Once the companies leave then a bust cycle will begin. There will be a prolonged period of unemployment and depression/recession. Eventually the standard of living will be pretty much where it was before. Maybe once the cambodians (or wherever the jobs went) get uppidy and demand more money the jobs might come back but more likely they will migrate to africa or someplace even more destitute.
This is alarmist and unwarranted. Name me a country like the US or the UK that has developed and then as you claim "undeveloped" when everyone left. It doesn't happen.
It leads to two things: 1. a rise in the standard of living in both countries - the "non-valued adding" jobs are shipped overseas, as the labour costs of doing them in the original country are too great (which also means usually that the people doing them weren't paid enough), and an increase in the living conditions in the recipient country 2. a fall in the cost of goods in the original country
There are always going to be periods of transition where economies move to producing new innovative things and leave old industries behind. Australia has had it happen to it with the steel industry, the US Europe and Japan are protecting their agriculture industries to prevent this from happening (no politician wants to be in power when it happens - it takes guts to lower subsidies). However, none of these economies will sink or stagnate because of this. Of the ones listed before, Japan is the only one in trouble - and this isn't because jobs are moving offshore, it's a mix of Japanese fiscal conservatism (at a personal level - nobody wants to buy stuff, they're all saving) and fiscal mismanagement (especially their banking sector).
Free trade is a good thing(TM). People that argue against it on economic (not talking environmental) grounds are normally trying to prop up dying industries or modern day McCarthyists. I find the parent post's idea that we're all going to end up working in jails quite ludicrous to be honest.
Well, sure, Japan no longer produces so much cheap junk. That's why Taiwan, and now China ate their lunch.
And that's how it works! Eventually the amount of money China makes from the "cheap junk" (btw, I would hardly call RAM from Taiwan "cheap junk") will raise the standard of living, education and level of innovation. Suddenly, the "cheap junk" China turns out won't be cheap or junky any more. Wages will go up, and quality of goods will go up - and with it, the prices of the goods. A hole will open for another poor country to start producing the "cheap junk".
China is already on the road out of "cheapness". Did you know that a very large selection of the good "English" hi-fi equipment is now made in China? The quality of these components is quite high, too.
Taiwan is on the road to be at a Japanese-level manufacturer, and China is on the road to be a Taiwanese-level manufacturer.
And, in case you hadn't guessed by now, this is all basic economics - otherwise known as the Trickle Down Theory.
Apple may represent "quality" to many people, but the reality is that the're made by the same companies as every other computer.
This is OT, but it deserves a response.
It's not just the parts, but how they're put together that makes a product well designed. The fact is, the quality of components that go into making a Renault and a BMW and not that different. However, in most cases the BMW has had better initial design, so that the parts work together better. Stresses, tensions, component placement, etc all work in harmony. Or at least better than in Renaults (not that Renaults are bad cars). That's why people pay more for Beemers (or at least partly - if the build was crap, the brand's reputation wouldn't be that good).
Similarly, the amount of thought and design that goes into a Powerbook versus something like a Dell Latitude means that although the HD and memory and all the other commodity component parts are the same, the design of the cases and where these components are placed go into giving Apple some of the best built laptops in the industry.
Not to troll, but I think that a lot of laptops that will come out of china will suck, just like a lot of the other toys and electronics that come out of China. On the other hand, it probably would drive the price down enough for me to afford one in addition to my desktop. Personally, I won't be getting one of these laptops from China because I am a mac freak and never want to use any OS other than Mac OS X ever again.
This is what people used to say about Taiwan, and before Taiwan, Japan.
Now, Taiwan is responsible for producing a number of Apple's computers. They also supply memory to computer manufacturers all over the world.
Japan started out life by creating second-rate consumer goods like watches and cameras. While their watches haven't improved that much (j/k), Nikon et al produce some of the best cameras you can buy. Not that it was always like that. And what about Honda/Toyota, etc? When they first came out, those were the cars you bought when you'd just been declared bankrupt. Now, they're some of the most reliable cars you can buy; Japan pushed the just-in-time production model and numerous other innovations, and their automotive industry is one of the most vibrant in the world.
