No, because it is highly profitable - and while that may seem like semantic quibbling, it is all the difference in the world.
Beyond that, those who profit here have two layers of insulation: First, it was made in China ("Oh, those bad, bad Chinese!", the media cooperatively wails). And secondly, since the corporation is a de facto "person" under U.S. law the individuals who make the decisions here are rarely found to be culpable/responsible; instead, the corporation picks up the tab out of small change.
Contradictorily - and presumably only because they are new to the game of capitalism - the Chinese have yet to learn that the search for profits justifies all, so when they catch a business executive pulling a stunt that harms their people, they gift said executive with that uniquely Chinese jewelry: A bullet behind the ear.
Or perhaps their government is just less corrupt than ours is.
I note that searches of Secunia, SANS.org, and CERT don't return any mention of it, which is curious given that the...alert...began spreading on or about the 3rd of December, 2009 according to a date-sorted Google search (who is Jeremy Allexon?). Said search likewise fails to turn up any sources which I would call "authoritative".
lolll...yes, indeed; same old same old. Still, I am concerned by today's right, as I hear a lot of "That isn't in the Constitution - therefore we should not be doing it!" and "This is a Republic, not a democracy!" from them.
That suggests to me that they wouldn't hesitate to abrogate the Bill of Rights in order to ensure that he who has the most property - the most wealth - dictates the way that our government is run, and who shall benefit from it.
Not a very comforting scenario, given that I am well shy of the $100 million or so in net worth that it takes to be significant among the right these days.
A lot of people like to think that "Business-with-a-capital-B" (in reality, the people behind them) has only "gone bad" of late. But the reality, as you point out, is that they have been working to undermine our Constitution and the rights and well-being of the American people for well over a century. Successfully, too, with only a few minor setbacks, most notably during the Presidencies of FDR, LBJ, and JFK.
Yet regardless of American history and the nation's current reality, too many still see the experience of "Business people" as being invaluable to the governing of our nation.
And that is true - but only if you can find a way to eliminate those who would warp government into being the tool of "Business-with-a-capital-B", which is the situation this nation has permitted itself to become entangled in.
Given the way the U.S. of A. works, I would not be surprised to see first use in the strip on people's credit cards in order to store your last 10,000 purchases. Coupled with an RFID chip, this would enable targeted advertising as you walked down the street...and voila! We have Blade Runner.
Sans exotic feminine androids, of course; we always seem to get the bad out of Sci-Fi first.
I must be the only person in the world who knows people...lots of people...who buy new computers because the lack of isolation - lack of sandboxing - between the browser app and the o/s ends up making them think the computer is worn out 'cuz it is so sloooowwwwwwwwww....servicing all of those 'bot requests, and all.
About time...I was getting the impression that the solution was going to be $20 netbooks...use one to browse the web, it gets contaminated, and you throw it away and get a new one. Not very efficient, resource-wise.
I've got moderator points to use, but this comment of yours required a more personal plaudit (besides, you were already tagged @5). I think everybody who is ever in a position where he or she has to judge a group of people and pick only one winner should consider reading it aloud at the awards ceremony.
The Highlander nature of human competitions has its drawbacks...
I had a top secret security clearance with an armful of qualifiers by the time I was 18. The intensity of the security requirements for the things that I did in no way left me prepared for what was misnamed "security" in the corporate world, but it did lead me to abruptly learn one thing: It is not smart to tell anybody who has more power or connections than you do that their laziness or ineptness poses a a security or business continuity risk.
All things - to include security - play second fiddle to office politics in corporate America.
Except, of course, in those rare instances where everybody in the executive suites has a vested interest in keeping either their competitors or the government unaware of their activities.
most western countries in the same position would do the same as would any corporate entity in the western hemisphere
Well, America wouldn't...
That is, as long as the labor costs involved with making or building whatever from whatever is artificially cheaper someplace else, then our right - our CEOs, our Wall Street boyz, our bankers (in short, our Republicans) - will happily export whatever strategic metals we have as well as the industrial infrastructure required to utilize it.
I feel quite comfortable in making that assertion, since that is precisely what they have been doing. China is well aware of their greed, and has been playing it like the proverbial fiddle.
I just hope that China is content with the prospect of the economic domination of the world, and doesn't go into the harvesting-of-land-and-wealth-with-a-bang game once they feel they have accumulated sufficient strategic metals to withstand embargo or interdiction of any further supplies for a time. A time defined, of course, by the period required to convert the technologically-advanced industrial infrastructure that our corporate government gifted them with into history's largest armaments plant.
If China's less-than-public master plan does include such a strategy, then I am afraid that I would face a bit of a moral dilemma. I would have a really hard time convincing myself that protecting those of us who have sold us out in order to ensure that they have the most to lose is worthwhile.
Especially in light of the fact that this would be the second time that they've put it to the American people in order to enrich themselves. Actually, it is a little worse this time; the warping of our inequality curve has surpassed that of 1929.
That makes, imho, the moral thing to do becomes cooperation with the authorities, in all cases, even when you're not sure about the morality of their actions.
