Cable TV is getting very hard to justify these days when, day after day, you keep noticing "500 channels and nothing's on." I would love to have an alternative but there's no competition.
Sure there is: Bittorrent and Hulu for TV shows and Netflix for movies. I'm still waiting for networks to "get it" and start offering TV shows from their own bittorrent servers, with a few commercials already embedded in the video, but public (illegal) servers exist now and TV shows are always easy to get. Of course, the networks will likely start out by having a dedicated player that is a POS when users want to use MPC, but it would be nice start in the right direction.
In about the same time on Facebook, I have seen insane amounts of trolling and spam. The spam in particular where some "girl" asks to be your friend, and the account is only a way to link to porn. But I see tons of trolling on the public pages. Obviously, if you don't visit a bunch of public areas on Facebook, you won't see it, as a stranger can't troll on your personal page, etc. It gets deleted quickly on facebook (and it cant here, just modded down), but as a percentage of posts in those areas, I would almost bet they get more on facebook.
People who troll on facebook don't register with their real names usually, usually it is with a 2nd+ account (I have a 2nd account from when I played a few games, as do many people I know). Then again, they also don't send their photo to their neighbors and brag about the trolls either, so I guess there are exceptions.
While I think 18 weeks is too steep, even here in the US there have been limitations on free speech beyond your examples. I think the key difference in the US and UK here is that it would very difficult to prosecute under the comments being "obscene" in the US, as that particular word has always been considered too subjective for most courts. There would have been a better chance to sue (and win) in a civil court for harassment/mental distress, which has a lower standard. The whole O.J. incident demonstrated that quite well.
And yes, they should have just banned the user and deleted the comments. The situation also begs the question 'should you expect a certain amount of vandalism if you post a memorial in a public place that anyone can comment on anonymously?' Obviously doesn't justify his actions, but it is kinda like painting a giant wall solid white on the bad side of town, and expecting no one will vandalize it because it looks so pretty as a solid shade of white.
Patton is credit as something to the effect of "Your job isn't to die for your country, it is to make the other guy die for his." War is about attrition, be it bullets, tanks, humans or will. Who ever runs out first, loses. Quick, brutal conflicts tend to remove the will before all the bullets and humans are used up. "Shock and Awe®" was a diluted version of this. The obvious problem is that in the middle east, you have cultures who will "surrender" to simply make it easier to attack you from within. They know that you aren't really going to be brutal in your attacks, and they use this quite well to kill your soldiers.
The other point is that in order to charge in 6 minutes, the thing must be on a 100 amp circuit. You can only move so many electrons using a 230v/15a circuit, no matter how advanced the battery is.
I was not aware of that quote, but was tempted to say as much, particularly if they were dumb enough to enter the SE portion of the US where ownership of military worthy weapons is higher than the rest of the nation. When I have made that point before, people tend to jump in and try to argue against it, saying how tanks, etc. would negate that. They forget the Revolutionary War I suppose, where just a few crazy rednecks hiding in the trees caused havok amongst the most disciplined of troops. Ironically, that was our first experience with terrorism, but we were the terrorists.
Not that it is justified, but AT&T is about the same with their business accounts. It took us most of a year to get them to realize they owed us over $6,000, and 6 months after that to get them to apply the credits to our bill. Needless to say, once the credits were used up, we changed our 12 phone lines and 3mbit worth of data lines over, to Time Warner, and get better service, similar or better uptime, for about $30,000 less per year.
If the US launched an all-out strategic attack on an opponent
China? Russia? What do you think the odds are that we would be doing a First Strike against any nuclear power? Correct answer: Zero, nada, zip. This means they would be used as a second strike, which is by definition, strategic positioning of weaponry, and the founding idea behind the Nuclear Triad. They wouldn't be bombing boots on the ground in China, too much chance for collateral damage, and the real goodies aren't even the soldiers (which can be handily taken care of with conventional weapons.) The real goodies are infrastructure. If the shit were literally to hit the fan and you have to second strike (as I discount ALL possibilities of a first strike by the US), you nuke dams, power plants, nuclear facilities, military installations, and maybe even factories and shipyards. Yes, soldiers would die, but the real target is infrastructure. If China landed troops on the west coast, tactical nuclear wouldn't be an option except as a hail mary. You don't piss in your own chili that way.
