Because its not that easy. In principle, BBC could follow a main body, and a few bigger newspapers could be forced to follow a official doctrine. But because its not done, there is no standard in England. The US situation is even more complex, simply from having little to no expansive state media, so even if they did a bookwork on their part of the language, there is no way to force communication to follow suit. At most, you will get papers pushers related to the government, to have a cheat sheet for common words that needs to be replaced. In both, the school system is used, but it doesn't have the same kind o reach, because you are waiting for those kids to reach the age where they become adults.
The situation in France is a bit different, i mean, we can quote Wikipedia on the matter: >France Télévisions (French pronunciation: [fs televizj]) is the French public national television broadcaster. It is a state-owned company formed from the integration of the public television channels France 2 (formerly Antenne 2) and France 3 (formerly France Régions 3), later joined by the legally independent channels France 5 (formerly La Cinquième), France Ô (formerly RFO Sat), and France 4 (formerly Festival). And the same is true of the various branches of Radio France. So when Academie Francaise decides on something, common media known to the public will have to accommodate this. In subtitles, translations, new shows, the news, etc. So its either a phone, or a phone multifunction now. So in a few years, people will ask for the latter in shops, instead of a smart phone~.
so it seems its more of a case of the professor of mentil, showing a bit of edge, is hurt a little that his circle of academia can't try to unfuck the language in the long term.
I agree with this sentiment. >Then there's the problem of what qualifies as an ID, especially with international events. There is no such thing. Just fucking specify what is valid, and follow those rules. Just don't go full retard and think passports are supposed to be used for civilian identification. You don't even need to do it properly, anything with name on is fine so long it looks like its real plastic. If it gets to the point where scammers has to run a card printing operation, with mismatched genders and name heritage, well thats at the least a cost they have to bear.
Short term thats true. In long term, you might order something, but that also means you finish measurement with the first batch of clothes. So you order 32-32 pants, get to see how the S-M-L scaling goes, take a few measurements. So i guess the economy of scale means: Customers might do 75% return, but those don't do that often. So between broken goods, cloth returns, and whatnot, only 1/3 returns? That means that people do figure out what to order, to avoid returns. Otherwise the number could be far higher, or online orders much harder to do.
As a Norwegian? Supply and Demand is not healthy for a Consumer marked, it really isn't. You need a diverse hedge of crops and arts inside those crops. Otherwise you end up with one superplant, with one super genus, and then it dies to some form of potato plague because its just one species stretched across the face of the earth. But i can't even tell WTF is going on with US Agriculture, its wild. Its a indirect subsidiary of lower incomes, paired with livestock feed subsidiary, in a very complex way. It might even be healthy, if it involved less pesticide and more species of corn.
There is also some other issues, even if S&D is healthy for the marked, the vacuum from removal isn't, and is going to cause far more damage than simply ignoring the issue, in the short term(decade). But at the same time, subsidiary to force faster Supply and Demand is a thing, some times even paired with insane profit seekers in everything between consumer and producer. The current one for Norway is cattle and lamb, where retail price after 1-3 modifications is sold at more than 10x the price, for a process that isn't nearly close to that in terms of cost or margins, or even distribution, in a post freezer world. If you go digging, you will find similar for USA. Or Sweden, or Switzerland, for Politics march on, like the true cancer it is.
I also agree on the sentiment of the post: Long term planning is really really hard, and subsidiaries/technology/export rarely hits their mark.
If they where of serious value, they would have to be stored properly. Not somewhere that would burn down to a wild wildfire. Or, at the least thats the case if this even resembles what happens to insurance of personal property.
Because its a complex issue. You need to clear the land, start using it, encourage the right forms of fauna(grass, plants, etc), have animals pasture on it, and after some point, the plantlife in the soil is now rich enough that the land is very fertile. The issue is not that it can't be done: The issue is that it takes time, and resources, and the great fear is that if such a event happens where its needed, there will basically be global famine while the breadwinners wait and maybe starve, waiting for the land to... terraform. There is no other way to describe it, in simple terms.
And thats not touching in related things, such as manpower shortages, or the need to clear land.