And so it will be with China. So while now you might say how crap they are, there's a US $100bn per year trade deficit between the US and China in China's favour (I think that figure is correct), and all that money will continue to go towards making China the new Japan.
Well, at least let the "association" that springs up to "protect" book writers have an appropriate acronym this time. RIAA/MPAA doesn't translate to something easily spoken...
how about BwRAA... aka BRAA, or the Book Writers Association of America. Least that way they'll sound like the idiots they are.
or maybe BITCH - Book Industry Technology Control and Harmonisation
omniweb has some stuff that apple could do well to integrate into safari - but they won't!
which is why I'm glad they've opened the engine up for third party use, because it means Apple can focus on speed and integration with the OS, and 3rd parties can get on with innovating.
The coolest feature in omniweb has to be the ability to customise urls in the url line; for example, I've set it up so if I type fedex 574849 then it goes to the fedex order tracking site, and tracks order 574849. You can set these up for google, imdb, and anything else that gives results based on variables stored in the URL. It's awesome, and I haven't seen anything implemented like it anywhere else.
when you think about it - some of the key advantages that Apple technologies have slot in perfectly with what customers like the Navy would want. The G4 and the rest of the PPC line work very well in specialised applications where vectorisation can take place (and when they're being used for one specific application, this optimisation can be done), and what's more they'll perform very well while putting out less heat and using up less power.
When you're on a sub that requires every inch of space to be utilised, these are attributes that make a computing system very attractive.
Once Apple deploys the G5s into these puppies, I think there's going to be a lot of organisations looking at their present hardware rigs in a very critical light.
Wait a minute. Could *I* do this? Could I perhaps inadvertantly target, say, certain industry associations, because my spidering software had mistakenly identified them as distributors of my IP? Could I then hold them to the same standards of proof that they are holding random Kazaa users, and force their lawyers to establish a precident, as the defendants, for just what you have to show in court before you can win such a case?
IANAL, but as I understand it you have the same rights in enforcing your copyright as the RIAA.
Is how the RIAA rolled Verizon. That was where things really started heading down the tubes - any idiot could walk into a courthouse, lodge a form with a court clerk and the process is started.
There should be a higher burden of proof - a judge should be looking over it. Or, you'll clog the court system, as is happening with the RIAA and it's 900+ subpoenas. It would also encourage them to go after the serious people (those making money through piracy) as opposed to the college kids and grandparents (who will normally just roll over instantly due to potential legal costs).
However, I don't think it's going to take them much longer to hit critical mass for "people fucked off". Then it'll start to get interesting again. No more Mickey Mouse Preservation Acts, etc then: they'll blow the goodwill the $$$ in politicians pockets bought them.
I think any organization bright enough to pull off a major terrorist act would also be bright enough not to make a bet with the pentagon about when and where it would happen
I'm sorry, but I can't imagine that any major defense/anti-terrorism organisation could not have forseen this.
When I saw this, one thing came to mind: honeypot. And when they say you're "untraceable", it only emphasises it. They're going to pay you millions on the back of a big bet, and you're going to be untraceable? Yeah, right.
They have the right idea in this to sell the idea of open source to the public. A vast majority of them will never understand the difference, but they will definately understand the universal language of dollars and cents. I really can't think of a logical argument that can be made against this, really.
Not that I'm the biggest MS supporter, but you want a few good reasons why they shouldn't just roll on out a new system: 1. Retraining costs. For an entire Government 2. Required software doesn't exist, or isn't as functional as under MS-platforms. Exchange is the biggest kicker - there are free alternatives, but not much matches the functionality. It is de facto. 3. Support staff. You've got an entire IS infrastructure built around supporting the platform. I agree, the tail should not wag the dog, but the cost of retraining these guys to become necessarily savvy with Linux may even be more than point 1. 4. MS has a support infrastructure that is much better suited to helping large organisations meet their IS roles than any Linux based organisation, especially here in Australia.
