There are only 2 things we Americans can call "secure" industries: farming and bullshitting.
Farming doesn't need much explanation. But like George Carlin says, the USA will always be the world leader in manufacture and export of Bullshit. Be it Hollywood bullshit, musical bullshit, or Madison Avenue bullshit, we are the supreme overlords.
All other industries are merely waiting in line to be outsourced.
What the other responder said about "developer time is much more valuable than CPU time" deserves more comment.
Yes, I'm sure you're an alpha coder. I'm sure you demand a helluva salary. And I'm also sure that coders of your caliber are a small subset of all coders available in the labor pool. So how would a manager ensure that their programming project didn't blow up at runtime? Let's see.....they could get into a bidding war with lots of other managers at other companies for your services, or they could implement their project in a safer but slightly slower language: Java.
You are correct in that the government tramples on the idea of freedom and then tries to convince us that we are free ("With Libery and Justice for All" ??? Please).
But to suggest that a democratic regime would do differently is false. Republicans and Democrats are just 2 power-hungry groups who pick and choose different freedoms they want to protect, then proceed to trample on the rest. It is only the Libertarians who are true defenders of freedom.
This may be what you believe in order to rationalize your defeatist attitude. But just as there were people in this country willing to stand up to the British 250 years ago, there will be people willing to stand up to an overly oppressive should it become necessary in the future. Such as the author of the BINGO post I suspect.
Because they are (generally) chicken-shit elitists who lead pitiful little lives and take out their frustrations by disenfranchising people they don't like: conservatives.
Oh please. Nothing to do with terrorism? I'll admit Bush comes off badly when public speaking, but all first-person accounts indicate he is a pretty sharp guy. He is trying to do what he thinks his constituency wants him to do: go after terrorists. I don't know where you get this stuff about "oil prices and heavy industries." He is plenty wealthy on his own, and is not doing anything out of greed.
You are seriously underestimating the guy. I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff, and he certainly could be a better public speaker, but I doubt he's the greedy warmonger simpleton you think he is.
Why not spend more money on preventing war instead of fighting war?
This may come as a suprise to you, but there are people in the world who want to kill you and me just out of spite. We who sit around on Saturday mornings sipping tasty caffienated beverages sometimes have a hard time relating to those in the 3rd world raised in highly religious environments where they are taught that all their problems are because of us, and the only way to fix it is with an AK or a suicide bomb.
When you try to act on this problem, you end up making the productive members of society give away huge amounts of their earnings because the only way to *prevent war* on a planet with limited resources and swelling population is to redistribute wealth. "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need." This leads to socialism or communism. People are not naturally inclined to work for the service of others. It is not natural for people to sacrifice the fruits of their labor for some larger social goal. Surely you learned something from the collapse of the Soviet Union, yes?
So sorry, but the old saying rings true: The best way to keep the peace is to prepare for war.
Typical whiny-ass liberal mumbojumbo. Yes, instead of using the money for a cost-effective and efficient recruiting tool for THOSE HEATHENISTIC WARMONGERS, let's dump the money into preserving the nanny-state.
Here is an editorial from today's (2/26/02) Detroit Free Press about why this bill should be passed. According to Mr. Dingell, this bill does nothing but good. Maybe someone would care to refute him?
Disclaimer: I have not decided one way or another on this issue.
Of course Hillary--it's another VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY!!!
You are being paranoid. Our elected officials, after their (everyone's) initial reaction to 9/11, took this as an opportunity to "do something" even though what they did was wrong. (It makes a nice bullet point on the campaign literature.) Only a few (Bob Barr, et al) had the guts to stand up and say, "this is wrong, govt. has enough power as is." And no one had the guts to say, "You live in a free country, and people will occasionally abuse those freedoms. Deal with it."
OK, maybe I just haven't looked in the right places, but I still can't find a list of local businesses that are reputable. I'd like to go to a site and say, "Give me all the mechanics in my area who've gotten ratings >= 8" without having such ratings corrupted by schills. It's still the recommendations of friends/neighbors/associates that work best for me.
Hurry--better start to poo-poo this new technology before it's actually taken seriously!;)
To say "I wouldn't trust other people" speaks volumes. Why not? You obviously trust YOURSELF enough to pilot one. Why should we trust you?
Fact is, anyone who has the fortitude to earn a license to fly one is probably skilled enough to look out for you too.
The chance of equipment failure is a valid concern, and that's why most people will stick with that tired old 2-dimensional mode of ground transportation. But give it a chance! Consider for a moment the elimination of intersections and stop signs--commuting heaven! Your other concerns are mere details (albeit valid ones) that could be eliminated one way or another.
Slashdot Mirror
Another unnecessary government program. Long live big government!
This has nothing to do with taxes on purchases from Amazon or similar online retailers.
This is about bureaucrats going after lost tax revenue. Going after Amazon customers is the next logical step.
There are only 2 things we Americans can call "secure" industries: farming and bullshitting.
Farming doesn't need much explanation. But like George Carlin says, the USA will always be the world leader in manufacture and export of Bullshit. Be it Hollywood bullshit, musical bullshit, or Madison Avenue bullshit, we are the supreme overlords.
All other industries are merely waiting in line to be outsourced.
The USA is hemorrhaging its own wealth.
This guy is completely worthless anymore.
