also, Bush the first started reaping the peace dividends... Clinton carried this on. Bush I inherited about $480 billion (in constant dollars) and left Clinton with about $400 billion, so he knocked off about 16%. Clinton inherited the $400 billion and left with $345 billion, so he brought it down another 14% but in 8 years. Granted he had to deal with Republicans and a blowjob (in that order) the last couple of years, but you still have to give Bush I some credit.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    19. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 2, Funny

      A shoe is the *furthest* insult you can throw. But we're looking for *highest* for this particular trivia question.

    20. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Ninnle+Linux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, those annoying conservative types and their spending.

      Are you saying this in complete ignorance of the fact that during the Reagan, Bush I and II administrations that the most national debt was piled on?

    21. Re:The Cold War Called ... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      AFAIK, "nekulturny" (literally, uncultured) is still the highest insult you can throw at a Russian.

      I see that you've read Heinlein. However, that particular thing that he wrote wasn't true then, much less now.

      Depending on the social class, the highest insult you can throw at a Russian is probably either "intelligent" (as in belonging to intelligentsia) when directed by a prole against someone he perceives as a smartass, or "bydlo" (this is a Polish loanword that literally means "cattle", and figuratively someone who lives to eat and copulate, and nothing above that) when it is the other way around.

    22. Re:The Cold War Called ... by wbren · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...the highest insult you can throw at a Russian.

      Not a shoe?

      Not a chair?

      Oh right, this is Dell, not Microsoft.

      --
      -William Brendel
    23. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Ninnle+Linux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And if you think I'm making this up, just look at this graph: http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt_files/image002.jpg

      Notice the very different slopes between the last 3 republican presidential administration and Clinton's. Reagan almost tripled the national debt, Bush I made it go up almost 50% to it and then good ole Baby Bush made it go up almost 80%. Damn that tax and spend "liberal", Bill Clinton, and his not piling on to the national debt as much as those "fiscally responsible" conservative presidents!

    24. Re:The Cold War Called ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly! Everything in history is the fault of the DemocRAT party.

      It's not as if $7.5T of the $10.5T debt was run up under Republican presidents. It's not like $5T was run up under Bush while his party had control of the House, Senate, Supreme Court, and Federal courts. It was the LIEberals!

      It's all the fault of TAX and SPEND Democrats who.. uh.. had a surplus when they were last in office? Uh. No it HAS to be Clinton's fault, otherwise there might be some flaw in my world view. That's impossible, because I'm a Conservative!

      Er, yeah. Clinton fucked a chubby intern. That's what caused this mess. If he hadn't done that, Alan Greenspan would never have left interest rates criminally low for too long. In 2004, the SEC would never have raised the leverage limit from 12:1 to 30:1 (making a 3% decline in asset values wipe our your company).

      And whatever wasn't the fault of Clinton was CARTER's fault. That damn CRA, which passed in 1977. It broke the economy 30 years later because it forced the GSEs to make loans to black people (a.k.a. the lazy poor who are only poor because they are irresponsible and they drive Cadillacs and have cable TV that they buy with their welfare checks which they don't deserve) even though the mess extends far beyond subprime mortgages and that private, non-GSE mortgages account for 3/4 of the problem. It's the fault of Clinton, Carter, Fannie, and Freddie. All LIEberals.

      (I'm not racist. My church once had a black guy in it. I just think all black people are lazy. But that's not racism. Read the "Bell Curve", a fine scholarly work.)

      And, anyway, Bush's tax cuts worked as promised. His tax cuts created the same number of jobs in eight years as Clinton created in thirteen months! They are why we located all those WMDs and why the fundamentals of our economy are strong. It was TOO MUCH REGULATION that caused the problems that are purely psychological. There's no problem with the economy, except for all the problems with it, which are ONLY the fault of DemocRATs.

      Also, the media is liberal. Like Joe Scarborough. I mean, it's not like liberal MSNBC would put a Conservative congressman on TV for three hours a day. (Shout out to Lori Klausutis!)

      Yup. I can't believe how quickly the LIEberals on Slashdot forget the details of history.

      I'm a small government, free market Conservative who wants Sarah Palin to be Dictator for Life. She gives me star-bursts in my pants.

      --

      Did I get that right? I think that's the current Conservative orthodoxy. It's certainly got all the wonderfully truthy proclamations I've heard from Conservatives THIS FUCKING WEEK.

  4. Real World Experience by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Our programmers are some of the best in the world,"

    Of course - after all, those viruses don't program themselves, now do they?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:Real World Experience by hardburn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. Most of the best Russian programmers are currently either making botnets or breaking DRM. During the late stages of the Cold War, they spent most of their time buying or stealing code from the West. A fact that the CIA once exploited to cause one of the largest non-nuclear man made explosions.

      While you might like the DRM breakers, nothing here is much to get excited about.