At first, that line is reasonable. Instead of gambling on a flagship model, you do a diverse form of gambling. And i guess it worked out, the massive amount of lineage forking in Nokia models is sorta amazing, and so is the ascetic. But this isn't what is talked about, what is talked about, is how Nokia in a post iPhone world, made a bunch of terrible decisions, allowing Microsoft to eventually buy out the phone part, and then waste it, and nobody was the wiser. Your post is not addressing the arguments of sjbe, so its a terrible post.
Eh, anon, you don't get it do you. Its one issue if the nutrition information is fudged. Its another if the nutrition information is correct, but also the only way to gauge how much water/salt is added. Assuming of course ground beef == ground beef, and we aren't talking minced meat versus ground beef.
You don't need a smart label. Consumer products is to some degree guaranteed to be in good shape. However, a store might need one. So instead of a label on each product(i.e giant box filled with meat), the box has a smart label on it. So when the product has reached store, the store can tell if there has been any normal degradation. Temperature, humidity, pressure, light, time. What is useful here is that by design, things that get moved in large quantum will be exposed to moving: Delays, bad temporary storage, faults in moving equipment(i.e truck refrigerator), too hot on site. It also has a real use for less perishable goods, such as candy, fabric, or other such things, allowing long term storage while also having a measure of degrading, allowing potential improvement of storage if somebody cared.
However, this is not useful by itself. Existing locations and stores, and storages, already have routines to deal with. Except if a thing is moved quite far. Lets say shipping between border nations, or even further: Over the ocean, and then trucked/trained across the nation, and then redistributed. So suddenly, such a thing can be used to tell if a shipment will be of premium value, or if its more reasonable enchant it by exposing it to a preservation method(i.e pickling, curing, smoking, etc)
Clear a forklift? Really? When rough conditions happen, you have no warning, because you are already in mud or tilted terrain. So when you finally tilt, there is no warning. And the danger of tilting itself isn't so bad, you just sit sideways: No the real danger of tilting, is that things start tumbling or falling around. When you think about it, Exoskeletons only need one safety mechanism for common usage: If something goes wrong, lock joint. And allow user to leave the device, if he has help.
Then again, the potential dangers of exoskeletons isn't even tripping accidents. Going for those as a example, is a sign of short sighted tabloid thinking. The greatest bother, is that to create a simple exoskeleton, you need some very simple limitations: 1. Joints can't be fully bent. Might mean knightly super movement with no danger, or stiff painful movement for work 2. Augmented movement is hard and potentially dangerous. A "safe" exoskeleton might have slow movement of limbs: Like driving a really slow forklift, which could be extremely bothersome when not moving objects 3. Additional reinforcement, to prevent injury in case of uneven movement(i.e clearing climbing obstacles, or uneven footing) On top of that, it might never be safe to operate in any barely tilted environment. And offers no advantage in height, without turning it into a balance/durability game for children.
You got a population of 11 million people. You will do fine. Unless its per commune/county, in which case... yeah, it will such for anywhere not central. Or you will just get shitty French export, being Mini France already. I also wonder if it will be a segregated horror show for Norway/Sweden/Denmark, of it will be segregated into their capitals and large cities.
I think thats a small and simple view of it. I guess Major Print Coalition(or whatever they could be called) is really really scared that at some point, Google or Facebook will look at them, and realize they source to Reuters or other such companies, and might attempt to kill them as middlemen. Or they are scared that the decline in quality will eventually threaten their income for Physical papers, because it will kill of quite a bit of print and knowledge.
Not that anybody should really care, but USA is a huge marked, so its weird to watch further Monopoly actors trying to do something weird. From a foreign viewpoint, this is weird: As a foreigner who still lives in a nation where the idea is that certain things should be decentralized via state funding, so the Nation can survive getting dragged into another World War/super famine/system collapse. This state funded decentralization still includes physical newspapers, which is why it looks odd from our angle.
The Norwegian Minister of Climate and the Environment's current minster isn't named Vidar Helgesenlaid. But Vidar Helgesen.