While the Geneva Convention is against it, the most effective way is to nuke rice patties making them unusable for years, literally starving the troops. Same reason for bombing dams, to destroy the ability to feed themselves as arable land is now flooded with radiation and washed away in the resulting flood. Then, I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of "rules" of war. Seems pointless since one side always ignores, and the other side always cheats when they can. If you notice, every war since all the rules have been put in place has been a long slogging battle with more death than would be possible if the rules were ignored (Korea, still ongoing, Vietnam, lost, middle east, etc.) And yes, I am aware that I am in the minority on that point, which doesn't negate the truth of the matter.
At one point we had Khrushchev sitting across from us. At one point they had Reagan.
Both of which I say were much more rational than given credit. One way to get your opponent to pay attention is if they think you are crazy enough to use the nuclear option. Even Obama has made it clear that it isn't off the table. And as for Reagan, I would gladly vote for him again. On the domestic side, he was the closest we have had to a libertarian president. Obviously his foreign policies were not libertarian.
Too bad we only have negative evidence that M.A.D. actually worked in the first place.
"Positive evidence" as in real mutually assured destruction? The fact that no one used nuclear weapons in any capacity outside of testing (ie: USSR/Afghanistan, US/Vietnam, etc.) clearly shows that M.A.D. worked rather well. If only the U.S. had nuclear weapons during the middle 20th century, I'm quite sure that they would have been used in other conflicts, to "save lives". M.A.D. made it so everyone must wanted nuclear weapons, but no one could use them for fear of being erased off the planet. Sounds like it worked like a charm.
then definitely any tight grouping of 100.000+ soldiers+armor should fear a nuclear warhead, and such groupings would be inevitable.
Wrong answer. No military is going to group 100k soldiers in an area that can taken out by a single warhead, and never would have. Ever. Even in WWII we were only able to kill 100k people by striking civilians. This is the whole reason you have multiple military bases, to distribute you capabilities and make it impossible for an enemy to take out a significant portion with a single strike. With the exception of training bases, military posts generally have less than 10k people, and often less than 5k people stationed there, for this exact reason. The remainder of the work force on a base are civilians.
And you won't see tactical nuclear weapons being used in the field likely ever, as that is the invisible line in the sand that would justify the enemy using nukes, perhaps on civilian targets. And there is no justification for using them against an enemy without nuclear capability. If an enemy used tactical nukes on us, we would still use them as a strategic weapon in retaliation, against fixed targets, not mobile troops. Even though we have them, tactical nuclear weapons make no sense, as they are solely a deterrent, a strategic weapon. Perhaps this is why they were all under SAC (Strategic Air Command) and not TAC (Tactical Air Command) during the Cold War, including all ICBMs (obviously excepting navel based warheads under the Nuclear Triad philosophy: Bombers, ICBMs, Submarines)
So, such groupings are not only NOT inevitable, they are highly unlikely as there is no tactical or strategic advantage to such a grouping, and tremendous risks.
Expect some bad mods for being right. Everyone likes to pretend that the Cold War didn't happen, and most of the people with the strongest opinions didn't live during it, have never served in the military or had relatives that did during the Cold War. Plenty of mistakes have been made along the way (Vietnam for starters), but having a strong military and nuclear deterrent since WWII wasn't one of them.
While I understand why, most people under 30 don't fully appreciate the threat of the USSR after WWII as they are fortunate enough to not have lived under it. Ironically, the reason they haven't lived under that threat is due to what some are complaining about to begin with.
Been there, done that. Usually it only requires downloading the 'no CD' crack, so you can play the $50 game you just bought without swapping out the CD every time.
The number of warheads in the US peaked in the 60s, not the 80s, so a big part of what the Soviets were trying to catch up with was our technology, not just our numbers. And yes, they used more warheads as a way to counteract our better technology. This is why they completely freaked on the SDI (star wars) system, as it would make all their warheads obsolete, in theory. Our stealth technology and other weapons likely played a bigger role in pushing the Soviets to spend more during the 70s-80s than the nukes did.
And I agree, had we not had the military buildup we had (all types) then the USSR might still be here today. China, on the other hand, is a very sticky situation. They appear to be at the beginning states of an economic war with us, and we just don't realize it. And they don't need 1000s of warheads as a deterrent, just 50-100 is plenty. Our greatest asset is that we tend to be better at creating the technologies, while China has a history of being good at copying technology. Oh, and now China has decided to quit exporting rare earth minerals used in advanced technologies.