      --
      Not a typewriter
  5. Prideful Putin ? by OrangeTide · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pride goeth before a fall.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:Prideful Putin ? by Lux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He's got a point. Building computers is simply not a terrifically difficult business.

      I was in St. Petersburg (Putin's hometown) a few months ago visiting in-laws, and I helped them pick out their first computer from a local vendor. What they got was a pretty nice machine for the money. The selection was good. A fine consumer experience, overall.

      Do they need a foreign corporation in that market locally? Would they benefit immensely from that? Not really.

  6. dude, by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    you're getting a polonium 210!

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  7. Russian Computing by LaminatorX · · Score: 4, Funny

    Our botnets span the globe! Our shadowy hosting providers are without peer! Our ability to ddos former republics who move monuments is second to none...

  8. "Best" by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Our programmers are some of the best in the world

    Yes. Just look at how they dominate the malware industry. And nobody is better at herding bots.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:"Best" by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Just look at how they dominate the malware industry. And nobody is better at herding bots.

      That is one good example. They have lots of skilled people in a hellhole economy. And sending hard currency they don't have (mostly because of corrupt politicians like Putin it must be said) to buy stuff they could do themselves with labor so underutilized they accept the low returns of the malware industry out of desperation is do dumb even Putin gets it.

      And I can totally understand why they wouldn't want a Dell. If they want Chinese made crap they have China's number, why would they want to cut the US in on the action just to get a Dell sticker on the box?

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    2. Re:"Best" by SpinyNorman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Eastern european programmers do tend to dominate things like the Top Coder and Google Code Jam competitions (although a Chinese guy won the latter last year), so there's certainly plenty of talent there. Let's not also forget that they've got things like the unmanned Progress ISS supply ship that we're totally dependent on - something that neither the US, Europe nor anywhere else has to offer.

    3. Re:"Best" by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Short answer: You have no idea what you are talking about.

      Long answer:

      Dunno about Progress, or the Soyuz for that matter, being low performance... They are dependable workhorses that do the job 10x cheaper and more reliably than the Shuttle.

      Performance is independent of reliability or cost. And though Soyuz and Progress may be cheaper per launch - when you compare the costs of the multiple launches required to replace a single Shuttle flight, all the sudden they aren't a bargain anymore. The last numbers I saw indicated it would take nearly 18 launches of Soyuz and Progress to partially replace a single Shuttle flight. I say partially because Soyuz/Progress cannot support spacewalks, cannot return cargo/tools/handling equipment, and cannot deliver equipment much larger than a medium sized suitcase.
       
      You want to compare Soyuz and Shuttle reliability? Let's do, let's compare 95 odd Soyuz flights to 120 odd Shuttle flights...
       
      Fatal Accidents

      • Soyuz - 2, Shuttle - 2

      Non fatal accidents

      • LOM (loss of mission) caused by booster failure. Soyuz-2 (booster fire on pad, failure of the 2nd stage to separate), Shuttle-0
      • LOM accidents caused by spacecraft failure. Soyuz-3 (all unable to dock before batteries exhausted), Shuttle-0.
      • Partial LOM accidents. Soyuz-0, Shuttle-1 (Shuttle executed ATO resulting in an orbit too low for some tasks, mission completed otherwise normally and approximately 75% of the affected tasks were later reflown - which Soyuz cannot do at all.)
      • Significant (life threatening) on orbit failures. Soyuz-1 (jettisoned orbital module, which contains virtually all life support, and then subsequently was unable to reenter on schedule but reentered before life support was completely exhausted), Shuttle-0
      • Significant (life threatening) reentry accidents Soyuz-2 (both a failure of the service module to seperate on schedule resulting in a nose reentry until the service module burned away, one of these on the most recent flight!), Shuttle-0
      • Landing accidents (life threatening) Soyuz-3 (landed on a frozen lake and ended up submerged under the ice, bounced down a mountainside ending up just inches from a drop off, landed off target in subzero weather), Shuttle-0
      • Significant but non life threatening landing accidents. Soyuz-7 (all off target high G reentries, four of these in the last eight years, all four cause by complete computer failure), Shuttle-0

      It's not a pretty picture - and it gets worse when you consider the Progress collision with MIR, something Shuttle has never done...
       
      Ares will have to be a poor performer indeed to even approach the Soyuz record.
       
       

      Your notion of Progress being obsolete, but European or US alternatesd being better is a bunch of crap.

      I didn't say it was currently obsolete, I said it will be obsolete. Currently it is obsolescent.
       
       

      For a start the Eupoean ATV's most critical component, the docking procedure, is based on the Soviet design

      So what? That doesn't change the fact that ATV's performance (cargo capacity) is far higher.
       
       

      more importantly Progress does the job reliably.

      Being reliable doesn't mean it isn't obsolescent and approaching obsolescence.
       
