The problem with focusing on the fact that they are better than they could be is that you can justify practically any working conditions, so long as you can imagine something that's worse.
Ah, but what are the important things to focus on? This is the slashdot fail. The important figure to focus on is China's wealth. Its GDP/Capita.
Its really easy to sit here in one of the richest nations on earth and criticize a nation that has 1/10th the wealth per capita as America, and criticize them for not having the conditions that are only available in wealthy nations.. its easy as long as we completely ignore how fucking poor China is. Thats why none of the critics ever touch upon the subject of how poor the country is, but they instead appeal to emotions about "terrible working conditions" and other bullshit.
The people of China need these factories in order to increase the wealth of the entire nation. The primary enemy of mankind is poverty. The number one killer of humans is poverty. How dare anyone sit in judgment of China for trying to better the lives of its people through wealth creation. If you want to judge the government for its assaults on freedom thats great.. but to judge the country because the people want a better life and are doing the same shit we did to make better lives for ourselves.. its bullshit... tired old dogmatic bullshit.
They seem to be mutually exclusive to you because you have no idea what you are talking about.
There are two prices.. one for buying and one for selling, called Bid and Ask. ,br>
I have this crazy idea... since you have posted many times on this story.. that maybe since you dont know what you are talking about, that you not talk. Is it really that hard to restrict yourself to subjects where you have some sort of clue?
The New York Times wrote [that] the joint report then noted "Automatic computerized traders on the stock market shut down as they detected the sharp rise in buying and selling." As computerized high frequency traders exited the stock market, the resulting lack of liquidity "...caused shares of some prominent companies like Procter & Gamble and Accenture to trade down as low as a penny or as high as $100,000." These extreme prices also resulted from "market internalizers," firms that usually trade with customer orders from their own inventory instead of sending those orders to exchanges, "routing 'most, if not all,' retail orders to the public markets -- a flood of unusual selling pressure that sucked up more dwindling liquidity."
300 people did not die because of their improper assurances. If they did "properly" assure them, they would have been called quacks, or they would have been sued for causing a hype if nothing happened and still could have faced fines or jail time.
False dichotomy.
The problem is that they spoke with authority saying that there would not be a big quake, when they knew full well that their knowledge didn't go to those lengths. They weren't honest about it. Its really that simple.
This isnt an either/or situation. It wasn't just "no there wont" or "yes there will." The truth was neither, but they chose to say "no there wont."
The fact that all known post-industrial economies went through the same system of development does somehow put the onus on you with your extraordinary claim that it somehow magically isn't necessary for China.
Did you think that you knew what you were talking about?
Foxconn annual profit (2010) is $2.2 billion.
Foxconn employees (2010) is 920+ thousand.
That means annual profit per employee is $2391.
Lets suppose they give the entire profit away to the employees. Thats $199 per month, or $6.55 per day, per employee.
Are you still all smug, or do you now have a lump in your throat because of how ignorant that you now realize that you are? I wonder. The right thing to do would be to have that lump... thats if you have a conscience.. do you have a conscience, or is this fake caring that you do enough for you?
No matter how many times you call it exploitation, that doesn't make it so. These people want a better life, which is why they work in factories. Just like Americans did. Just like the English did. Just like the Germans did. Just like the French did. Just like the Japanese did. Just like the Taiwanese did. Just like the Australians did. Just like the Canadians did.
You are filthy rich in comparison to the rest of the world, but you are so spoiled that you don't even know it. The Chinese people cannot have your life until their country is comparatively rich. Their country cannot become comparatively rich until the majority of the population is involved in wealth creation. Thats a straight up fact and no matter how many times you claim bullshit like "exploitation", you cannot change the facts.
Yes, we all understand that you feel so strongly for the plight of others that you feel the need to say something, *anything*, as some sort of make-you-feel-good-inside moral protest. Your problem is that your thinking is so shallow that all you are doing is appealing to emotion. There is no logic in your protest. There are no facts in your protest. Its just a protest for protests sake, and for that you should be ashamed of yourself. How shallow, petty, and spoiled you are.
The problem with American eating habits is almost surely the massive amounts of carbs that we take in. Shoot for 100 grams of carbs per day for the next month and see what happens. 100 grams is below the recommended amount, but is not the dangerous atkins-level no-carb deprivation.
Just because the asshole calling people racist when they dont agree with him doesnt see the answer to his question, does not mean that the question wasn't answered. It means thjat the asshole calling people racist when they dont agree with him doesnt have an actual consistent philosophy that would be necessary to defend his argument so instead he is a willfully ignorant asshole that calls people racists in a tantrum.