I believe that is the essentially the same argument employed by the defense at the Nuremberg Trials.
In HS and many MANY college sociology, anthropology, ethnic studies, etc. his books are required reading.
Speaking of scams...whenever circumstances have had me buying university textbooks, I have always noticed an interesting correlation between unjustifiably high prices and the phrase "required reading".
Always annoyed me, since there are an amazing number of text books that are "required reading" that are rehashes and/or agglomerations of existing works. To add insult to injury, you find them sitting right next to far cheaper books with the same content.
So to hear that his works are "required reading" shot a great big hole in my ability to sympathize with his fear that illicit copies will alleviate the burden his books place upon some poor college student.
The real secret, Edison found, arguing it out with Charles Batchelor, was to raise the voltage to push a small amount of current through a thin wire to a high-resistance filament. It was an application of the law propounded in 1827 by the German physicist George Ohm, but it was still imperfectly understood. Edison himself said later, "At the time I experimented I did not understand Ohm's law. Moreover, I do not want to understand Ohm's law. It would stop me experimenting." This is Edison in his folksy genius mode. Understanding the relationship linking voltage, current, and resistance was crucial to the development of the incandescent lamp, and he understood it intuitively even if he did not express it in a mathematical formula.
I don't foresee Republican support for saving the American people from an asteroid. Their argument would be that if you save them from one, they'll expect to be saved from the next one, and there we go again: More "entitlement spending".
I went to their about us web page, and the prominent link to their brochure at the bottom of the page makes you very aware that here it is on the verge of 2010, and they haven't updated their brochure since 2007.
Now that is cheap.
Made me wonder if they charge their employees for parking.
They're suing to defend the effort they put into gaining a competitive advantage through concocting a new and unique way of underpaying for labor.
Can you blame them? Think how much effort you put into having rousing good sex, and then expand that to encompass the hundreds of thousands of American IT workers who are screwed by H1B each and every day.
Although that may be an inappropriate analogy, particularly if your partners are both willing and leave the arena happy.
What I get out of this? That we Americans are a lot better these days at spreading the idea of using think-tanks to justify whatever further enriches the individual than we are at "spreading democracy" that benefits entire nations.
Slashdot Mirror
No, because it is highly profitable - and while that may seem like semantic quibbling, it is all the difference in the world.
Beyond that, those who profit here have two layers of insulation: First, it was made in China ("Oh, those bad, bad Chinese!", the media cooperatively wails). And secondly, since the corporation is a de facto "person" under U.S. law the individuals who make the decisions here are rarely found to be culpable/responsible; instead, the corporation picks up the tab out of small change.
Contradictorily - and presumably only because they are new to the game of capitalism - the Chinese have yet to learn that the search for profits justifies all, so when they catch a business executive pulling a stunt that harms their people, they gift said executive with that uniquely Chinese jewelry: A bullet behind the ear.
Or perhaps their government is just less corrupt than ours is.
I note that searches of Secunia, SANS.org, and CERT don't return any mention of it, which is curious given that the...alert...began spreading on or about the 3rd of December, 2009 according to a date-sorted Google search (who is Jeremy Allexon?). Said search likewise fails to turn up any sources which I would call "authoritative".
Given the nature of corporate competition...
lolll...yes, indeed; same old same old. Still, I am concerned by today's right, as I hear a lot of "That isn't in the Constitution - therefore we should not be doing it!" and "This is a Republic, not a democracy!" from them.
That suggests to me that they wouldn't hesitate to abrogate the Bill of Rights in order to ensure that he who has the most property - the most wealth - dictates the way that our government is run, and who shall benefit from it.
Not a very comforting scenario, given that I am well shy of the $100 million or so in net worth that it takes to be significant among the right these days.
A lot of people like to think that "Business-with-a-capital-B" (in reality, the people behind them) has only "gone bad" of late. But the reality, as you point out, is that they have been working to undermine our Constitution and the rights and well-being of the American people for well over a century. Successfully, too, with only a few minor setbacks, most notably during the Presidencies of FDR, LBJ, and JFK.
Yet regardless of American history and the nation's current reality, too many still see the experience of "Business people" as being invaluable to the governing of our nation.
And that is true - but only if you can find a way to eliminate those who would warp government into being the tool of "Business-with-a-capital-B", which is the situation this nation has permitted itself to become entangled in.
Again, as your comment points out.
It is bizarre that corporations are "persons" because of the timing of a SCOTUS clerk's stenography.
But the fact people are losing rights as the corporate "person" is gaining them is hazardous to human health.
Given the way the U.S. of A. works, I would not be surprised to see first use in the strip on people's credit cards in order to store your last 10,000 purchases. Coupled with an RFID chip, this would enable targeted advertising as you walked down the street...and voila! We have Blade Runner.
Sans exotic feminine androids, of course; we always seem to get the bad out of Sci-Fi first.
(Don't forget to mod me off-topic, fellas.)
High-end ben-wah balls that reverberate to the sound of money?
lolll....rated off-topic?