As a side note, Steam discounts 4 packs of games for their multiplayer games. And they have frequent "free weekends". And frequent 50% or more sales. And guest passes. And you can play them in internet cafes if you like. And yes, it is possible (and someone pointed out) to work around their DRM, which is weaker than most and they don't care (Gabe has stated that piracy isn't in his top 5 concerns).
It isn't perfect, but they are more friendly than anyone else for trying out games. Most companies simply tell you to buy it, or if you MUST, then first read the reviews from "objective" gaming sites. Yes, that is a joke.
There is an expression that "nice guys finish last", and honestly, there is a lot of truth to it. Like it or not, you can get more out of the average person if you abuse them a little. A boss that engages but always makes demands that are slightly impossible gets more productivity than one who is laid back. Oh, some people would like to THINK the opposite is true, but there is a reason the cliche is a cliche. As someone used to being both the boss (as owner) and a higher level employee (Of another company) at the same time, I can attest to the power of the said cliche. People in power, either in business or politics, tend to be a bit of a prick. You have to, in order to walk on the backs of a few others to rise to the top. There are exceptions, but this IS the rule.
The problem is that some people with power take it to the next level, and abuse people who are not in their employ but instead of mutual interests. Java programmers as a whole would fit this, as a healthy Java community would benefit Oracle and the members of the community. But once you have a company with a culture of top-down management, it is difficult to get them to engage even when it is in their best interest. I would imagine that no manager that works for Oracle gets any kind of bonus that is related to the performance of the Java platform, or it would appear. As long as money isn't trading hands, there is no reason for anyone there to invest their time into "trivial tasks" such as working with the community.
According to the people working there, it is closing before January, at least regarding actual manufacturing. They have been running a skeleton crew for quite a while, and even worked many of the people 7 days a week for a while. They originally said it would be closed a year ago, but ended up paying the small crew large bonuses to stay around, which helps but not as much as staying. Living near the plant, the wife and I know several people who work (or did) there.
And yes, Dell wasn't exactly tech jobs, but it was jobs. And considering that unemployment is well over 10% here, we would have been very happy to keep the jobs. It created more than "Dell" jobs, it created UPS jobs, restaurant jobs, etc. Having Dell here would have opened up some more opportunity as well. They never were able to get employment up to the levels they promised, and had to give back the tax incentives, although all the money spent on roads to the plant and other infrastructure is simply spent and can't be recovered, which is why I am hoping someone moves in and at leasts puts that investment to work.
Time on the water is cheap compared to time over land, calculating cost per mile. We deal in a lot of stuff in ocean containers, and it is the overland portion of the trip that is expensive. Once it is on a truck, you need one truck and one driver for one container, instead of one vessel and 20 crew for hundreds of containers. And not all the parts come from China. Flying specialized parts from China to NC isn't much different than to NC either, when you are talking about that kind of volume.
With a lot of higher end products that have a good margin, a company is way more likely to build in the US or at least North America. The problem with building in the US isn't quality of employees or products, it is the overall cost. This is why cheap stuff with razor thin margins go overseas first, the stuff that you don't just sell 10,000 of them, but > 1 million. This is one of the reasons I am for lowering corporate taxes, to encourage more manufacturing, for at least mid and high end products.
I don't foresee Apple doing all their manufacturing in the USA, but perhaps similar to what Dell was doing: The "build your own" market. This applies only to computers, not their other devices, which will always be overseas. One of the weaknesses of Apple in the past has been being able to customize your computer system. While it is infinitely better now, you still need to be able to take the main components (made in China) and do the final assembly near your point of shipment. Having a facility in NC *could* be beneficial geographically, as it reduces shipping times and fees. And again, being 30 minutes from both UPS and FedEx hubs is a HUGE advantage, as it means you can always negotiate the best deals, as they have to compete for the business. And your stuff you loaded at 6pm is in the air by 10pm and in the regional center before the AM crew has their morning coffee.
I don't want to sound like a Chamber of Commerce ad, but suffice it to say there are logical reasons why Apple *might* consider this area for building system. Having the datacenter nearby certainly doesn't hurt the chances either.
Actually, they are located close to McGuire nuclear power plant (owned by Duke Energy), and near 4 major hydroelectric dams on the Yadkin River that create High Rock Lake, Tuckertown, Badin Lake (Narrows) and Falls lake, which are managed/quazi-owned by Alcoa. Alcoa doesn't make aluminum here anymore, so they have power to sell, and usually do during peak time. There are also a number of coal and natural gas plants nearby. I live about 70 miles from the new data center, and was somewhat surprised that they put it in such a low density area, until I realized how much power capacity is nearby. TVA isn't really a factor in this part of the country, as I believe all the hydro power around here is privately owned.
