...How large is the market for such a tablet going to be?
The mobile professionals in need for more muscular arms or faster legs - either carry the extra weight of the batteries or to put the tablet in the dock to recharge it.
Please mod parent +Interesting (troll is definitely undeserved)
This is not to say that parent can say that his shop is "guilt free" in this regard, as it doesn't show any assurance the cast aluminium boxes are made with ethical workforce practices.
Sometimes this thought scares me. It makes me wonder if there actually is an alternate reality where what Rick Santorum makes sense, and we're just not privy to it. Much as they are not privy to our world, where Rick is full of Santorum.
Your post: a perfect example of sense being spoken and crazy being heard.
That is when the US flexes its military muscle, resulting in the countries making a hasty retreat back to the dollar.
Mate, you're delusional. Letting aside the prospect, in a WWIII, of US taking the place of Germany in WWII (would it have many allies from this position? I doubt Europe will consent to lend a "hand" in this madness)... consider
US had 10 years of war in two countries that brought the economy to its knees (running a high deficit and such). If the countries in BRICS decide they want no more to trade in USD and US triggers a war to coerce them back, US will have to fight one-third of the world's total population, with a combined nominal GDP of US$13.6 trillion, with a geographical distribution over 4 continents and spanning over approx 1/4 of the Earth surface. I'm afraid that US doesn't have a muscle this big.
Re: BRICS as an organisation not a casual grouping.
I stand corrected. I didn't realise they had formalised their relationships to that degree.
Nonetheless, it's hard to see India, for example, siding with China in a dispute with the US. Or Brazil.
Lower the risk of exposure to a volatile borrower (US start playing nasty with China would be seen as volatile)?
Let see
* India buying IMF gold - among the reasons - diversifying India's reserves (under the milder term of "foreign exchange reserve management") and a larger voting share in the IMF;
* Brazil - even if at a record high reserve level, probably quite f**ked in this respect - the exposure to US securities seems quite high. Anyway, here's something interesting: Brazil prepared to lend reserves from the nation's central bank (CB) to help finance the rescue package for the European Union - looks like a (risky?) attempt to diversify to me.
Well, it's hysterical, but not nonsense. There's the normal diplomatic pressure, threats to preferred trade status, etc. Not the sort of thing the OP meant, of course.
Maybe not nonsense, but US (and other First World nations) would have to be very careful; the population in BRICS (1/3 of the whole world population) would not feel the same impact on their living standard if the BRICS trade with US will lower down. I don't mean anything sudden, but 3-5 years of gradual reduction in the trade level would be just enough for the US population to feel quite down (after such a long period, a high unemployment won't be solved that quickly and a lower availability of cheap products from China won't make their life easier).
"BRICS" is just a traders acronym for five high growth nations, it is not a trade alliance. The five have absolutely no loyalty to each other.
Minor correction: not necessarily a trade alliance (as neither G8 or G20 is), but not just a mere acronym (an international political organisation of leading emerging economies, arising out of the inclusion of South Africa into the BRIC group in 2010). Which may make you assertion of "lack of loyalty" to lose water (see the "Trade medium" paragraph).
I'm addressing the incessant refrain that China somehow can "Call in" US debt, as if they were regular loans. There's no mechanism by which China can use US Treasury issued bonds to harm the US. There's no mechanism by which they can even threaten it. There is no leverage. People need to stop uncritically regurgitating this hysterical nonsense.
Is there a leverage for US (and other First World nations) to get tougher on China as the OP suggested? Or is it also a hysterical nonsense?
I see... and all the other nations (especially those in BRICS) will be happy to hear US started to default on bonds issued to China and will do nothing, right?
"If China acted to damage the US using Treasury bonds"
Exactly the same as freezing the assets of a dictator who threatens the US, which has happened any number of times without destroying the financial system. And why would Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa get between the US and China in a dispute? Why would they avenge China if China did something stupid and came off worse for it?
Avenge? I don't think vengeance is the proper term. I'd rather think they'll get around, rally and lower the level of trading with US; I mean: how comfortable would you be with a partner that sucks you dry, how long would you still stay in the partnership?
Africa is seen by Chinese businessmen as 900 million potential customers in a fast-growing market. Perhaps more importantly, African societies are far from market saturation, like their Western counterparts.
Globalization is a bitch in every sense of it, can't stay forever at the winning end if you stop playing fair.
