That's not at all what it looked like when things came up for a vote in Congress. Most of the time the Republicans voted as a block, the Democrats split.
The goal of the majority is to pass legislation that appeases special interests, of which there are a lot. The goal of the minority is to become the majority. That is why the minority party normally votes as a block, in order to make it difficult for the majority to appease all the special interests.
Observe the difficulty that the Democrats had in passing the health care reform bill. The difficulty wasnt because they needed Republican support (they didnt get any Republican support at all, right up to the bitter end.) The bill ballooned to thousands of pages as more and more members of the majority demanded that their own special interests be met.
Thats why people everywhere take jobs. Its just insinuation without substance.
That impoverished countryside is impoverished because China is poor. China will remain poor until most of the people are involved in wealth creation, such as working in factories. The western world took these same steps 120 years ago. Our mainstream media is inexplicably painting the picture that its bad for the people of China to rise up out of poverty in the only way known to work. Fucking laughable.
I fail to see how living in poverty implies that sub-human work conditions, which are so appalling that they even force workers to suicide in droves
You meant to state the fact that Foxconn's suicide rate is many times lower than the United States, instead of bullshit like our media does, right? right?
To put things in perspective, China's GDP/Capita is about equal to what the United States had 120 years ago in 1890. If you compare the various metrics of 1890 United States with 2012 China, the people of China are doing very well for themselves.
The people of China want a better life for themselves and they are willing to work to get it. This one company employs a million people and competes within the labor market to get them, which is why Foxconn is one of the best employers to work for in China. Nobody is holding a gun to the heads of these employees, its quite the contrary in spite of what Americas mainstream media wants to tell us.
As of this moment, parent is modded 50% insightful and 50% offtopic.
I dont see how its offtopic. It isnt that big of a stretch to define mp3 files as computer programs if jar files and the like are also defined as computer programs.
We spend ~$30billion a year on research in the U.S. on the NIH, so a partial solution is already in place.
Thats fine, except for covering testing costs as well. How many millions does it take just to get the FDA to allow? Well lets see what I found out from Google:
Yes, it's craptastic that Dodd isn't getting investigated [at least, not publicly].
Wow, why wasnt this your sentiment when you posted the first time? I think that you are mad that you have to admit it.
But it's not like the republican's fall all over themselves to investigate fellow republican's when they are in charge.
There you go, bashing Republicans again...
You couldn't even go more than one complete sentences without transforming back into a Republican basher. The Democrats and their actions are the ones being discussed, but you can't stand it.
You need to use reason and logic to discredit reasoning. The specific laws which limited immigration, nor their intended purpose, undermine his logic at all. They only serve to undermine the people who passed those laws, and their reasons for doing so.
Your argument can be reduced to "Friedman is wrong about immigration because congress was full of racists in 1924".. its neither a logical nor reasoned argument. Its simply an appeal to emotion.
I do agree that you should follow the legal process, but the cost can be prohibitive to many foreign nationals.
To quote Milton Friedman:
"I have always been amused by a kind of a paradox. Suppose you go around and ask people 'The united States as you know before 1914 had completely free immigration. Anybody could get on a boat and come to these shores and if he landed on Ellis Island he was an immigrant. Was that a good thing or a bad thing?'
You will find that hardly a soul who will say that it was a bad thing. Almost everybody will say it was a good thing. ‘But what about today? Do you think we should have free immigration?’ ‘Oh, no,’ they’ll say, ‘We couldn’t possibly have free immigration today. Why, that would flood us with immigrants from India, and God knows where. We’d be driven down to a bare subsistence level.’
What’s the difference? How can people be so inconsistent? Why is it that free immigration was a good thing before 1914 and free immigration is a bad thing today? Well, there is a sense in which that answer is right. There’s a sense in which free immigration, in the same sense as we had it before 1914 is not possible today. Why not?
Because it is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. And you cannot have both. If you have a welfare state, if you have a state in which every resident is promised a certain minimal level of income, or a minimum level of subsistence, regardless of whether he works or not, produces it or not. Then it really is an impossible thing.