I must be the only person in the world who knows people...lots of people...who buy new computers because the lack of isolation - lack of sandboxing - between the browser app and the o/s ends up making them think the computer is worn out 'cuz it is so sloooowwwwwwwwww....servicing all of those 'bot requests, and all.
About time...I was getting the impression that the solution was going to be $20 netbooks...use one to browse the web, it gets contaminated, and you throw it away and get a new one. Not very efficient, resource-wise.
I've got moderator points to use, but this comment of yours required a more personal plaudit (besides, you were already tagged @5). I think everybody who is ever in a position where he or she has to judge a group of people and pick only one winner should consider reading it aloud at the awards ceremony.
The Highlander nature of human competitions has its drawbacks...
I had a top secret security clearance with an armful of qualifiers by the time I was 18. The intensity of the security requirements for the things that I did in no way left me prepared for what was misnamed "security" in the corporate world, but it did lead me to abruptly learn one thing: It is not smart to tell anybody who has more power or connections than you do that their laziness or ineptness poses a a security or business continuity risk.
All things - to include security - play second fiddle to office politics in corporate America.
Except, of course, in those rare instances where everybody in the executive suites has a vested interest in keeping either their competitors or the government unaware of their activities.
most western countries in the same position would do the same as would any corporate entity in the western hemisphere
Well, America wouldn't...
That is, as long as the labor costs involved with making or building whatever from whatever is artificially cheaper someplace else, then our right - our CEOs, our Wall Street boyz, our bankers (in short, our Republicans) - will happily export whatever strategic metals we have as well as the industrial infrastructure required to utilize it.
I feel quite comfortable in making that assertion, since that is precisely what they have been doing. China is well aware of their greed, and has been playing it like the proverbial fiddle.
I just hope that China is content with the prospect of the economic domination of the world, and doesn't go into the harvesting-of-land-and-wealth-with-a-bang game once they feel they have accumulated sufficient strategic metals to withstand embargo or interdiction of any further supplies for a time. A time defined, of course, by the period required to convert the technologically-advanced industrial infrastructure that our corporate government gifted them with into history's largest armaments plant.
If China's less-than-public master plan does include such a strategy, then I am afraid that I would face a bit of a moral dilemma. I would have a really hard time convincing myself that protecting those of us who have sold us out in order to ensure that they have the most to lose is worthwhile.
Especially in light of the fact that this would be the second time that they've put it to the American people in order to enrich themselves. Actually, it is a little worse this time; the warping of our inequality curve has surpassed that of 1929.
That makes, imho, the moral thing to do becomes cooperation with the authorities, in all cases, even when you're not sure about the morality of their actions.
I believe that is the essentially the same argument employed by the defense at the Nuremberg Trials.
I distinctly remember when America invented sex - I was 14, and it was under the grape arbor in my backyard...
In HS and many MANY college sociology, anthropology, ethnic studies, etc. his books are required reading.
Speaking of scams...whenever circumstances have had me buying university textbooks, I have always noticed an interesting correlation between unjustifiably high prices and the phrase "required reading".
Always annoyed me, since there are an amazing number of text books that are "required reading" that are rehashes and/or agglomerations of existing works. To add insult to injury, you find them sitting right next to far cheaper books with the same content.
So to hear that his works are "required reading" shot a great big hole in my ability to sympathize with his fear that illicit copies will alleviate the burden his books place upon some poor college student.
The real secret, Edison found, arguing it out with Charles Batchelor, was to raise the voltage to push a small amount of current through a thin wire to a high-resistance filament. It was an application of the law propounded in 1827 by the German physicist George Ohm, but it was still imperfectly understood. Edison himself said later, "At the time I experimented I did not understand Ohm's law. Moreover, I do not want to understand Ohm's law. It would stop me experimenting." This is Edison in his folksy genius mode. Understanding the relationship linking voltage, current, and resistance was crucial to the development of the incandescent lamp, and he understood it intuitively even if he did not express it in a mathematical formula.
I don't foresee Republican support for saving the American people from an asteroid. Their argument would be that if you save them from one, they'll expect to be saved from the next one, and there we go again: More "entitlement spending".
I went to their about us web page, and the prominent link to their brochure at the bottom of the page makes you very aware that here it is on the verge of 2010, and they haven't updated their brochure since 2007.
Now that is cheap .
Made me wonder if they charge their employees for parking.
They're suing to defend the effort they put into gaining a competitive advantage through concocting a new and unique way of underpaying for labor.
Can you blame them? Think how much effort you put into having rousing good sex, and then expand that to encompass the hundreds of thousands of American IT workers who are screwed by H1B each and every day.
Although that may be an inappropriate analogy, particularly if your partners are both willing and leave the arena happy.
Before I get a bunch of balloons and a lawn chair together, do you pick up hitchhikers if they're at your approximate altitude?
That silence you hear is the RIAA.
I thought it was going to say beer.
The Russians did it! The Russians did it!
Whenever I see a knee-jerk reaction by a government, the first thought that pops into my head is "Oh, my. Are they nuclear?"
What I get out of this? That we Americans are a lot better these days at spreading the idea of using think-tanks to justify whatever further enriches the individual than we are at "spreading democracy" that benefits entire nations.