       

      The US seems incapable of utilizing the incremental improvement approach of the Japanese or Russia - it's always a matter of redesigning from scratch every time

      Care to cite a Japanese spacecraft design exhibiting this characteristic? Meanwhile, we can discuss how Soyuz has steadily lost capability in its evolution from general purpose orbiter to hyper specialized space station taxi. Then there is Progress, which has made some progress. Then there is Shuttle - which has new computers, a new flight control system, a new display system, new solid rocket motors, new SSME's (increasing thrust), a new external tank that increases payload to orbit by many tons.

  9. Re:Look out Mike! by AioKits · · Score: 2, Funny

    He's almost to the point of provoking pretentious Polonium Putin!

    --
    "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
  10. It was a very mild rebuke by MykePagan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did anyone actually watch the clip? It appeared to me that Putin gave a very mild rebuke to Dell, and then went on to do just as much marketing of Russian IT :-) It was not a big "F-You Dell, F-you The West" like the headlines imply.

    1. Re:It was a very mild rebuke by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it was more like "when are you going to start treating us as equals?"

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:It was a very mild rebuke by internetizen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yes, it was more sensationalist and selective reading. It was more a bad simultaneous translation, as many Russians are noting. Plus it was not about Dell per se, it was "the IT sector" in general. see http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/36591

    3. Re:It was a very mild rebuke by Darth+Cider · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, it seemed mild to me too, so I transcribed TFV, in the interests of honesty and fairness. (I'm not a sympathizer of any sort!)

      Here's the transcript:

      People with limited capacities should be helped. Pensioners should be helped. Developing countries should be helped. And help must not only be simply in the form of giving the money, perpetuating the circle of poverty. Why negotiations at the WTO (?) are at an impasse? Because rich countries cannot meet the needs of the developing economies...let's be frank about it and open... One must look for a compromise, speaking of Russia and our partners in Europe, our partners in Europe and the United States and Indonesia... one needs fully fledged equal partnership. In many respects, our economies are complementary. Indeed, we've managed to achieve a lot in developing informatization, as we say of our society. A few years ago, imagine a village in Siberia with a computer system and internet access. We did it. We made it. We have a government program for that. In every school, I stress, every Russian school has both computer rooms and internet access. In the Far East, in the Far North, everywhere. This movement of IT in the society will continue as dictated by both the development of economy and society... No one would ever think of doubting opportunities of information offered by (the) internet as an open source for information and for opinion sharing. You may like something, you may not like something. But complete freedom is the word here. Speaking of the intentions of the State, we have a program, a federal program - it is called Electronic Russia. We intend to continue this individual program in cooperation with our partners, and it is great pleasure that we will accept, as we have done before, investments into this sector and will continue developing our own products and presenting them to the global market. Many companies of Russia are major operators of the cellular services in a number of the developed economies of the world and we will continue facilitating such experts in the future. We have quite a few coinciding interests in these and in this area of course we will find a few more. Many companies (I will not name them) work in these areas. Of course, it doesn't only deal with hardware, as they say, but also and most importantly with intellectual products, the software, Here we have a few things to offer to the market, and I am grateful to you for this allusion. Traditionally, we have a very strong school of mathematics in Russia, and our programmers are among the best in the world, no doubt about it, and nobody would contest it here, even our Indian colleagues. I would say, let's do [with] the job. Thank you.

  11. Nice slap down by MisterSquirrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Putin's defense, he was slapping down a marketing pitch. The linked article gets it wrong on a subtle but significant detail: Mr. Dell didn't ask "If" Dell could help, he asked "How" Dell could help.

    Who can blame Putin for being offended by the implication that Russia needed Mr. Dell's help? So he let him have it with both barrels, much as any of us might react to an unwanted and annoying telemarketer, if they gave us a similarly arrogant pitch.

    And by the way, shouldn't the lame jokes be changed to start with "In post-Soviet Russia"?

    1. Re:Nice slap down by Greg_D · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a huge difference between declining assistance and going off on a childish diatribe because a businessman offered his services to you. Putin seems to be playing up to the state-owned press in Russia which lionizes everything he does.

    2. Re:Nice slap down by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Possibly, but I'd direct you to Robert Heinlein's essays on how to deal with Russians and the Russian system, "Pravda Means Truth" and "Inside Intourist", both in Expanded Universe. These were written based on personal experience travelling inside Russia, with his wife learning Russian fluently enough to talk to people there without needing a translator. They provide quite a bit of insight into why Putin reacts the way he does.

  12. Re:Programmers? by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Swell.

    Your understanding of the situation reminds me of Bush looking at his polls.

    Putin, not big on technology, took Dell's question as an insult, and retorted with a prideful display. Nothing more than that.

    Chances of Dell selling much into Russia? Poorer-- although it would be a great counter-culture way to insult Putin. For that alone, an offset may have been made so as to prevent Dell from having to file an 8K (for downward trend warning due to sales-geek faux pas).