Electricity usage in NC is way down, due to all the textile and furniture manufacturing moving to China and India, plus all the aluminum manufacturing is now gone. Those industries were typically BIG consumers of electricity. My understanding is that all the power plants in this region are running well below their peak output, so we literally have more than we know what to do with here. I would imagine that electricity is damn cheap for Apple to buy in bulk, which is a major portion of their expenses.
Also, it doesn't hurt that NC is located somewhat in the center of the eastern USA, and 2/3rds of the population lives east of the Mississippi river, so it is actually a good location, geographically. The rather new Dell plant near Winston-Salem was just shut down (moved to Mexico), and there has been rumors of Apple buying it for manufacturing as well. There are lots of good reasons that would make sense, since the state spent MILLIONS in new infrastructure to the plant just a few years ago, and the workforce around here is generally good with a manufacturing history, AND both UPS and FedEx have major hubs about 30 minutes away at GSO. Would love to see that happen, only because we need the jobs with over 10% unemployment here.
I have 50 steam games, all of them were two clicks and they installed in the background. In spite of dumb moderating, it is a fact. Almost every game I have bought auto-configures (Steam doesn't have as much control over that). I might tweak stuff but it runs fine on first click. And of course I'm not getting paid, at to even state so is pretty much FUD. MANY of us appreciate Steam and love the service. It isn't perfect, and YOU might not like everything about it, but many of us DO. They open their SDK up for mods, if you buy a bulk package that has a game that you already own, you get to GIVE the extra to a friend instead of just sucking it up.
Do you lose First Sale? Yes. Guess what, PC games don't resell for shit unless they are still quite new, so I don't really care, and I don't remember trying to gloss over or hide that fact, nor does Steam. If you want games you can buy and sell used, buy a console or stay off Steam, no one is making you use the service.
Slashdot Mirror
Cable TV is getting very hard to justify these days when, day after day, you keep noticing "500 channels and nothing's on." I would love to have an alternative but there's no competition.
Sure there is: Bittorrent and Hulu for TV shows and Netflix for movies. I'm still waiting for networks to "get it" and start offering TV shows from their own bittorrent servers, with a few commercials already embedded in the video, but public (illegal) servers exist now and TV shows are always easy to get. Of course, the networks will likely start out by having a dedicated player that is a POS when users want to use MPC, but it would be nice start in the right direction.
In about the same time on Facebook, I have seen insane amounts of trolling and spam. The spam in particular where some "girl" asks to be your friend, and the account is only a way to link to porn. But I see tons of trolling on the public pages. Obviously, if you don't visit a bunch of public areas on Facebook, you won't see it, as a stranger can't troll on your personal page, etc. It gets deleted quickly on facebook (and it cant here, just modded down), but as a percentage of posts in those areas, I would almost bet they get more on facebook.
People who troll on facebook don't register with their real names usually, usually it is with a 2nd+ account (I have a 2nd account from when I played a few games, as do many people I know). Then again, they also don't send their photo to their neighbors and brag about the trolls either, so I guess there are exceptions.
While I think 18 weeks is too steep, even here in the US there have been limitations on free speech beyond your examples. I think the key difference in the US and UK here is that it would very difficult to prosecute under the comments being "obscene" in the US, as that particular word has always been considered too subjective for most courts. There would have been a better chance to sue (and win) in a civil court for harassment/mental distress, which has a lower standard. The whole O.J. incident demonstrated that quite well.
And yes, they should have just banned the user and deleted the comments. The situation also begs the question 'should you expect a certain amount of vandalism if you post a memorial in a public place that anyone can comment on anonymously?' Obviously doesn't justify his actions, but it is kinda like painting a giant wall solid white on the bad side of town, and expecting no one will vandalize it because it looks so pretty as a solid shade of white.
Patton is credit as something to the effect of "Your job isn't to die for your country, it is to make the other guy die for his." War is about attrition, be it bullets, tanks, humans or will. Who ever runs out first, loses. Quick, brutal conflicts tend to remove the will before all the bullets and humans are used up. "Shock and Awe®" was a diluted version of this. The obvious problem is that in the middle east, you have cultures who will "surrender" to simply make it easier to attack you from within. They know that you aren't really going to be brutal in your attacks, and they use this quite well to kill your soldiers.