And as that is said, something more interesting: http://www.dinside.no/okonomi/... http://www.ost-varme.no/starts... http://www.husogheim.no/1/1_3.... Summarized: Assuming you already have a installation, and are a consumer, in Norway -Heat pump is calculated to be at 0.3-0.4per khw, but its still limited by how far down the pump goes before it can't supply(somewhere after freezing, some can even go to -25C). Earth installation will offset that. -Gass costs about 0.5kr per kWh -Propane costs about 0.5 per kWh -Pellets costs about 0.6kr per kWh -Oil costs about 1kr per kWh -Wood cost sabout 0.8kr per kWh -Paraffin cost sabout 1.3kr per kWh That said, for comforts sake, using those systems into water carried heat is the more stable and comfortable heating option. And another limit is how good the insulation of the house is: getting better windows(number of layers, insulation quality), as well as replacing to significantly higher quality glass wool.
So I read your statement, and i guess that makes sense. But what is the difference between human experimentation, and publishing censored data logs compiled into statistics?
I think that position is a strawman. So once you have infastructure to mine, refine and use a natural resource, you have a sunk cost into that resource. But unlike a low end retailer chain: The profits are actually great, so the company earns a lot of money. Its not that USA doesn't understand the basic marked forces, its more about the leadership of those companies wanting to sit on their money instead of creating jobs. Quite simply because the US population isn't really earning money on the labor that is needed, its just earning a living(significantly less).
There is a reason they call it "The Rust Belt", and not "Coal mining area". There is simply no will to keep things running as they should, or invest in other areas to replace them. T. Norwegian
This isn't about Trump being smart or stupid, this is about Trump reading the ink on the wall, of symbol politic, and just saying "we are paying for something we don't get results for" and add on a few silly PR spins on top of that. And unlike a lot of other people, he isn't a established politician. He seem to understand that he shouldn't wait for Election Number Two to start being willful. And unlike most of them, if he fails, he gets to go back being Donald Trump in his Trump Tower. And USA is in a position where they would fund India's and Chinas expansion of pollution. But since he isn't a career politician, he doesn't have loyalty to the platform. So he can say no.
And I would argue he has a good understanding of due process: If its not properly ratified, it can always be struck down. This is a case where Obama signed something, but didn't dry the ink. Which is what allows Trump to do as he pleases. And what is so interesting about this, is to see fucked the global media coverage of the case is.
I doubt its that simple. News services also has to blame themselves, for doing improper coverage of most subjects, essentially shooting themselves in the foot about any longterm credibility. And thats true for State media as well(NRK, BBC, NHK, KAVI), where the general insistence of even allowing outsourcing, combined with a small influx of Tabloid trends. And whats true of state and commercial is that their vision is sorely lacking, meaning they don't have a long term plan to fall back on, further reducing their quality.
These lack of good qualities are also true of what they outsource to(Reuters, Associate Press, Havas, Xinhua, ITAR-TASS). So local news sources will be plagued by the low quality they import, as well national and commercial services do, unless they are willing to pay for boots in the ground.
I doubt it. Because thats a very narrow view of how press releases works. Except for bullet point 4, which is generally a dishonest rebrand of "media" into "tabloid media". Because if the first point was true, we wouldn't even have any press releases from them. We have lots. Main obstacle is that nobody wants to setup China export shops, in a age where media use major companies such as Reuters for news sources. Another issue is that due Hong Kong existing, as well as Taiwan, any Chinese news export won't setup anything in the mainland. The second point is true, but not to the degree you think it is. If Coca Cola is getting told to budge, they really won't. Companies simply don't budge the way you think they do.
Third point is sorta true, but China isn't a small banana republic. I honestly think "you must discuss human rights!" at every single opportunity as a native counterquestion is silly, when you often ask that as the main question, instead of asking about important technicalities or what the export cost really is.
The problem with Phage theory is that its based on knowledge: If you know at will attack, you can prepare for it. But if you where to have a surgery, you are open to RANDOM bacteria. And this is why phage has limitations. So Phage will not help for what Antibiotics is used for.
And thats before you get into the fact Soviet migrationanry medicine has several major issues with spread of knowledge, quality control, and other such problems. I am saying: Don't trust Russian medicine, trust Latvian or some other post USSR nation medicine instead.