    Don't go in to politics.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  13. Dell needs a class in international business by MoellerPlesset2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not that I agree with him, but I understand Putin's response. Look at it from Putin's POV: Putin is a very strong nationalist. And just about every country, not least Russia, tends to be quite sensitive to American condescension or arrogance, real or perceived. So when Dell says, in what would be an okay-ish remark between Americans, 'how can we help you', it's easily felt as condescending in foreign eyes. Especially Russian ones and especially Putin's. Add to that the cultural factor of Russian temperament and you get what Putin said. Dell probably should have phrased it in a more neutral manner. For instance, he could have been more generalized and simply ask "How can the IT sector in Russia be expanded to better utilize the reserves of talent there?" Or something similar. By his response, you'll find out if there's a role for you or not. So simply by dropping the 'How can we help' bit, you avoid the implication that they _need_ help (even if they do, nobody really wants to be told that by someone else) and the further implication that 'we' are the only ones who can do so.

    1. Re:Dell needs a class in international business by MoellerPlesset2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In other words: Do a better job of bootlicking.

      Bzzzt! Wrong attitude. Unless your objective is to get into a pointless argument or pissing contest.
      Taking into account the opposing POV is hardly 'bootlicking', it's common sense. It also costs nothing. Arrogance OTOH, has no value. What consolation is it to you that you refused to be a 'bootlicker' in your opinion, if it means you fail to achieve your goals?

      You take into account the opposing POV to find the course of action most likely to produce the desired result. If Dell had phrased his question differently, he could have gotten the answer he was looking for. Instead, he got some useless nationalistic banter. If it'd been a business negotiation, Dell would have risked losing out on the deal, and both sides would probably lose.

      Diplomacy is not a zero-sum game, and it's not pandering or bootlicking. It's the dignified art of getting stuff done without getting sidetracked into pointless discussions. Saying 'my way or the highway' does not tend to get things done, and does not make someone a good leader, if that's what you think. Because leaders, pretty much by definition, are people who get things done.

  14. Summary is a bit off by SpinyNorman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Putin wasn't reacting to Dell offering computers so much as Dell suggesting that Russia had a problem with technical talent that needed addressing, which *is* obviously absurd! Even if Russia did have a problem developing IT talent, the solution isn't a big order of Dell computers, even if Dell honestly thinks it is.

  15. TopCoder by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    According to the TopCoder algorithm competition stats:

    1 Russian Federation 2930.06
    2 China 2843.33
    3 Poland 2842.79
    4 Ukraine 2557.06
    5 Japan 2483.83
    6 Canada 2426.56
    7 United States 2320.98
    8 Slovakia 2291.73
    9 South Korea 2226.98
    10 Belarus 2206.81

    Let's just hope the next war isn't fought with robots.

    1. Re:TopCoder by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

      Any reason why the results are like that? I'm curious on why eastern europeans do so well. Better/different education system?

      I think it's mostly strong emphasis on math and other hard sciences starting with high school, and the system of "advanced" (but still public/free) schools for bright students (you usually have to pass some fairly hard exams to get in) with even more emphasis. I've studied in two such schools in my last 4 years of school studies - we had about 8 hours of math and 4 hours of physics each week, and in the last two years math involved solving cubic and quadratic equations, dealing with derivatives, integrals and logarithms, functional analysis, stereometry (solid geometry) and so on. It helps to set the right frame of mind.'

      That said, IT & CS education in Russia is still crappy, and mostly non-existent. I've yet to see any university offering a CS course, and IT/IS ones usually involve outdated technologies and incompetent teachers. All good Russian programmers I know are entirely self-taught when it comes to programming itself - most have engineering or math degree otherwise.

    2. Re:TopCoder by gregorio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's mostly strong emphasis on math and other hard sciences starting with high school, and the system of "advanced" (but still public/free) schools for bright students (you usually have to pass some fairly hard exams to get in) with even more emphasis. I've studied in two such schools in my last 4 years of school studies - we had about 8 hours of math and 4 hours of physics each week, and in the last two years math involved solving cubic and quadratic equations, dealing with derivatives, integrals and logarithms, functional analysis, stereometry (solid geometry) and so on. It helps to set the right frame of mind.'

      That's not what I hear from friends at work who migrated from Russia to, on their words, "any country on the west that would accept me". They often told histories about how smart young people from Russia had to survive by doing "tricks" and acting "cute" to foreigners and big national companies at events such as Math/Chess/Programming competitions. A good and modern example of this situation is the malware scene.

      It's all about need. Those eastern european kids really need to win these competitions. They can't afford to be "normal" because the job market for normal people was always a great mess at Russia.

      The same kid from the west, with the same capabilities, will simply dismiss so much work just for some competition and say "ohhh, screw this, I tried". The number of kids from the west who actually need this kind of victory is extremely small and this group is mostly composed of empoverished folks and people with extremely serious issues related to socialization and self-esteem.