The other point is that in order to charge in 6 minutes, the thing must be on a 100 amp circuit. You can only move so many electrons using a 230v/15a circuit, no matter how advanced the battery is.
I was not aware of that quote, but was tempted to say as much, particularly if they were dumb enough to enter the SE portion of the US where ownership of military worthy weapons is higher than the rest of the nation. When I have made that point before, people tend to jump in and try to argue against it, saying how tanks, etc. would negate that. They forget the Revolutionary War I suppose, where just a few crazy rednecks hiding in the trees caused havok amongst the most disciplined of troops. Ironically, that was our first experience with terrorism, but we were the terrorists.
Not that it is justified, but AT&T is about the same with their business accounts. It took us most of a year to get them to realize they owed us over $6,000, and 6 months after that to get them to apply the credits to our bill. Needless to say, once the credits were used up, we changed our 12 phone lines and 3mbit worth of data lines over, to Time Warner, and get better service, similar or better uptime, for about $30,000 less per year.
What engineer writes their software to intentionally miscalculate?
I take it you never watched Office Space? ;)
If the US launched an all-out strategic attack on an opponent
China? Russia? What do you think the odds are that we would be doing a First Strike against any nuclear power? Correct answer: Zero, nada, zip. This means they would be used as a second strike, which is by definition, strategic positioning of weaponry, and the founding idea behind the Nuclear Triad. They wouldn't be bombing boots on the ground in China, too much chance for collateral damage, and the real goodies aren't even the soldiers (which can be handily taken care of with conventional weapons.) The real goodies are infrastructure. If the shit were literally to hit the fan and you have to second strike (as I discount ALL possibilities of a first strike by the US), you nuke dams, power plants, nuclear facilities, military installations, and maybe even factories and shipyards. Yes, soldiers would die, but the real target is infrastructure. If China landed troops on the west coast, tactical nuclear wouldn't be an option except as a hail mary. You don't piss in your own chili that way.
While the Geneva Convention is against it, the most effective way is to nuke rice patties making them unusable for years, literally starving the troops. Same reason for bombing dams, to destroy the ability to feed themselves as arable land is now flooded with radiation and washed away in the resulting flood. Then, I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of "rules" of war. Seems pointless since one side always ignores, and the other side always cheats when they can. If you notice, every war since all the rules have been put in place has been a long slogging battle with more death than would be possible if the rules were ignored (Korea, still ongoing, Vietnam, lost, middle east, etc.) And yes, I am aware that I am in the minority on that point, which doesn't negate the truth of the matter.
At one point we had Khrushchev sitting across from us. At one point they had Reagan.
Both of which I say were much more rational than given credit. One way to get your opponent to pay attention is if they think you are crazy enough to use the nuclear option. Even Obama has made it clear that it isn't off the table. And as for Reagan, I would gladly vote for him again. On the domestic side, he was the closest we have had to a libertarian president. Obviously his foreign policies were not libertarian.
Too bad we only have negative evidence that M.A.D. actually worked in the first place.
"Positive evidence" as in real mutually assured destruction? The fact that no one used nuclear weapons in any capacity outside of testing (ie: USSR/Afghanistan, US/Vietnam, etc.) clearly shows that M.A.D. worked rather well. If only the U.S. had nuclear weapons during the middle 20th century, I'm quite sure that they would have been used in other conflicts, to "save lives". M.A.D. made it so everyone must wanted nuclear weapons, but no one could use them for fear of being erased off the planet. Sounds like it worked like a charm.
then definitely any tight grouping of 100.000+ soldiers+armor should fear a nuclear warhead, and such groupings would be inevitable.
Wrong answer. No military is going to group 100k soldiers in an area that can taken out by a single warhead, and never would have. Ever. Even in WWII we were only able to kill 100k people by striking civilians. This is the whole reason you have multiple military bases, to distribute you capabilities and make it impossible for an enemy to take out a significant portion with a single strike. With the exception of training bases, military posts generally have less than 10k people, and often less than 5k people stationed there, for this exact reason. The remainder of the work force on a base are civilians.