While thats true, there is also caveat: Even something like Tesla only have 5 hours of driving range. Thats actually decent enough to get sales, but thats still 5 hours. And 5 hours is a lot, and it actually enough to get penetration in the consumer marked, and it did that. If fossil fuels is to vanish in 8 years, you need electric vehicles for 16-20 hour ranges, to penetrate the last part of the marked that needs such range. Cross country truck driving is such a thing, even if it only exists due limited infrastructure(trains, ports, last mile). The same is true for roadtrips, and electrical needs to push a lot further if its to squeeze gasoline or diesel to rent only.
I agree that as more and more reasonable solutions is rolled out, with realistic real world performance, electrical vehicles will penetrate more and more of the marked.
Tariff's aren't a magical solution. They are a short term solution that relies on the marked adopting to the tariffs. If the marked doesn't, you get situations like Brazil where there is no high end production in any sector, meaning the marked is basically permanently crashed for most sectors except automobiles. And the lack of economic strength, manufacturing tech, will to license technology, very low consumer yields, and several other aspects keeps Brazil crippled via Tariffs. You also have places like Norway and Japan, where extensive tariff's and subsidies basically push for a flat communist economy for food, which guarantees some rather extensive stable food volume. The downside is that production also stops where subsidies or tariffs stops, where things like imported animal food isn't tariffed enough to guarantee food safety if cross ocean trade slowed down.
So if these examples are relevant to the argument, tariffs can be a start, but its not replacement for long term investment/regulation to stay ahead in a global marked. All tariff's will do, is to allow investment will to exist, in getting high end infrastructure if parts already exist. They don't change that the boat is gone, and nobody will do mass production via cheap labor if a high end factory is more cost effective.
The problem with this theory, is that you forget that land cables are still bottlenecked by being land cables. Connection across the ocean and between nations is also bottlenecked, where the former is extremely bottlenecked compared to the latter. I.E If you block of what is essentially New Yorks sea cables, you add more than 100 ping for anything that would cross the chokepoint for both sides.
Slashdot Mirror
Because its not that easy. In principle, BBC could follow a main body, and a few bigger newspapers could be forced to follow a official doctrine. But because its not done, there is no standard in England.
The US situation is even more complex, simply from having little to no expansive state media, so even if they did a bookwork on their part of the language, there is no way to force communication to follow suit. At most, you will get papers pushers related to the government, to have a cheat sheet for common words that needs to be replaced.
In both, the school system is used, but it doesn't have the same kind o reach, because you are waiting for those kids to reach the age where they become adults.
The situation in France is a bit different, i mean, we can quote Wikipedia on the matter:
>France Télévisions (French pronunciation: [fs televizj]) is the French public national television broadcaster. It is a state-owned company formed from the integration of the public television channels France 2 (formerly Antenne 2) and France 3 (formerly France Régions 3), later joined by the legally independent channels France 5 (formerly La Cinquième), France Ô (formerly RFO Sat), and France 4 (formerly Festival).
And the same is true of the various branches of Radio France.
So when Academie Francaise decides on something, common media known to the public will have to accommodate this. In subtitles, translations, new shows, the news, etc.
So its either a phone, or a phone multifunction now. So in a few years, people will ask for the latter in shops, instead of a smart phone~.
so it seems its more of a case of the professor of mentil, showing a bit of edge, is hurt a little that his circle of academia can't try to unfuck the language in the long term.
I agree with this sentiment.
>Then there's the problem of what qualifies as an ID, especially with international events.
There is no such thing. Just fucking specify what is valid, and follow those rules. Just don't go full retard and think passports are supposed to be used for civilian identification.
You don't even need to do it properly, anything with name on is fine so long it looks like its real plastic. If it gets to the point where scammers has to run a card printing operation, with mismatched genders and name heritage, well thats at the least a cost they have to bear.
Short term thats true.
In long term, you might order something, but that also means you finish measurement with the first batch of clothes.
So you order 32-32 pants, get to see how the S-M-L scaling goes, take a few measurements.
So i guess the economy of scale means: Customers might do 75% return, but those don't do that often. So between broken goods, cloth returns, and whatnot, only 1/3 returns?
That means that people do figure out what to order, to avoid returns. Otherwise the number could be far higher, or online orders much harder to do.
As a Norwegian?