If you have free immigration, in the way we had it before 1914, everybody benefited. The people who were here benefited. The people who came benefited. Because nobody would come unless he, or his family, thought he would do better here than he would elsewhere. And, the new immigrants provided additional resources, provided additional possibilities for the people already here. So everybody can mutually benefit.
But on the other hand, if you come under circumstances where each person is entitled to a pro-rate share of the pie, to take an extreme example, or even to a low level of the pie, than the effect of that situation is that free immigration, would mean a reduction of everybody to the same, uniform level. Of course, I’m exaggerating, it wouldn’t go quite that far, but it would go in that direction. And it is that perception, that leads people to adopt what at first seems like inconsistent values.
Look, for example, at the obvious, immediate, practical example of illegal Mexican immigration. Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It’s a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It’s a good thing for the United States. It’s a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it’s only good so long as its illegal.
That’s an interesting paradox to think about. Make it legal and it’s no good. Why? Because as long as it’s illegal the people who come in do not qualify for welfare, they don’t qualify for social security, they don’t qualify for the other myriad of benefits that we pour out from our left pocket to our right pocket. So long as they don’t qualify they migrate to jobs. They take jobs that most residents of this country are unwilling to take. They provide employers with the kind of workers that they cannot get. They’re hard workers, they’re good workers, and they are clearly better off."
As long as the venue has made its yearly ASCAP tribute payment that never gets to the authors, there is absolutely nothing the authors of this song can do about it.
The US military also has a rather high suicide rate, people in general don't rant over it.
Now there you go.. You do not seem to comprehend that the Foxconn suicide rate is amazingly low. Instead, its "rather high" like the U.S. military.
This is exactly the problem. You do not understand the scare number, and have led yourself to believe that its "rather high." No, it's not. Its "rather outstanding."
Are you saying that billions in profit won't pay for better salary and waste disposal? 10k workers at 50k$ is 0.5bil$ per year.
Foxconn employs a million people, not 10k, and their profit is around $1000/worker/year.
Here is the main problem with these rants against using Chinese labor:
China's GDP/Capita after adjustment for inflation and purchasing power is still just a bit lower than America in 1890. Thats America 120 years ago. This idea that such a country can provide the same level of things that we in the rich part of the world enjoy is laughable. Every single rant against China always uses a scare number without any context. 17 suicides at Foxconn in 2010 for example. Thats a scare number with no context. Put it in context and its 1 suicide for every ~59000 employees per year, and adding more context we see that America has a suicide rate of 1 suicide for every ~9000 people per year.
The ranters cried about those 17 suicides, but failed to see the big picture. China is doing quite well for itself given its GDP/Capita. Their Human Development Index is on par with far richer countries. The ranters now cry because some of the employers there provide room and board on top of better than average pay? Really?
The classic 3G came out in 2003, the last classic supported by Rockbox is the 5G which came out in 2005. You couldn't have been talking about these since they are older than the date I mentioned, and support is "official."
The Nano 3G has no "unofficial" version like you are claiming, so you can't be talking about that either.
Exactly what the hell are you going on about? Next time, take the time to say what you intended.
dealing with failures of individual components will be really a large part of the problem.
Highly doubtful since the brain itself is very sloppy about the whole process. Neurons dont fire at exact thresholds, frequent permanent damage events plague them as we go through life, and even diet can have measurable effects on brain chemistry that effect how signals propagate as well as cause damage.
What I'm saying is that there is clearly an extremely high degree of redundancy built into brains because of the reality of physical randomness, and that there is no reason to believe that any small part of the system is essential in such a way that component failures are an obstacle.
With an exaflop computer, simulating the human brain is looking like it might be possible.
Take a moment, relax, and then try to answer this question: What does computational speed have to do with it?
The point is that simulations are not linked to computational speed. Some simulations that we do today are performed thousands of times faster than "reality" while most others that we do today are performed thousands, or even millions of times slower. The speed of the simulation is irrelevant to their existence, so stop pretending that speed has any sort of importance to simulating something like a brain. A turing machine is a turing machine. Period.
Pretty much every day of your recent life you have observe the results of simulations that are trillions of times slower than reality, and that is the simulation of the propagation of light. We dont need faster computers to simulate a brain.. we just need to figure out how to simulate a brain.
tl;dr: The parent shouldn't talk about things that he doesnt understand.
you can't say that because GPL requires copyright to exit for the license to have any legal power.