Have a nice day, asshole that calls people racist at the drop of a hat.
You have misplaced a tenet of capitalism, that trade benefits those involved, with this idea of "benefiting society."
If Sony is charging more than you would like to spend on a product, then dont buy it. Welcome to freedom of choice. If you dont trade, then neither of you are harmed. If you do trade, then we can only assume that you were happy to do so because you have free choice.
Most airlines only overbook a few seats, and it works out fine the majority of the time (I don't have exact numbers, but I'm a very frequent flier and rarely hear about people being bumped)
Behold the power of the Poisson distribution, sometimes called "The Law of Small Numbers."
I have had that same thought about a Valve console. All I can figure is that they just think that there isn't any money in hardware...and that it would be too hard to break into the market.
Valve's issue is that their entire portfolio requires someone elses operating system.
So how does one translate an existing game's code into C# so that one can release through XBLIG?
If its an existing game then you are already moving outside the 'indie' circle. You already have profits from a different platform and want to get profits from the 360 too. I'm not going to cry a river for professional developers that are making lots of money, regardless of how you want to paint XBLIG requirements.
This could have been settled with a few minutes of thought on your part
This could have been settled if you were intellectually honest, instead of beginning by ascribing an extreme exaggeration to the worth of your argument.
A good sign of a weak argument is when a person begins by telling people how very strong the argument they are about to present is. Instead of letting your argument stand on its merits, you chose to be intellectually dishonest and claiming more merit than it had. This could have been settled if you DIDNT FUCKING DO THAT.
That sounds like rationalizing if I ever heard it. Let's face it, you can either take a stand or not.
There's no amount of talking or pragmatic compromise that will solve a basic problem of disrespecting human dignity in the workplace.
The rationalizers here are the ones that are trying to assign the conditions of prosperity to dirt poor countries. China GDP/Capita, after adjusting for inflation and purchasing power, is about US$6500.
That pie only goes so far no matter how you slice it. You can stick your head in the sand and ignore this fact, but that neither makes you right nor gives you the moral authority to criticize others. You simply dont know what you are talking about, but instead have to throw around worthless sound-bites like "disrespecting human dignity in the workplace" in order to push an idea that you are not equipped to actually defend in any other way.
The Chinese are leaving their subsistence farms for those factories because they believe that they will be better off doing so. It is as if you think that they do not have a right to a better life, argued by using your twisted bullshit logic that its "not better enough." Bullshit. They are becoming rich in the same way that every western country did; by increasing their GDP through manufacturing.
They cannot reap the rewards of being a rich nation until they actually are a rich nation. They cannot become a rich nation until a large portion of the population in involved in wealth creation. It is the mobilization of resources, enabled by production, that will make them rich. Your ideas will keep them poor, and for that you should be ashamed.
A counterexample, which is what I provided, disproves the point.
A counterexample does not disprove the point if the "example" is mutually exclusive to what you are attempting to "disprove."
Your argument can be translated into "but in cases where the situation is completely different to the conditions given, then you are wrong about the conclusion you drew that specified that those conditions are necessary for it."
The problem is that your statements need this translation to make them honest.
So yes.. there is a need to point out your lack of intellectual honesty.. unless of course its more than you being dishonest.. maybe you really dont understand how logic actually works? You do understand that that IF A THEN B is not disproved with IF NOT A THEN NOT B ? You do, right? Right?
I blame the schools for either your lack of critical thinking and logic skills, or your complete lack of intellectual honesty. Schools were supposed to make sure that neither happened... guess they didn't.
That would not be covered by this law. If it is true then you can't stop others talking about it.
The argument about a person simply not creating a facebook account is that someone else may tag you in photos, and what not.
But now you are claiming that the tagging of photos and what-not will not be covered.
Looks to me like the supports of this bill cant get their stories straight.. that any excuse to push this law forward is a good one... complete lack of intellectual honesty.
What you instead mean is that under certain conditions not given, conditions that seem to be mutually exclusive to the one you claim to disagree with, that you disagree.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with focusing on the fact that they are better than they could be is that you can justify practically any working conditions, so long as you can imagine something that's worse.
Ah, but what are the important things to focus on? This is the slashdot fail. The important figure to focus on is China's wealth. Its GDP/Capita.
Its really easy to sit here in one of the richest nations on earth and criticize a nation that has 1/10th the wealth per capita as America, and criticize them for not having the conditions that are only available in wealthy nations.. its easy as long as we completely ignore how fucking poor China is. Thats why none of the critics ever touch upon the subject of how poor the country is, but they instead appeal to emotions about "terrible working conditions" and other bullshit.