And you won't see tactical nuclear weapons being used in the field likely ever, as that is the invisible line in the sand that would justify the enemy using nukes, perhaps on civilian targets. And there is no justification for using them against an enemy without nuclear capability. If an enemy used tactical nukes on us, we would still use them as a strategic weapon in retaliation, against fixed targets, not mobile troops. Even though we have them, tactical nuclear weapons make no sense, as they are solely a deterrent, a strategic weapon. Perhaps this is why they were all under SAC (Strategic Air Command) and not TAC (Tactical Air Command) during the Cold War, including all ICBMs (obviously excepting navel based warheads under the Nuclear Triad philosophy: Bombers, ICBMs, Submarines)
So, such groupings are not only NOT inevitable, they are highly unlikely as there is no tactical or strategic advantage to such a grouping, and tremendous risks.
Expect some bad mods for being right. Everyone likes to pretend that the Cold War didn't happen, and most of the people with the strongest opinions didn't live during it, have never served in the military or had relatives that did during the Cold War. Plenty of mistakes have been made along the way (Vietnam for starters), but having a strong military and nuclear deterrent since WWII wasn't one of them.
While I understand why, most people under 30 don't fully appreciate the threat of the USSR after WWII as they are fortunate enough to not have lived under it. Ironically, the reason they haven't lived under that threat is due to what some are complaining about to begin with.
So the author of the original article did about as much due diligence as the editor on /. did in publishing this article here?
Been there, done that. Usually it only requires downloading the 'no CD' crack, so you can play the $50 game you just bought without swapping out the CD every time.
Piracy is solved forever.
Excellent! So software companies will finally quit using DRM that is more disruptive to their paying customers than it was to the pirates then?
The number of warheads in the US peaked in the 60s, not the 80s, so a big part of what the Soviets were trying to catch up with was our technology, not just our numbers. And yes, they used more warheads as a way to counteract our better technology. This is why they completely freaked on the SDI (star wars) system, as it would make all their warheads obsolete, in theory. Our stealth technology and other weapons likely played a bigger role in pushing the Soviets to spend more during the 70s-80s than the nukes did.
And I agree, had we not had the military buildup we had (all types) then the USSR might still be here today. China, on the other hand, is a very sticky situation. They appear to be at the beginning states of an economic war with us, and we just don't realize it. And they don't need 1000s of warheads as a deterrent, just 50-100 is plenty. Our greatest asset is that we tend to be better at creating the technologies, while China has a history of being good at copying technology. Oh, and now China has decided to quit exporting rare earth minerals used in advanced technologies.
As a side note, Steam discounts 4 packs of games for their multiplayer games. And they have frequent "free weekends". And frequent 50% or more sales. And guest passes. And you can play them in internet cafes if you like. And yes, it is possible (and someone pointed out) to work around their DRM, which is weaker than most and they don't care (Gabe has stated that piracy isn't in his top 5 concerns).
It isn't perfect, but they are more friendly than anyone else for trying out games. Most companies simply tell you to buy it, or if you MUST, then first read the reviews from "objective" gaming sites. Yes, that is a joke.
There is an expression that "nice guys finish last", and honestly, there is a lot of truth to it. Like it or not, you can get more out of the average person if you abuse them a little. A boss that engages but always makes demands that are slightly impossible gets more productivity than one who is laid back. Oh, some people would like to THINK the opposite is true, but there is a reason the cliche is a cliche. As someone used to being both the boss (as owner) and a higher level employee (Of another company) at the same time, I can attest to the power of the said cliche. People in power, either in business or politics, tend to be a bit of a prick. You have to, in order to walk on the backs of a few others to rise to the top. There are exceptions, but this IS the rule.
The problem is that some people with power take it to the next level, and abuse people who are not in their employ but instead of mutual interests. Java programmers as a whole would fit this, as a healthy Java community would benefit Oracle and the members of the community. But once you have a company with a culture of top-down management, it is difficult to get them to engage even when it is in their best interest. I would imagine that no manager that works for Oracle gets any kind of bonus that is related to the performance of the Java platform, or it would appear. As long as money isn't trading hands, there is no reason for anyone there to invest their time into "trivial tasks" such as working with the community.
According to the people working there, it is closing before January, at least regarding actual manufacturing. They have been running a skeleton crew for quite a while, and even worked many of the people 7 days a week for a while. They originally said it would be closed a year ago, but ended up paying the small crew large bonuses to stay around, which helps but not as much as staying. Living near the plant, the wife and I know several people who work (or did) there.