OK, good point. But how does this work exactly? Will Radaharikrishnan videoconference his summation to the jury?
Yes, I know not all legal work involves court work, but I really can't see this affecting the legal industry the way it's affected the IT industry.
Unless it's something that by nature can only be done by US workers (and what would that be??), we're screwed.
We can't outsource our lawyers. It's simple really. 20 years from now the US will have a litigation-based economy.
The U.N. Blue Helmet army will roll them.
Maybe not, but it is definitely time to join the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
What the other responder said about "developer time is much more valuable than CPU time" deserves more comment.
Yes, I'm sure you're an alpha coder. I'm sure you demand a helluva salary. And I'm also sure that coders of your caliber are a small subset of all coders available in the labor pool. So how would a manager ensure that their programming project didn't blow up at runtime? Let's see.....they could get into a bidding war with lots of other managers at other companies for your services, or they could implement their project in a safer but slightly slower language: Java.
It's a simple business decision.
You are correct in that the government tramples on the idea of freedom and then tries to convince us that we are free ("With Libery and Justice for All" ??? Please).
But to suggest that a democratic regime would do differently is false. Republicans and Democrats are just 2 power-hungry groups who pick and choose different freedoms they want to protect, then proceed to trample on the rest. It is only the Libertarians who are true defenders of freedom.
This may be what you believe in order to rationalize your defeatist attitude. But just as there were people in this country willing to stand up to the British 250 years ago, there will be people willing to stand up to an overly oppressive should it become necessary in the future. Such as the author of the BINGO post I suspect.
Because they are (generally) chicken-shit elitists who lead pitiful little lives and take out their frustrations by disenfranchising people they don't like: conservatives.
If we find an asteroid that will cause ELE in 100 years, don't even think about raising my taxes to do something about it!
Raise my kids taxes!
Oh please. Nothing to do with terrorism? I'll admit Bush comes off badly when public speaking, but all first-person accounts indicate he is a pretty sharp guy. He is trying to do what he thinks his constituency wants him to do: go after terrorists. I don't know where you get this stuff about "oil prices and heavy industries." He is plenty wealthy on his own, and is not doing anything out of greed.
You are seriously underestimating the guy. I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff, and he certainly could be a better public speaker, but I doubt he's the greedy warmonger simpleton you think he is.
Why not spend more money on preventing war instead of fighting war?
This may come as a suprise to you, but there are people in the world who want to kill you and me just out of spite. We who sit around on Saturday mornings sipping tasty caffienated beverages sometimes have a hard time relating to those in the 3rd world raised in highly religious environments where they are taught that all their problems are because of us, and the only way to fix it is with an AK or a suicide bomb.
When you try to act on this problem, you end up making the productive members of society give away huge amounts of their earnings because the only way to *prevent war* on a planet with limited resources and swelling population is to redistribute wealth. "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need." This leads to socialism or communism. People are not naturally inclined to work for the service of others. It is not natural for people to sacrifice the fruits of their labor for some larger social goal. Surely you learned something from the collapse of the Soviet Union, yes?
So sorry, but the old saying rings true: The best way to keep the peace is to prepare for war.
Typical whiny-ass liberal mumbojumbo. Yes, instead of using the money for a cost-effective and efficient recruiting tool for THOSE HEATHENISTIC WARMONGERS, let's dump the money into preserving the nanny-state.
I'm in the area too. Maybe we could organize a bunch of us and we could all carry the camera to his door (live feed of course).
Might be too little for a whole series, but certainly enough for one episode.
Disclaimer: I have not decided one way or another on this issue.
How much time do you expect a Chinese bureaucrat to spend prosecuting a fellow countryman because he made 1000 foreigners delete a bothersome message?
I hate spam, but the last thing I want is a bureaucratic solution. The free market will find a way grasshopper....
Of course Hillary--it's another VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY!!!
You are being paranoid. Our elected officials, after their (everyone's) initial reaction to 9/11, took this as an opportunity to "do something" even though what they did was wrong. (It makes a nice bullet point on the campaign literature.) Only a few (Bob Barr, et al) had the guts to stand up and say, "this is wrong, govt. has enough power as is." And no one had the guts to say, "You live in a free country, and people will occasionally abuse those freedoms. Deal with it."
The crackdown on non-citizens I can deal with....
Right, and those crazy blokes who threw all that tea into Boston Harbor were way out of line as well!!!
That statistic is BS.
OK, maybe I just haven't looked in the right places, but I still can't find a list of local businesses that are reputable. I'd like to go to a site and say, "Give me all the mechanics in my area who've gotten ratings >= 8" without having such ratings corrupted by schills. It's still the recommendations of friends/neighbors/associates that work best for me.
Hurry--better start to poo-poo this new technology before it's actually taken seriously! ;)
To say "I wouldn't trust other people" speaks volumes. Why not? You obviously trust YOURSELF enough to pilot one. Why should we trust you?
Fact is, anyone who has the fortitude to earn a license to fly one is probably skilled enough to look out for you too.
The chance of equipment failure is a valid concern, and that's why most people will stick with that tired old 2-dimensional mode of ground transportation. But give it a chance! Consider for a moment the elimination of intersections and stop signs--commuting heaven! Your other concerns are mere details (albeit valid ones) that could be eliminated one way or another.
Hey, if I can't find a spot for a cold one and my shotgun, you city-folk can have these things... ;)