The people of China need these factories in order to increase the wealth of the entire nation. The primary enemy of mankind is poverty. The number one killer of humans is poverty. How dare anyone sit in judgment of China for trying to better the lives of its people through wealth creation. If you want to judge the government for its assaults on freedom thats great.. but to judge the country because the people want a better life and are doing the same shit we did to make better lives for ourselves.. its bullshit... tired old dogmatic bullshit.
They seem to be mutually exclusive to you because you have no idea what you are talking about.
,br>
I have this crazy idea... since you have posted many times on this story.. that maybe since you dont know what you are talking about, that you not talk. Is it really that hard to restrict yourself to subjects where you have some sort of clue?
There are two prices.. one for buying and one for selling, called Bid and Ask.
The New York Times wrote [that] the joint report then noted "Automatic computerized traders on the stock market shut down as they detected the sharp rise in buying and selling." As computerized high frequency traders exited the stock market, the resulting lack of liquidity "...caused shares of some prominent companies like Procter & Gamble and Accenture to trade down as low as a penny or as high as $100,000." These extreme prices also resulted from "market internalizers," firms that usually trade with customer orders from their own inventory instead of sending those orders to exchanges, "routing 'most, if not all,' retail orders to the public markets -- a flood of unusual selling pressure that sucked up more dwindling liquidity."
2010 Flash Crash
Sun Chips are okay
Sun Chips causes anal leakage. It says so right on the bag! For christ sakes.
..because we suck the fat out of it and then pretend that its healthier because of it.
There are other ways you can do this....
What are those? You guys keep saying it... but have not told us how China is going to get rich without wealth creation. Empty words are empty.
300 people did not die because of their improper assurances. If they did "properly" assure them, they would have been called quacks, or they would have been sued for causing a hype if nothing happened and still could have faced fines or jail time.
False dichotomy.
The problem is that they spoke with authority saying that there would not be a big quake, when they knew full well that their knowledge didn't go to those lengths. They weren't honest about it. Its really that simple.
This isnt an either/or situation. It wasn't just "no there wont" or "yes there will." The truth was neither, but they chose to say "no there wont."
The fact that all known post-industrial economies went through the same system of development does somehow put the onus on you with your extraordinary claim that it somehow magically isn't necessary for China.
Did you think that you knew what you were talking about?
Foxconn annual profit (2010) is $2.2 billion.
Foxconn employees (2010) is 920+ thousand.
That means annual profit per employee is $2391.
Lets suppose they give the entire profit away to the employees. Thats $199 per month, or $6.55 per day, per employee.
Are you still all smug, or do you now have a lump in your throat because of how ignorant that you now realize that you are? I wonder. The right thing to do would be to have that lump... thats if you have a conscience.. do you have a conscience, or is this fake caring that you do enough for you?
No matter how many times you call it exploitation, that doesn't make it so. These people want a better life, which is why they work in factories. Just like Americans did. Just like the English did. Just like the Germans did. Just like the French did. Just like the Japanese did. Just like the Taiwanese did. Just like the Australians did. Just like the Canadians did.
You are filthy rich in comparison to the rest of the world, but you are so spoiled that you don't even know it. The Chinese people cannot have your life until their country is comparatively rich. Their country cannot become comparatively rich until the majority of the population is involved in wealth creation. Thats a straight up fact and no matter how many times you claim bullshit like "exploitation", you cannot change the facts.
Yes, we all understand that you feel so strongly for the plight of others that you feel the need to say something, *anything*, as some sort of make-you-feel-good-inside moral protest. Your problem is that your thinking is so shallow that all you are doing is appealing to emotion. There is no logic in your protest. There are no facts in your protest. Its just a protest for protests sake, and for that you should be ashamed of yourself. How shallow, petty, and spoiled you are.
The problem with American eating habits is almost surely the massive amounts of carbs that we take in. Shoot for 100 grams of carbs per day for the next month and see what happens. 100 grams is below the recommended amount, but is not the dangerous atkins-level no-carb deprivation.
Just because the asshole calling people racist when they dont agree with him doesnt see the answer to his question, does not mean that the question wasn't answered. It means thjat the asshole calling people racist when they dont agree with him doesnt have an actual consistent philosophy that would be necessary to defend his argument so instead he is a willfully ignorant asshole that calls people racists in a tantrum.
Have a nice day, asshole that calls people racist at the drop of a hat.