Supply and Demand is not healthy for a Consumer marked, it really isn't. You need a diverse hedge of crops and arts inside those crops. Otherwise you end up with one superplant, with one super genus, and then it dies to some form of potato plague because its just one species stretched across the face of the earth.
But i can't even tell WTF is going on with US Agriculture, its wild. Its a indirect subsidiary of lower incomes, paired with livestock feed subsidiary, in a very complex way. It might even be healthy, if it involved less pesticide and more species of corn.
There is also some other issues, even if S&D is healthy for the marked, the vacuum from removal isn't, and is going to cause far more damage than simply ignoring the issue, in the short term(decade).
But at the same time, subsidiary to force faster Supply and Demand is a thing, some times even paired with insane profit seekers in everything between consumer and producer. The current one for Norway is cattle and lamb, where retail price after 1-3 modifications is sold at more than 10x the price, for a process that isn't nearly close to that in terms of cost or margins, or even distribution, in a post freezer world.
If you go digging, you will find similar for USA. Or Sweden, or Switzerland, for Politics march on, like the true cancer it is.
I also agree on the sentiment of the post:
Long term planning is really really hard, and subsidiaries/technology/export rarely hits their mark.
If they where of serious value, they would have to be stored properly.
Not somewhere that would burn down to a wild wildfire.
Or, at the least thats the case if this even resembles what happens to insurance of personal property.
So in the end, I guess Freud was right:
A Cigar is still a Cigar, even if its no longer burning plants for fumes, but vaporizing liquids for mist.
Because its a complex issue.
You need to clear the land, start using it, encourage the right forms of fauna(grass, plants, etc), have animals pasture on it, and after some point, the plantlife in the soil is now rich enough that the land is very fertile.
The issue is not that it can't be done: The issue is that it takes time, and resources, and the great fear is that if such a event happens where its needed, there will basically be global famine while the breadwinners wait and maybe starve, waiting for the land to... terraform. There is no other way to describe it, in simple terms.
And thats not touching in related things, such as manpower shortages, or the need to clear land.
At first, that line is reasonable. Instead of gambling on a flagship model, you do a diverse form of gambling.
And i guess it worked out, the massive amount of lineage forking in Nokia models is sorta amazing, and so is the ascetic.
But this isn't what is talked about, what is talked about, is how Nokia in a post iPhone world, made a bunch of terrible decisions, allowing Microsoft to eventually buy out the phone part, and then waste it, and nobody was the wiser.
Your post is not addressing the arguments of sjbe, so its a terrible post.
Eh, anon, you don't get it do you.
Its one issue if the nutrition information is fudged. Its another if the nutrition information is correct, but also the only way to gauge how much water/salt is added.
Assuming of course ground beef == ground beef, and we aren't talking minced meat versus ground beef.
You don't need a smart label. Consumer products is to some degree guaranteed to be in good shape.
However, a store might need one. So instead of a label on each product(i.e giant box filled with meat), the box has a smart label on it.
So when the product has reached store, the store can tell if there has been any normal degradation.
Temperature, humidity, pressure, light, time.
What is useful here is that by design, things that get moved in large quantum will be exposed to moving: Delays, bad temporary storage, faults in moving equipment(i.e truck refrigerator), too hot on site.
It also has a real use for less perishable goods, such as candy, fabric, or other such things, allowing long term storage while also having a measure of degrading, allowing potential improvement of storage if somebody cared.
However, this is not useful by itself. Existing locations and stores, and storages, already have routines to deal with. Except if a thing is moved quite far. Lets say shipping between border nations, or even further: Over the ocean, and then trucked/trained across the nation, and then redistributed. So suddenly, such a thing can be used to tell if a shipment will be of premium value, or if its more reasonable enchant it by exposing it to a preservation method(i.e pickling, curing, smoking, etc)
Clear a forklift? Really?
When rough conditions happen, you have no warning, because you are already in mud or tilted terrain. So when you finally tilt, there is no warning. And the danger of tilting itself isn't so bad, you just sit sideways: No the real danger of tilting, is that things start tumbling or falling around.
When you think about it, Exoskeletons only need one safety mechanism for common usage: If something goes wrong, lock joint. And allow user to leave the device, if he has help.