Each bond is unique. The US Treasury registers and approves the owners of all Treasury issued bonds. If China acted to damage the US using Treasury bonds, they would suddenly find themselves the owners of worthless paper.
I see... and all the other nations (especially those in BRICS) will be happy to hear US started to default on bonds issued to China and will do nothing, right?
The same would happen if the US and China went to war (even by proxy, like Korea.)
I hope you don't suggest this as an outcome that would be preferable to not getting inflammated over minor squabbles (like Nortel - a Canadian company under liquidation, if I'm not mistaken - got hacked for 10 years and did nothing). Or are you on the view that cyber-war is not another "yellowcake fairy story" but a sound concept?
Either lenders will lend to the US when asked, or will have their holdings confiscated through the use of the printing press
Fail to see how this would solve the problem. You know?... the first to cry foul loudly will be the biggest corps of US, having their assets diluted, not to speak of the voters.
After this, it is not like China will (economically) stay with its hands crossed, I think the next move would be to make remimbi the currency of the world trade - many others nations already prefernow a more stable currency (or at least the countries in BRICS) - can you imagine their reaction if USD suddenly becomes garbage by a default?
Slashdot Mirror
With transistors that small, how would you harden a microchip against radiation?
Simple. Side effect of the whole equipment required to keep it in cryogenic conditions.
Medical expert Doc. Cottle agrees.
Hey, communism and "True Scotsmen" are safe too! (and I'm inclined to include the "free market" as well).
...How large is the market for such a tablet going to be?
The mobile professionals in need for more muscular arms or faster legs - either carry the extra weight of the batteries or to put the tablet in the dock to recharge it.
This is not to say that parent can say that his shop is "guilt free" in this regard, as it doesn't show any assurance the cast aluminium boxes are made with ethical workforce practices.
From open-source hardware communities?
It's for the word "lawn" and against anyone who is on it.
Now, get out of my turf, will ya?
I have accounts in both hotmail and gmail with about the same "exposure" on the internet and can't say i've seen any difference
I think I can help: just give me the two email addresses and tell me in which one you want more spam.
(duck)
Sometimes this thought scares me. It makes me wonder if there actually is an alternate reality where what Rick Santorum makes sense, and we're just not privy to it. Much as they are not privy to our world, where Rick is full of Santorum.
Your post: a perfect example of sense being spoken and crazy being heard.
(duck. Oy!!... just kidding, man, just kidding!)
I'm advocating a biological weapon that targets IP attorneys.
Sorry, they'll have a patent for it and sue you into oblivion before you get to use it.
That is when the US flexes its military muscle, resulting in the countries making a hasty retreat back to the dollar.
Mate, you're delusional. Letting aside the prospect, in a WWIII, of US taking the place of Germany in WWII (would it have many allies from this position? I doubt Europe will consent to lend a "hand" in this madness)... consider
US had 10 years of war in two countries that brought the economy to its knees (running a high deficit and such). If the countries in BRICS decide they want no more to trade in USD and US triggers a war to coerce them back, US will have to fight one-third of the world's total population, with a combined nominal GDP of US$13.6 trillion, with a geographical distribution over 4 continents and spanning over approx 1/4 of the Earth surface.
I'm afraid that US doesn't have a muscle this big.
Re: BRICS as an organisation not a casual grouping.
I stand corrected. I didn't realise they had formalised their relationships to that degree.
Nonetheless, it's hard to see India, for example, siding with China in a dispute with the US. Or Brazil.
Lower the risk of exposure to a volatile borrower (US start playing nasty with China would be seen as volatile)?
Let see
* India buying IMF gold - among the reasons - diversifying India's reserves (under the milder term of "foreign exchange reserve management") and a larger voting share in the IMF;
* Brazil - even if at a record high reserve level, probably quite f**ked in this respect - the exposure to US securities seems quite high. Anyway, here's something interesting: Brazil prepared to lend reserves from the nation's central bank (CB) to help finance the rescue package for the European Union - looks like a (risky?) attempt to diversify to me.
Well, it's hysterical, but not nonsense. There's the normal diplomatic pressure, threats to preferred trade status, etc. Not the sort of thing the OP meant, of course.
Maybe not nonsense, but US (and other First World nations) would have to be very careful; the population in BRICS (1/3 of the whole world population) would not feel the same impact on their living standard if the BRICS trade with US will lower down.