      Being quick and dirty: "spoiled" (that's always relative - I'm considering a eastern european view) kids won't put that much effort into this kind of event. They don't really care about being named "Top Coder" as they're living an extremely confortable life at the moment and will achieve good job positions at the future just for beinga national with a good diploma. That's why the malware scene is really weak at the US: people have better options.

      That's also bad for the west: if you were born at the US and attended a good university, you'll end up being a manager without needing much knowledge or even an IT-related graduation. That sucks because it means that our companies are being run by spoiled idiots instead of leading the race of improvement technology creation.

    3. Re:TopCoder by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's not what I hear from friends at work who migrated from Russia to, on their words, "any country on the west that would accept me"

      I am myself a Russian who migrated from Russia to "any country that would accept me" - which is Canada for now. What I told in my previous post was my personal experience, not hearsay.

      It's all about need. Those eastern european kids really need to win these competitions. They can't afford to be "normal" because the job market for normal people was always a great mess at Russia.

      That's just not true. First of all, regarding the job market - for software developers in particular, it's actually very good in Russia (or was until the crisis hit) - too few skilled people, too many opened positions. In my last 3 years of working in Moscow, I always knew that, at any given moment, I could walk out of my job and find a new one within 2 weeks. I've got salary which was several times larger than the average in the country. I've seen other people progress from junior to lead developer within 2 years because there were not enough properly experienced devs to fill all the lead positions. And that's not one particular company - that's the whole Moscow IT job market. Of course, Russia isn't just Moscow, but in practice most bright guys who can (and it doesn't take much) move to Moscow anyway because that's where the jobs are.

      As for why the kids want to win competitions... I participated in some of the local/regional Russian ones myself at school, and it wasn't about getting job offers at all. It was because taking part in one was expected of all the bright students, and because winning one could help getting into a better university later on (they're free, even the better ones, but the exams are hard, and this could help). And yes, of course, merely the feeling of being the smartest kid on the block is worth a lot - but that's only if the culture you grew up in fosters that, which it does in Russia for some kids (not all of them, not by a long shot - but I think we still do better than USA with their overemphasis on physical sports in school).

  16. Proper translation of Putin's statement... by Anonymusing · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here.

    âoeYou know, the trick is we're not someone in need of help. We're not invalids. Help is something that you should give to poor people, to people with limited capacities, to pensioners, to developing countries... As for Russia and our partners in Europe, in the United States, in some Asian countries, there should be a partnership of equals.â

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  17. Re:Programmers? by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not entirely convinced that you are 100% correct here. Recent tech spats with Russia et al include MS and piracy in Russian schools, OSS software directives, and several minor stories I seem to remember about the Russian government pulling away from outsiders. I'm pretty certain that after the cold war they have more reason to not want 'help' than any of us might imagine. My point is I don't think this is an isolated incidence of over reaction. I think it fits with an overall plan for IT infrastructure for government, as far as I can tell.

    In truth, after RefFlag Linux and some other efforts around the globe, I've been waiting for Russia et al to announce something that more or less tells Redmond to get stuffed. By way of guilt by association reasoning, if Putin and Russia manage to thumb their noses at North American software/hardware manufacturers, it's nearly certain that many others will follow suit. I suspect there are a lot of politics involved though... and that causes me curiosity.

  18. Full of shit you are, young Jedi by melted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Putin has been addressing the economy pretty darn well. There was pretty dramatic GDP growth during his tenure.

    2. While corruption is still high, it is MUCH lower than it was during Yeltsin years. Oligarchs don't open the doors in Kremlin with their foot anymore. The guy who tried to buy up enough of the parliament to pass his own laws (Khodorkovsky) is in the prison, where he will remain for a long time. Needless to say, the Russian people have much less sympathy to him that those who don't know what he's really in the prison for.

    3. It's about time Russia asserted itself internationally. For nearly a decade and a half, Russia did exactly as IMF and Washington DC told it. Needless to say, neither of the two had Russia's interests in mind.

    4. Putin was merely putting Dell in his place. Just because you got a ticket to Davos doesn't mean you're entitled to any kind of preferential treatment from the government. Dell is just "screwdriver assembly" company. There are plenty of those in Russia.

    Questions?

    1. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by ravenshrike · · Score: 4, Informative

      The amount of corruption hasn't declined in the least, rather, the competitors have all been eliminated and now the source of corruption is coming solely from the Putin faction and also the Russkie mafia. Entrepreneurial corrupt politicians not welcome.

    2. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. Putin has been addressing the economy pretty darn well. There was pretty dramatic GDP growth during his tenure.

      I'm sure $150/bbl oil had nothing to do with it.

      2. While corruption is still high, it is MUCH lower than it was during Yeltsin years. Oligarchs don't open the doors in Kremlin with their foot anymore. The guy who tried to buy up enough of the parliament to pass his own laws (Khodorkovsky) is in the prison, where he will remain for a long time.