He can say that because without any copyrights, binaries that are distributed would themselves be modifiable and redistributable through the act of decompiling and later recompiling. Specifically, everything both granted and restricted via GPL would be possible by default.
The guy you are talking to is brilliant, while you are just a shallow thinker that doesnt understand the repercussions of this mans ideas.
Foxconn is the world's largest maker of electronics components and makes products for every major computer company
...and to add some more info.. Foxconn employs just shy of 1 million workers, the equivalent of 1% of America's workforce. The flak Foxconn gets is always based on scare numbers rather than percentages.
When you employ 1 million workers, a dozen or so suicides isnt alarming at all. The news doesn't point out that 1 out of every ~70000 employees committed suicide in 2010. The news instead says 14 employees committed suicide in 2010, leaving it the the reader to try to infer what 14 means... "If 14 of my co-workers committed suicide, that would be like 5%.. terrible!"
For the record, 1 out of 70000 is an outstandingly good suicide rate. Good luck finding an industry in the United States that isnt an order of magnitude worse.
Whether anyone else was being arrested means nothing whatsoever.
If answering the question means nothing to you, then why the fuck did you quote it, then pretend to answer it, and finally insist that you did.
The question bothers you, and apparently your inability to respond to the question also bothers you.
Its time to be honest with yourself, that you dont actually have a position which you personally can defend. Thats called faith, as in christians, jews, and muslims. I bet that bothers you too.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not at all what it looked like when things came up for a vote in Congress. Most of the time the Republicans voted as a block, the Democrats split.
The goal of the majority is to pass legislation that appeases special interests, of which there are a lot. The goal of the minority is to become the majority. That is why the minority party normally votes as a block, in order to make it difficult for the majority to appease all the special interests.
Observe the difficulty that the Democrats had in passing the health care reform bill. The difficulty wasnt because they needed Republican support (they didnt get any Republican support at all, right up to the bitter end.) The bill ballooned to thousands of pages as more and more members of the majority demanded that their own special interests be met.
Thats why people everywhere take jobs. Its just insinuation without substance.
That impoverished countryside is impoverished because China is poor. China will remain poor until most of the people are involved in wealth creation, such as working in factories. The western world took these same steps 120 years ago. Our mainstream media is inexplicably painting the picture that its bad for the people of China to rise up out of poverty in the only way known to work. Fucking laughable.
I fail to see how living in poverty implies that sub-human work conditions, which are so appalling that they even force workers to suicide in droves
You meant to state the fact that Foxconn's suicide rate is many times lower than the United States, instead of bullshit like our media does, right? right?
Exactly.
To put things in perspective, China's GDP/Capita is about equal to what the United States had 120 years ago in 1890. If you compare the various metrics of 1890 United States with 2012 China, the people of China are doing very well for themselves.
The people of China want a better life for themselves and they are willing to work to get it. This one company employs a million people and competes within the labor market to get them, which is why Foxconn is one of the best employers to work for in China. Nobody is holding a gun to the heads of these employees, its quite the contrary in spite of what Americas mainstream media wants to tell us.
As of this moment, parent is modded 50% insightful and 50% offtopic.
I dont see how its offtopic. It isnt that big of a stretch to define mp3 files as computer programs if jar files and the like are also defined as computer programs.
From the FF 10 release notes:
o Fixed the bug which caused the major version number to be incremented instead of the minor version number.
$12,000,000 is a lot less than $802,000,000.
We spend ~$30billion a year on research in the U.S. on the NIH, so a partial solution is already in place.
Thats fine, except for covering testing costs as well. How many millions does it take just to get the FDA to allow? Well lets see what I found out from Google:
$802 million
Yes, it's craptastic that Dodd isn't getting investigated [at least, not publicly].
Wow, why wasnt this your sentiment when you posted the first time? I think that you are mad that you have to admit it.
But it's not like the republican's fall all over themselves to investigate fellow republican's when they are in charge.
There you go, bashing Republicans again...