And yes, Dell wasn't exactly tech jobs, but it was jobs. And considering that unemployment is well over 10% here, we would have been very happy to keep the jobs. It created more than "Dell" jobs, it created UPS jobs, restaurant jobs, etc. Having Dell here would have opened up some more opportunity as well. They never were able to get employment up to the levels they promised, and had to give back the tax incentives, although all the money spent on roads to the plant and other infrastructure is simply spent and can't be recovered, which is why I am hoping someone moves in and at leasts puts that investment to work.
Time on the water is cheap compared to time over land, calculating cost per mile. We deal in a lot of stuff in ocean containers, and it is the overland portion of the trip that is expensive. Once it is on a truck, you need one truck and one driver for one container, instead of one vessel and 20 crew for hundreds of containers. And not all the parts come from China. Flying specialized parts from China to NC isn't much different than to NC either, when you are talking about that kind of volume.
With a lot of higher end products that have a good margin, a company is way more likely to build in the US or at least North America. The problem with building in the US isn't quality of employees or products, it is the overall cost. This is why cheap stuff with razor thin margins go overseas first, the stuff that you don't just sell 10,000 of them, but > 1 million. This is one of the reasons I am for lowering corporate taxes, to encourage more manufacturing, for at least mid and high end products.
I don't foresee Apple doing all their manufacturing in the USA, but perhaps similar to what Dell was doing: The "build your own" market. This applies only to computers, not their other devices, which will always be overseas. One of the weaknesses of Apple in the past has been being able to customize your computer system. While it is infinitely better now, you still need to be able to take the main components (made in China) and do the final assembly near your point of shipment. Having a facility in NC *could* be beneficial geographically, as it reduces shipping times and fees. And again, being 30 minutes from both UPS and FedEx hubs is a HUGE advantage, as it means you can always negotiate the best deals, as they have to compete for the business. And your stuff you loaded at 6pm is in the air by 10pm and in the regional center before the AM crew has their morning coffee.
I don't want to sound like a Chamber of Commerce ad, but suffice it to say there are logical reasons why Apple *might* consider this area for building system. Having the datacenter nearby certainly doesn't hurt the chances either.
Cheap TVA electricity.
Actually, they are located close to McGuire nuclear power plant (owned by Duke Energy), and near 4 major hydroelectric dams on the Yadkin River that create High Rock Lake, Tuckertown, Badin Lake (Narrows) and Falls lake, which are managed/quazi-owned by Alcoa. Alcoa doesn't make aluminum here anymore, so they have power to sell, and usually do during peak time. There are also a number of coal and natural gas plants nearby. I live about 70 miles from the new data center, and was somewhat surprised that they put it in such a low density area, until I realized how much power capacity is nearby. TVA isn't really a factor in this part of the country, as I believe all the hydro power around here is privately owned.
Electricity usage in NC is way down, due to all the textile and furniture manufacturing moving to China and India, plus all the aluminum manufacturing is now gone. Those industries were typically BIG consumers of electricity. My understanding is that all the power plants in this region are running well below their peak output, so we literally have more than we know what to do with here. I would imagine that electricity is damn cheap for Apple to buy in bulk, which is a major portion of their expenses.
Also, it doesn't hurt that NC is located somewhat in the center of the eastern USA, and 2/3rds of the population lives east of the Mississippi river, so it is actually a good location, geographically. The rather new Dell plant near Winston-Salem was just shut down (moved to Mexico), and there has been rumors of Apple buying it for manufacturing as well. There are lots of good reasons that would make sense, since the state spent MILLIONS in new infrastructure to the plant just a few years ago, and the workforce around here is generally good with a manufacturing history, AND both UPS and FedEx have major hubs about 30 minutes away at GSO. Would love to see that happen, only because we need the jobs with over 10% unemployment here.
I have 50 steam games, all of them were two clicks and they installed in the background. In spite of dumb moderating, it is a fact. Almost every game I have bought auto-configures (Steam doesn't have as much control over that). I might tweak stuff but it runs fine on first click. And of course I'm not getting paid, at to even state so is pretty much FUD. MANY of us appreciate Steam and love the service. It isn't perfect, and YOU might not like everything about it, but many of us DO. They open their SDK up for mods, if you buy a bulk package that has a game that you already own, you get to GIVE the extra to a friend instead of just sucking it up.
Do you lose First Sale? Yes. Guess what, PC games don't resell for shit unless they are still quite new, so I don't really care, and I don't remember trying to gloss over or hide that fact, nor does Steam. If you want games you can buy and sell used, buy a console or stay off Steam, no one is making you use the service.