      You have any room in that prison? There's a few US oligarchs who probably deserve a stay there.

    3. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by jgalun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1) Putin did not address the economy well. Rising commodity prices addressed the Russian economy. No structural problems were addressed, and until they are, Russia will falter every time commodity prices go down. What happened to the scientific prowess of the Soviet Union? Putin has not restored that. Russia is not a leader in any high-tech industries, despite what Putin thinks.

      3) Putin is asserting Russia's interests in a typically moronic Russian manner. That is to say, he is trying to set Russia up as a Great Power and an ideological competitor to the West. But it doesn't have the population, resources, or technology to do this, so all it is doing is spending its money wastefully on these vanity projects. I mean, take something like selling missiles to Syria. It gains Russia almost nothing (some small money in arms sales and close ties with an country that still leaves Russia without any real leverage in the Middle East), but Russia pursues it because it is a poke in the eye to America. Much of Russia's policy seems more geared towards annoying the US (to prove that Russia can do what it wants) than doing anything useful for Russia.

      Let me put it this way. In 20 years, China and India will be rich and fully integrated into the global system. Russia, which 20 years ago was far ahead of both, will likely not be. For that, Putin needs to answer.

      4) What Dell said is standard business/political talk. It's a polite way of asking, "Is there anything we can invest in that would make both of us rich?" That's why politicians go on foreign trips trying to drum up business from investors, and why countries fly their own investors overseas to meet with foreign countries to solidify relations. Even if there are no specific opportunities for Dell right now, it is incredibly stupid for Putin to respond this one. It just sends a message to foreign investors that they are not wanted in Russia (a message already sent by Putin's actions to seize foreign investments in Russia's oil). How does eliminating foreign investment help the Russian people?

    4. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2, Interesting

      3. It's about time Russia asserted itself internationally. For nearly a decade and a half, Russia did exactly as IMF and Washington DC told it. Needless to say, neither of the two had Russia's interests in mind.

      Questions?

      Yes, I have questions. Do not change the subject by talking about what America does. What I want to know from you, since you seem to think you are an expert is... How does this "reassertion" benefit non-Russians?
      Is there more to this reassertion than simply supporting noxious dictators (ie. Sudan, Cuba) and stealing territory from other countries (ie. Georgia)?
      I'm not going to deny that Russia benefited little from doing what it was told to do, mostly because President Bush was too idiotic to understand the concept of "quid pro quo", but I fail to see how this new, proud Russia is really any better than the old Soviet one, which also supported noxious dictators and stole land (end of WWII for example).

    5. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Putin has been addressing the economy pretty darn well. There was pretty dramatic GDP growth during his tenure.

      It's no coincidence that oil prices tripled during his stay in the office. Now they're back down, and we'll see how long that GDP growth will last.

      While corruption is still high, it is MUCH lower than it was during Yeltsin years. Oligarchs don't open the doors in Kremlin with their foot anymore. The guy who tried to buy up enough of the parliament to pass his own laws (Khodorkovsky) is in the prison, where he will remain for a long time. Needless to say, the Russian people have much less sympathy to him that those who don't know what he's really in the prison for.

      I won't even comment on Khodorkovsky - anyone who knows enough about the case knows that it was a case of political persecution, pure and simple. Even if you go by the official version, he was charged with tax evasion, not "buying the parliament".

      Anyway, corruption is still there and as rampant as ever - it's just that, now that the official party of power is the "party of bureaucracy", it's considered normal. Meanwhile, the number of government workers (read: bureaucrats) in Russia has grown steadily during Putin's reign, and today actually exceeds their number in the USSR, for a country which has less than 2/3rds of the population of the USSR!

      It's about time Russia asserted itself internationally ... Questions?

      Good luck doing that with demotivated, undertrained and abused conscript cannon fodder making up the bulk of the military, with military tech 20 years old (very few new developments since the collapse of the USSR, and most of those don't even leave prototype stage), and with no coherent ideology save for "We are awesome 'cause we say so, and we're gonna whine a lot if you disagree, and maybe even punch you if we think you're weak enough".

      - fellow Russian

    6. Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi by makomk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, they had scientific prowess - it just wasn't exploited all that well.

      (They also had some very good mathematicians, which is probably partly why the NSA modified the DES S-boxes to make it more secure. In fact, they still do have good mathematicians.)

  19. A failed state? by swm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia

    Lower birth rates and higher death rates reduced Russia's population at a 0.5% annual rate, or about 750,000 to 800,000 people per year during the late 1990s and most of the 2000s. The UN warned that Russia's 2005 population of about 143 million could fall by a third by 2050.

    From

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state

    State: 5 a: a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory

    If you need a body of people to be a state,
    the I'd say that Russia is on its way to failure.

    Russia - Where Russians go to die
    -- The Onion

    1. Re:A failed state? by emocomputerjock · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you're overlooking the billion plus people to the south that would gladly reallocate their people to resource ratio at the expense of the Russians.