You couldn't even go more than one complete sentences without transforming back into a Republican basher. The Democrats and their actions are the ones being discussed, but you can't stand it.
Maybe you think basing conclusions on non-factual statements is acceptable logic and reasoning, but I truly don't.
Which non-factual statements? Now you are just waiving your hands. One logical fallacy after another....
Kinda discredits his reasoning though.
You need to use reason and logic to discredit reasoning. The specific laws which limited immigration, nor their intended purpose, undermine his logic at all. They only serve to undermine the people who passed those laws, and their reasons for doing so.
.. its neither a logical nor reasoned argument. Its simply an appeal to emotion.
Your argument can be reduced to "Friedman is wrong about immigration because congress was full of racists in 1924"
I do agree that you should follow the legal process, but the cost can be prohibitive to many foreign nationals.
To quote Milton Friedman:
"I have always been amused by a kind of a paradox. Suppose you go around and ask people 'The united States as you know before 1914 had completely free immigration. Anybody could get on a boat and come to these shores and if he landed on Ellis Island he was an immigrant. Was that a good thing or a bad thing?'
You will find that hardly a soul who will say that it was a bad thing. Almost everybody will say it was a good thing. ‘But what about today? Do you think we should have free immigration?’ ‘Oh, no,’ they’ll say, ‘We couldn’t possibly have free immigration today. Why, that would flood us with immigrants from India, and God knows where. We’d be driven down to a bare subsistence level.’
What’s the difference? How can people be so inconsistent? Why is it that free immigration was a good thing before 1914 and free immigration is a bad thing today? Well, there is a sense in which that answer is right. There’s a sense in which free immigration, in the same sense as we had it before 1914 is not possible today. Why not?
Because it is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. And you cannot have both. If you have a welfare state, if you have a state in which every resident is promised a certain minimal level of income, or a minimum level of subsistence, regardless of whether he works or not, produces it or not. Then it really is an impossible thing.
If you have free immigration, in the way we had it before 1914, everybody benefited. The people who were here benefited. The people who came benefited. Because nobody would come unless he, or his family, thought he would do better here than he would elsewhere. And, the new immigrants provided additional resources, provided additional possibilities for the people already here. So everybody can mutually benefit.
But on the other hand, if you come under circumstances where each person is entitled to a pro-rate share of the pie, to take an extreme example, or even to a low level of the pie, than the effect of that situation is that free immigration, would mean a reduction of everybody to the same, uniform level. Of course, I’m exaggerating, it wouldn’t go quite that far, but it would go in that direction. And it is that perception, that leads people to adopt what at first seems like inconsistent values.
Look, for example, at the obvious, immediate, practical example of illegal Mexican immigration. Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It’s a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It’s a good thing for the United States. It’s a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it’s only good so long as its illegal.
That’s an interesting paradox to think about. Make it legal and it’s no good. Why? Because as long as it’s illegal the people who come in do not qualify for welfare, they don’t qualify for social security, they don’t qualify for the other myriad of benefits that we pour out from our left pocket to our right pocket. So long as they don’t qualify they migrate to jobs. They take jobs that most residents of this country are unwilling to take. They provide employers with the kind of workers that they cannot get. They’re hard workers, they’re good workers, and they are clearly better off."
Genius. R.I.P.
:-) Is there another kind?
Yes, there are also despicable Democrats.
The song in question is covered under ASCAP licensing.
As long as the venue has made its yearly ASCAP tribute payment that never gets to the authors, there is absolutely nothing the authors of this song can do about it.
I really don't think there are many ranters about "those 17 suicides".
Really?
i guess that this site hasn't had a bunch of ranters then.
The US military also has a rather high suicide rate, people in general don't rant over it.
Now there you go.. You do not seem to comprehend that the Foxconn suicide rate is amazingly low. Instead, its "rather high" like the U.S. military.
This is exactly the problem. You do not understand the scare number, and have led yourself to believe that its "rather high." No, it's not. Its "rather outstanding."
The difference between doctors/residents and factory workers is the doctors/residents aren't working in a hazardous environment.
ORLY?
This was almost universally reported as, "workers at Apple manufacturer Foxconn..." without even mentioning Microsoft.