..and how does that solve the problem? Did you think the thousands of games on Steam use the Source engine?
Businesses arent supposed to "benefit society."
You have misplaced a tenet of capitalism, that trade benefits those involved, with this idea of "benefiting society."
If Sony is charging more than you would like to spend on a product, then dont buy it. Welcome to freedom of choice. If you dont trade, then neither of you are harmed. If you do trade, then we can only assume that you were happy to do so because you have free choice.
Most airlines only overbook a few seats, and it works out fine the majority of the time (I don't have exact numbers, but I'm a very frequent flier and rarely hear about people being bumped)
Behold the power of the Poisson distribution, sometimes called "The Law of Small Numbers."
I have had that same thought about a Valve console. All I can figure is that they just think that there isn't any money in hardware...and that it would be too hard to break into the market.
Valve's issue is that their entire portfolio requires someone elses operating system.
So how does one translate an existing game's code into C# so that one can release through XBLIG?
If its an existing game then you are already moving outside the 'indie' circle. You already have profits from a different platform and want to get profits from the 360 too. I'm not going to cry a river for professional developers that are making lots of money, regardless of how you want to paint XBLIG requirements.
...subway.. elevator.. is there a real difference?
This could have been settled with a few minutes of thought on your part
This could have been settled if you were intellectually honest, instead of beginning by ascribing an extreme exaggeration to the worth of your argument.
A good sign of a weak argument is when a person begins by telling people how very strong the argument they are about to present is. Instead of letting your argument stand on its merits, you chose to be intellectually dishonest and claiming more merit than it had. This could have been settled if you DIDNT FUCKING DO THAT.
That sounds like rationalizing if I ever heard it. Let's face it, you can either take a stand or not.
There's no amount of talking or pragmatic compromise that will solve a basic problem of disrespecting human dignity in the workplace.
The rationalizers here are the ones that are trying to assign the conditions of prosperity to dirt poor countries. China GDP/Capita, after adjusting for inflation and purchasing power, is about US$6500.
That pie only goes so far no matter how you slice it. You can stick your head in the sand and ignore this fact, but that neither makes you right nor gives you the moral authority to criticize others. You simply dont know what you are talking about, but instead have to throw around worthless sound-bites like "disrespecting human dignity in the workplace" in order to push an idea that you are not equipped to actually defend in any other way.
The Chinese are leaving their subsistence farms for those factories because they believe that they will be better off doing so. It is as if you think that they do not have a right to a better life, argued by using your twisted bullshit logic that its "not better enough." Bullshit. They are becoming rich in the same way that every western country did; by increasing their GDP through manufacturing.
They cannot reap the rewards of being a rich nation until they actually are a rich nation. They cannot become a rich nation until a large portion of the population in involved in wealth creation. It is the mobilization of resources, enabled by production, that will make them rich. Your ideas will keep them poor, and for that you should be ashamed.
A counterexample, which is what I provided, disproves the point.
A counterexample does not disprove the point if the "example" is mutually exclusive to what you are attempting to "disprove."
.. unless of course its more than you being dishonest.. maybe you really dont understand how logic actually works? You do understand that that IF A THEN B is not disproved with IF NOT A THEN NOT B ? You do, right? Right?
Your argument can be translated into "but in cases where the situation is completely different to the conditions given, then you are wrong about the conclusion you drew that specified that those conditions are necessary for it."
The problem is that your statements need this translation to make them honest.
So yes.. there is a need to point out your lack of intellectual honesty
I blame the schools for either your lack of critical thinking and logic skills, or your complete lack of intellectual honesty. Schools were supposed to make sure that neither happened... guess they didn't.
That would not be covered by this law. If it is true then you can't stop others talking about it.
The argument about a person simply not creating a facebook account is that someone else may tag you in photos, and what not.
But now you are claiming that the tagging of photos and what-not will not be covered.
Looks to me like the supports of this bill cant get their stories straight.. that any excuse to push this law forward is a good one... complete lack of intellectual honesty.
I think all speech should be protected.
Thats my logic, sparky. You dont seem to have any.
Later, Google removed the image entirely from the search results, banning the domain entirely.. saying the site 'could' spread malware.
Now, all of a sudden, Google doesnt do either? Really?
'They are going to confuse some people,' he explains, 'who will assume Google's trying to advance a political agenda with its search results.'"
It sure looks like they are.
I disagree. If...
You disagree... "if".. nice.
What you instead mean is that under certain conditions not given, conditions that seem to be mutually exclusive to the one you claim to disagree with, that you disagree.
Next time.. try some intellectual honesty.