  20. Re:It may be a misconseption on my part but... by Puchku · · Score: 5, Informative

    In India, we have thousands (literally) of kids graduating with computer engineering degrees every year. Now, the thing is, a lot of these degrees are pretty useless since the college/university that issued them is basically a money making machine, and nothing else.

    However, there are a bunch of good places that produce very good engineers. The Indian Institutes of Technology are the most well known, but there are some others that are equally good (some of the top Regional Enginnering Colleges, and so on)

    I think it boils down to numbers. Say we have 30,000 comp sci grads every year. Now say 60 percent of them are hacks who know nothing much and are only good for repetitive code work and stuff like that. 20 percent will be quite good, easily as competent as a good programmer in the US or wherever. 10 percent will be skilled at code and other stuff like management, the types who end up heading into upper management, 8 percent will be very good, and 2 percent will be fantastic.

    The 2 percent mostly heads off to MIT, or CMU, or $TOPSCHOOL to do an MS or a Phd, but that still leaves a pretty substantial number of good people.

    Now, when you realize that 30,000 is a low estimate, since the acutal figure is 175,000 (source: http://www.timesascent.co.in/index.aspx?Page=article&sectid=2&contentid=20080930200809301249051997b5b53a, and http://www.rediff.com/money/2006/jun/09bspec.htm ) you begin to see that while we do have a huge number of terrible programmers, we have a pretty good talent pool too. It's all about the numbers!

  21. Re:Obama hype by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing that you need to worry about is the God like persona that the media is painting Obama with. He may wind up being a good or even a great president, but no one is going to be able to live up to the hype that is being heaped upon him.

    Ah, in my best 3rd-grade impersonation I can muster...He started it.

    Seriously, you can blame the media up to a point, but the media didn't make over 500 campaign promises. He did. Let's see if he can merely live up to his own hype.

  22. Re:It may be a misconseption on my part but... by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've worked with a few H1-B's, and that's generally the impression I got. We had one guy who had a CS Masters from some Indian university, but after 6 months of trying, he still couldn't write a simple text processing app. At another job, we had hired a Crystal Reports 'expert' to create some reports that none of the staff had time for. For a couple of days the guy would ask how to make the numbers round down, rather than just rounding off. On the second day I took pity on him and showed him the joys of the Floor function. I had never programmed anything in CR, but I knew that there had to be a floor operator in there somewhere.

    I'm sure there are good Indian programmers. I'm also relatively certain that most of them are here on student visas, working on their grad school degrees. Those not in school most likely expect the same level of pay as their American counterparts. Never forget that you get what you pay for.

  23. and when does it become the next guy's mess? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    because I am curious.

    I would say two years in, because 9/11 wasn't Bush's mess either, he just got stuck with it.

  24. Re:Beware of geeks bearing gifts. by linzeal · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the beauty of his joke was that everyone who read it would come up with, "Geeks bearing gifts", as it was just a simple substitution of one letter and at the same time educate some of the people who do not know where the original adage comes from.

    The best textbooks are like this, in that they give you enough theory to draw your own hypothesis about a specific application. The worst textbooks give you a theory and than the author's own application of said theory.

  25. OK, so oil prices went up by junkgoof · · Score: 4, Informative

    Coincidentally oil prices went way up shortly after Bush jr was elected, and went way down after he left. In the interim Iran, Russia, and a number of other countries made out really, really well. The economic gains were very much due to oil prices and very little due to anything Putin did. Still better than Bush's economic plan that involved claiming deficit spending as a GDP increase, giving money to rich people is NOT Keynesian, making them work for it is.

    Putin has basically done a Lenin so far. He has taken power completely so he can help his friends and persecute his enemies. He has said a lot, especially about Russians being a great people and Russia being a superpower. He has not done a whole lot.

    Note: Reagan gets credit for a lot, but he was sort of all over the place as pres. Lower taxes, raise taxes, lower spending, raise spending, whatever. As for ending "communism," or, more accurately the Stalinist dictatorship (Lenin ENDED any semblance of communism in Russia, and started a totalitarian dictatorship, Stalin took over after a few years and continued for decades), it ended when Gorbachev told the East German leadership they could not shoot protesters, and if they did he would not send out the army to support them; the tyrants started picking up their gold and planning their luxurious retirements instantly.

    Oh well, at least Putin has less secret police and executions than Lenin did...

    --
    You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
  26. Bright Side by Demonantis · · Score: 3, Funny

    At least Putin wouldn't have to deal with their shitty customer support...

  27. If both do it, I prefer the one that does openly by Scrameustache · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Obama is different, one might say? Well, he doesn't seem particularly interested in cutting spending, so far. He's trying to get Republican/Conservative support on basically a spending bill (the "stimulus" plan). I haven't seen him pushing democrats to cut spending yet.