Maybe because Foxconn is the largest manufacturer in the world, employing literally a million people.
Are you saying that billions in profit won't pay for better salary and waste disposal? 10k workers at 50k$ is 0.5bil$ per year.
Foxconn employs a million people, not 10k, and their profit is around $1000/worker/year.
Here is the main problem with these rants against using Chinese labor:
China's GDP/Capita after adjustment for inflation and purchasing power is still just a bit lower than America in 1890. Thats America 120 years ago. This idea that such a country can provide the same level of things that we in the rich part of the world enjoy is laughable. Every single rant against China always uses a scare number without any context. 17 suicides at Foxconn in 2010 for example. Thats a scare number with no context. Put it in context and its 1 suicide for every ~59000 employees per year, and adding more context we see that America has a suicide rate of 1 suicide for every ~9000 people per year.
The ranters cried about those 17 suicides, but failed to see the big picture. China is doing quite well for itself given its GDP/Capita. Their Human Development Index is on par with far richer countries. The ranters now cry because some of the employers there provide room and board on top of better than average pay? Really?
The classic 3G came out in 2003, the last classic supported by Rockbox is the 5G which came out in 2005. You couldn't have been talking about these since they are older than the date I mentioned, and support is "official."
The Nano 3G has no "unofficial" version like you are claiming, so you can't be talking about that either.
Exactly what the hell are you going on about? Next time, take the time to say what you intended.
Speaking of out of date, Rockbox doesnt support any iPod generations released after 2006.. thats 6 years ago.
I picked up a used Nano 3g (released in 2007) about 3 or so years ago and have given up waiting for Rockbox support.
dealing with failures of individual components will be really a large part of the problem.
Highly doubtful since the brain itself is very sloppy about the whole process. Neurons dont fire at exact thresholds, frequent permanent damage events plague them as we go through life, and even diet can have measurable effects on brain chemistry that effect how signals propagate as well as cause damage.
What I'm saying is that there is clearly an extremely high degree of redundancy built into brains because of the reality of physical randomness, and that there is no reason to believe that any small part of the system is essential in such a way that component failures are an obstacle.
With an exaflop computer, simulating the human brain is looking like it might be possible.
Take a moment, relax, and then try to answer this question: What does computational speed have to do with it?
The point is that simulations are not linked to computational speed. Some simulations that we do today are performed thousands of times faster than "reality" while most others that we do today are performed thousands, or even millions of times slower. The speed of the simulation is irrelevant to their existence, so stop pretending that speed has any sort of importance to simulating something like a brain. A turing machine is a turing machine. Period.
Pretty much every day of your recent life you have observe the results of simulations that are trillions of times slower than reality, and that is the simulation of the propagation of light. We dont need faster computers to simulate a brain.. we just need to figure out how to simulate a brain.
tl;dr: The parent shouldn't talk about things that he doesnt understand.
you can't say that because GPL requires copyright to exit for the license to have any legal power.
He can say that because without any copyrights, binaries that are distributed would themselves be modifiable and redistributable through the act of decompiling and later recompiling. Specifically, everything both granted and restricted via GPL would be possible by default.
The guy you are talking to is brilliant, while you are just a shallow thinker that doesnt understand the repercussions of this mans ideas.
Foxconn is the world's largest maker of electronics components and makes products for every major computer company
When you employ 1 million workers, a dozen or so suicides isnt alarming at all. The news doesn't point out that 1 out of every ~70000 employees committed suicide in 2010. The news instead says 14 employees committed suicide in 2010, leaving it the the reader to try to infer what 14 means... "If 14 of my co-workers committed suicide, that would be like 5%.. terrible!"
For the record, 1 out of 70000 is an outstandingly good suicide rate. Good luck finding an industry in the United States that isnt an order of magnitude worse.
Whether anyone else was being arrested means nothing whatsoever.
If answering the question means nothing to you, then why the fuck did you quote it, then pretend to answer it, and finally insist that you did.
The question bothers you, and apparently your inability to respond to the question also bothers you.
Its time to be honest with yourself, that you dont actually have a position which you personally can defend. Thats called faith, as in christians, jews, and muslims. I bet that bothers you too.