Then again, the potential dangers of exoskeletons isn't even tripping accidents. Going for those as a example, is a sign of short sighted tabloid thinking.
The greatest bother, is that to create a simple exoskeleton, you need some very simple limitations:
1. Joints can't be fully bent. Might mean knightly super movement with no danger, or stiff painful movement for work
2. Augmented movement is hard and potentially dangerous. A "safe" exoskeleton might have slow movement of limbs: Like driving a really slow forklift, which could be extremely bothersome when not moving objects
3. Additional reinforcement, to prevent injury in case of uneven movement(i.e clearing climbing obstacles, or uneven footing)
On top of that, it might never be safe to operate in any barely tilted environment. And offers no advantage in height, without turning it into a balance/durability game for children.
You got a population of 11 million people. You will do fine. Unless its per commune/county, in which case... yeah, it will such for anywhere not central.
Or you will just get shitty French export, being Mini France already.
I also wonder if it will be a segregated horror show for Norway/Sweden/Denmark, of it will be segregated into their capitals and large cities.
I think thats a small and simple view of it. I guess Major Print Coalition(or whatever they could be called) is really really scared that at some point, Google or Facebook will look at them, and realize they source to Reuters or other such companies, and might attempt to kill them as middlemen.
Or they are scared that the decline in quality will eventually threaten their income for Physical papers, because it will kill of quite a bit of print and knowledge.
Not that anybody should really care, but USA is a huge marked, so its weird to watch further Monopoly actors trying to do something weird. From a foreign viewpoint, this is weird: As a foreigner who still lives in a nation where the idea is that certain things should be decentralized via state funding, so the Nation can survive getting dragged into another World War/super famine/system collapse. This state funded decentralization still includes physical newspapers, which is why it looks odd from our angle.
The Norwegian Minister of Climate and the Environment's current minster isn't named Vidar Helgesenlaid.
But Vidar Helgesen.
And as that is said, something more interesting:
http://www.dinside.no/okonomi/...
http://www.ost-varme.no/starts...
http://www.husogheim.no/1/1_3....
Summarized: Assuming you already have a installation, and are a consumer, in Norway
-Heat pump is calculated to be at 0.3-0.4per khw, but its still limited by how far down the pump goes before it can't supply(somewhere after freezing, some can even go to -25C). Earth installation will offset that.
-Gass costs about 0.5kr per kWh
-Propane costs about 0.5 per kWh
-Pellets costs about 0.6kr per kWh
-Oil costs about 1kr per kWh
-Wood cost sabout 0.8kr per kWh
-Paraffin cost sabout 1.3kr per kWh
That said, for comforts sake, using those systems into water carried heat is the more stable and comfortable heating option. And another limit is how good the insulation of the house is: getting better windows(number of layers, insulation quality), as well as replacing to significantly higher quality glass wool.
So I read your statement, and i guess that makes sense.
But what is the difference between human experimentation, and publishing censored data logs compiled into statistics?
Go fuck yourself. He is doing Gods work: Article is shit, and so is headline. Why even submit it to the firehose, if its so bad?
>it is a distributor choice
So its on by default. Thank you for your valid and long argument
I think that position is a strawman. So once you have infastructure to mine, refine and use a natural resource, you have a sunk cost into that resource. But unlike a low end retailer chain: The profits are actually great, so the company earns a lot of money.
Its not that USA doesn't understand the basic marked forces, its more about the leadership of those companies wanting to sit on their money instead of creating jobs. Quite simply because the US population isn't really earning money on the labor that is needed, its just earning a living(significantly less).
There is a reason they call it "The Rust Belt", and not "Coal mining area". There is simply no will to keep things running as they should, or invest in other areas to replace them.
T. Norwegian
This isn't about Trump being smart or stupid, this is about Trump reading the ink on the wall, of symbol politic, and just saying "we are paying for something we don't get results for" and add on a few silly PR spins on top of that.
And unlike a lot of other people, he isn't a established politician. He seem to understand that he shouldn't wait for Election Number Two to start being willful. And unlike most of them, if he fails, he gets to go back being Donald Trump in his Trump Tower.
And USA is in a position where they would fund India's and Chinas expansion of pollution. But since he isn't a career politician, he doesn't have loyalty to the platform. So he can say no.