I don't mean anything sudden, but 3-5 years of gradual reduction in the trade level would be just enough for the US population to feel quite down (after such a long period, a high unemployment won't be solved that quickly and a lower availability of cheap products from China won't make their life easier).
"BRICS" is just a traders acronym for five high growth nations, it is not a trade alliance. The five have absolutely no loyalty to each other.
Minor correction: not necessarily a trade alliance (as neither G8 or G20 is), but not just a mere acronym (an international political organisation of leading emerging economies, arising out of the inclusion of South Africa into the BRIC group in 2010). Which may make you assertion of "lack of loyalty" to lose water (see the "Trade medium" paragraph).
I'm addressing the incessant refrain that China somehow can "Call in" US debt, as if they were regular loans. There's no mechanism by which China can use US Treasury issued bonds to harm the US. There's no mechanism by which they can even threaten it. There is no leverage. People need to stop uncritically regurgitating this hysterical nonsense.
Is there a leverage for US (and other First World nations) to get tougher on China as the OP suggested? Or is it also a hysterical nonsense?
I see... and all the other nations (especially those in BRICS) will be happy to hear US started to default on bonds issued to China and will do nothing, right?
"If China acted to damage the US using Treasury bonds"
Exactly the same as freezing the assets of a dictator who threatens the US, which has happened any number of times without destroying the financial system. And why would Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa get between the US and China in a dispute? Why would they avenge China if China did something stupid and came off worse for it?
Avenge? I don't think vengeance is the proper term. I'd rather think they'll get around, rally and lower the level of trading with US; I mean: how comfortable would you be with a partner that sucks you dry, how long would you still stay in the partnership?
In case it escaped you: while US (and other First World nations) use Africa as a garbage dump, China invests heavily there; even in 2006, the Africans were the second largest trading partners after US. Give it enough time and ...
Africa is seen by Chinese businessmen as 900 million potential customers in a fast-growing market. Perhaps more importantly, African societies are far from market saturation, like their Western counterparts.
Globalization is a bitch in every sense of it, can't stay forever at the winning end if you stop playing fair.
It is not like US can default only to China,
Each bond is unique. The US Treasury registers and approves the owners of all Treasury issued bonds. If China acted to damage the US using Treasury bonds, they would suddenly find themselves the owners of worthless paper.
I see... and all the other nations (especially those in BRICS) will be happy to hear US started to default on bonds issued to China and will do nothing, right?
The same would happen if the US and China went to war (even by proxy, like Korea.)
I hope you don't suggest this as an outcome that would be preferable to not getting inflammated over minor squabbles (like Nortel - a Canadian company under liquidation, if I'm not mistaken - got hacked for 10 years and did nothing).
Or are you on the view that cyber-war is not another "yellowcake fairy story" but a sound concept?
That's more steampunk than cyberpunk, ....
You're right, I stand corrected, thank you.
...be cyber-punk
(disclaimer: not affiliated in any way with datamancer, just love the designs)
Either lenders will lend to the US when asked, or will have their holdings confiscated through the use of the printing press
Fail to see how this would solve the problem. You know?... the first to cry foul loudly will be the biggest corps of US, having their assets diluted, not to speak of the voters.
After this, it is not like China will (economically) stay with its hands crossed, I think the next move would be to make remimbi the currency of the world trade - many others nations already prefer now a more stable currency (or at least the countries in BRICS) - can you imagine their reaction if USD suddenly becomes garbage by a default?
Which we can default on. That leverage goes both ways.
Hmm... is it? It is not like US can default only to China, how would you like US 'es credit rating to go to C-?
Congress' passing of comprehensive cybersecurity legislation
What, "think of the children" and ACTA/SOPA/PIPA are "sooo 2011", no good no more?
Seriously, guys, anyone that can provide some links that shows "strong opposition from open source"?
Try Greece. I heard is cheap.
Many of those telco facilities will probably remain as data centers, not office space.
Alternative use: monitoring, intercepting and logging communications?
May the mods offer you heaps of +Informative!! (I would, but since I posted...)
In the end, Intel gets double-jeopardy protection for the bargin-bin price of funding the NY AG office for a couple years.
Might not be... there's no court ruling on it (this means another AG may want to restart the brouhaha)
This comes on the heels of a late-2011 court ruling which “greatly reduced the scope of the New York Attorney General’s lawsuit.”
Which court ruling? /. at the time
I can't remember to see something on