    I didn't see the republicans pushing for smaller government recently.

    There was a lot of big talk, but the government spending and debt kept getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  28. Birds of a feather? by macraig · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However arrogant and egotistical you might think Putin is, Michael Dell is worse. I thought how Putin responded was restrained by comparison to what I would have said in the same situation. The larger context illuminates just how bigoted were Dell's comments. What a putz.

    As an American socialist, Dell's attitude and values exemplify why I despise the American economic system as it is, and by extension our political system, since the same selfish arrogant egotistical bigoted putzes move freely back and forth between the two.

    1. Re:Birds of a feather? by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps you should move to Russia and put your childish rebelion to work,

      However, from what I heard in the video, the problem is more of a translation problem then an insult. Dell was simply saying we will be happy to set up shop and allow you to tap our resources because we want to sell things to you. It's obvious that the word help which when companies speak of it in the US, they usually mean provide something you want to buy, got translated in a way that questioned Russia's competence in IT. As Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in the beginning, we are not invalids, you should help them. Where in the later part of the video, he talks about using imports and partners from other countries as crutched more or less but stated their goals were to build Russia's abilities and support local development and sources.

      Now, he basically conflicts the impression of the beginning statement with an actual statement made further into the video. This tells me that Micheal Dell was a country boy in a big city where what he thought he said meant something else. In America, the sales person generally asks how can I help you with the intentions of making a sale. In this case, Russia's terminology or customs probably aren't aware of this so it came across insulting instead of just a sales pitch. The comments were not bigoted, arrogant or egotistical at all, they were just different styles that were lost in translation.

    2. Re:Birds of a feather? by macraig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Revolutions are never child's play.

      You can make whatever rationalization you like, but hard sales pitches ARE insulting. Dell's hard sales pitch was especially insulting given the context in which it was delivered.

      To any true socialist (which I doubt Putin is), Dell's comments are even more insulting. Allow me to rephrase Dell's question to be more transparent to his motives: "What goods and services can we sell you at inflated prices, so that we may unfairly enrich ourselves and our own and disadvantage you and yours?" Remember, a goal of socialism is exchanges of equal value in every transaction, as much as that is humanly possible. What Dell's offer implied was anything but philanthropic or socialistic.

      And Dell did this on a public stage at an economic forum. Putin had every reason to be insulted.

  29. All scedulers are commies by wsanders · · Score: 4, Funny

    "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" describes schedulers more accurately. Dividing the time up equally would be like .... oh, I dunno, something about a Ferrari and hot grits ...

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  30. A recession is just a reduction in credit by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and a correlated reduction in debt.

    The way to get out is to print (no, not borrow) money. Reducing the deficit, paying off the national debt, reducing personal or corporate debt will all cause a recession under the existing monetary system because it nukes the equivalent amount of credit.

    It's all fairly simple once you understand that 95% of US money is credit and realise that growth == inflation == credit and debt.
     

    --
    Deleted
  31. There are a lot of good people, but... by junkgoof · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think the difference between top schools, average schools, and poor schools in India is way more pronounced than in the US, and the US is already fairly unbalanced compared to say, the system here in Canada (OK, here Waterloo is way above the others for CS/eng, but the worst places are not too bad; in the US top tier vs State is often pretty ridiculous). I have an Indian friend who keeps going on about how great Indian schools are, but his tech knowledge is pretty feeble. From his anecdotes his classes were all memorize, regurgitate, forget, repeat. All rote, no real learning. I know some really good Indian/Pakistani/ guys, but they generally finished up their schooling in Singapore/Europe/US/Canada.

    In contrast most of the Russian people I know who were educated in Russia seriously know their stuff in various fields. It is a bit biased as in many cases there was competition to leave, so you don't see the underachievers, (sort of like how foreign exchange students tend to be likable extroverts because likeable extroverts tend to become foreign exchange students), but even so.

    1 billion Indians, 300 million Americans, 650 million literate Indians, 297 million literate Americans, and the numbers get closer as you go toward higher education. Offshoring companies tend to claim lots of stuff, but if you read the company interviews as opposed to the marketing you see "we had all these Ph.ds trying to replace part-time aspiring actors for English/writing jobs at 25% of salary and yet we failed to deliver on all our contracts; not one successful project."

    I'm not trying to knock Indians but infrastructure counts for something. And offshore companies have really had the marketing going *sigh*.

    --
    You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
  32. Re:Obama hype by Soylent+Beige · · Score: 2, Interesting

    He's off to a fair (6 and 1) start. Track it here http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

    --
    Everyone hates me because I'm paranoid.
  33. Never, ever. by jeko · · Score: 4, Funny

    Never, ever underestimate the awesome destructive power of a drunk, belligerent, brute-force-loving, pissed-off engineer...

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  34. Re:Geek girls would be ok by Repossessed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You haven't met many geek girls have you?

    --
    Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)