And I would argue he has a good understanding of due process: If its not properly ratified, it can always be struck down. This is a case where Obama signed something, but didn't dry the ink.
Which is what allows Trump to do as he pleases.
And what is so interesting about this, is to see fucked the global media coverage of the case is.
I doubt its that simple. News services also has to blame themselves, for doing improper coverage of most subjects, essentially shooting themselves in the foot about any longterm credibility.
And thats true for State media as well(NRK, BBC, NHK, KAVI), where the general insistence of even allowing outsourcing, combined with a small influx of Tabloid trends. And whats true of state and commercial is that their vision is sorely lacking, meaning they don't have a long term plan to fall back on, further reducing their quality.
These lack of good qualities are also true of what they outsource to(Reuters, Associate Press, Havas, Xinhua, ITAR-TASS). So local news sources will be plagued by the low quality they import, as well national and commercial services do, unless they are willing to pay for boots in the ground.
I doubt it. Because thats a very narrow view of how press releases works. Except for bullet point 4, which is generally a dishonest rebrand of "media" into "tabloid media".
Because if the first point was true, we wouldn't even have any press releases from them. We have lots. Main obstacle is that nobody wants to setup China export shops, in a age where media use major companies such as Reuters for news sources. Another issue is that due Hong Kong existing, as well as Taiwan, any Chinese news export won't setup anything in the mainland.
The second point is true, but not to the degree you think it is. If Coca Cola is getting told to budge, they really won't. Companies simply don't budge the way you think they do.
Third point is sorta true, but China isn't a small banana republic. I honestly think "you must discuss human rights!" at every single opportunity as a native counterquestion is silly, when you often ask that as the main question, instead of asking about important technicalities or what the export cost really is.
The problem with Phage theory is that its based on knowledge: If you know at will attack, you can prepare for it.
But if you where to have a surgery, you are open to RANDOM bacteria. And this is why phage has limitations.
So Phage will not help for what Antibiotics is used for.
And thats before you get into the fact Soviet migrationanry medicine has several major issues with spread of knowledge, quality control, and other such problems. I am saying: Don't trust Russian medicine, trust Latvian or some other post USSR nation medicine instead.
While thats true, there is also caveat: Even something like Tesla only have 5 hours of driving range. Thats actually decent enough to get sales, but thats still 5 hours. And 5 hours is a lot, and it actually enough to get penetration in the consumer marked, and it did that.
If fossil fuels is to vanish in 8 years, you need electric vehicles for 16-20 hour ranges, to penetrate the last part of the marked that needs such range. Cross country truck driving is such a thing, even if it only exists due limited infrastructure(trains, ports, last mile). The same is true for roadtrips, and electrical needs to push a lot further if its to squeeze gasoline or diesel to rent only.
I agree that as more and more reasonable solutions is rolled out, with realistic real world performance, electrical vehicles will penetrate more and more of the marked.
Tariff's aren't a magical solution. They are a short term solution that relies on the marked adopting to the tariffs.
If the marked doesn't, you get situations like Brazil where there is no high end production in any sector, meaning the marked is basically permanently crashed for most sectors except automobiles. And the lack of economic strength, manufacturing tech, will to license technology, very low consumer yields, and several other aspects keeps Brazil crippled via Tariffs.
You also have places like Norway and Japan, where extensive tariff's and subsidies basically push for a flat communist economy for food, which guarantees some rather extensive stable food volume. The downside is that production also stops where subsidies or tariffs stops, where things like imported animal food isn't tariffed enough to guarantee food safety if cross ocean trade slowed down.
So if these examples are relevant to the argument, tariffs can be a start, but its not replacement for long term investment/regulation to stay ahead in a global marked.
All tariff's will do, is to allow investment will to exist, in getting high end infrastructure if parts already exist. They don't change that the boat is gone, and nobody will do mass production via cheap labor if a high end factory is more cost effective.
The problem with this theory, is that you forget that land cables are still bottlenecked by being land cables. Connection across the ocean and between nations is also bottlenecked, where the former is extremely bottlenecked compared to the latter.
I.E If you block of what is essentially New Yorks sea cables, you add more than 100 ping for anything that would cross the chokepoint for both sides.