These are just off the top of my head. Like I said, standard slashdot disclaimer - I'm hardly an MS sympathiser - but with the en masse discounts MS offers big organisations like Governments, and the potential pitfalls that changing to Linux could involve, I would want the Government to be very wary of wandering down this path. I especially agree with the "mandatory" selection of an OS - as always, it should be best tool for the job.
USS Bill Clinton gets really close to some of the not-quite-commissioned submarines, and gets them to stick torpedoes in places where torpedoes shouldn't be stuck.
Then there's the USS George W Bush, which comes with faulty radar that is always detecting incoming Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Can we quit with the Ronald Reagan/Alzheimer's jokes? I hardly think you'd be laughing so hard if someone you knew or was close to had the misfortune of having it.
Of all the degenerative diseases, in my opinion this would have to be one of the worst - losing all the memories most cherished to you. You might as well be dead.
You also join an elite group of people like Colonel Gaddafi for making such tasteless jokes.
But when Apple only sells music in a worse (more lossely compressed than CD or Flac), or the Louvre only sells copies of the Mona Lisa on postcards, or Pendant publishing won't even print old liturature, then it's both unfair and unethical to deprive the public of enjoying its culture.
Which is no different to selling on CDs. It's not the quality of the original. It's compressed to facilitate distribution.
To insist on getting original quality for every piece of artwork is totally infeasible - it either requires everyone to be at the source, or a massive reproduction and distribution network to be set up.
They don't seem to understand that we don't want their stuff. It doesn't matter how loud they shot, how annoying they are, or how many times they try to deliver their message--we aren't going to buy their products.
If this was really true, it would have stopped already.
Ah yes, the good old "Only the guilty need fear" argument, shame its a fiction.
Around the world we have countless examples of restrictions made in the name of national security actually being used against the country's own citizens. East Germany, Russia, China, most of the old communist countries and so on.
The actions of the Stasi and the KGB were all justified by the excuse of "National Security".
I was waiting for the privacy bridgade to show up.
If it's used to impinge on people's privacy, then deal with it as and when it shows up. But don't bash on the tech simply because it has nasty uses.
Computers can have nasty uses - they can be used to track people in a variety of ways.
Likewise, imagine how helpful this technology could be for the troops in the US right now, trying to deal with what is in effect urban guerilla warfare.
Well, other than the fact the stupid reviewer had enabled the server renderer trick to take advantage of the 2nd CPU on the G4, all it shows is Adobe Premiere performance.
oops, not HAD enabled it, but HADN'T enabled it. Stoopid me:)
that's like saying because they used GIMP instead of Photoshop on the Xeon, the Xeon is at a disadvantage.
SO? The image may turn out the same, but Apple were doing benchmarks using GCC compiler. Until Intel want to provide a compiler for the PPC 970, it's the only way to standardise the test.
The other thing that really shits me about this is that all the same people crying "foul" were the same ones pointing at that Adobe Premiere article not so long back, where the P4 beat the G4. Well, other than the fact the stupid reviewer had enabled the server renderer trick to take advantage of the 2nd CPU on the G4, all it shows is Adobe Premiere performance.
Just like, all this shows is SPECs compiled with GCC.
Slashdot Mirror
This is alarmist and unwarranted. Name me a country like the US or the UK that has developed and then as you claim "undeveloped" when everyone left. It doesn't happen.
It leads to two things:
1. a rise in the standard of living in both countries - the "non-valued adding" jobs are shipped overseas, as the labour costs of doing them in the original country are too great (which also means usually that the people doing them weren't paid enough), and an increase in the living conditions in the recipient country
2. a fall in the cost of goods in the original country
There are always going to be periods of transition where economies move to producing new innovative things and leave old industries behind. Australia has had it happen to it with the steel industry, the US Europe and Japan are protecting their agriculture industries to prevent this from happening (no politician wants to be in power when it happens - it takes guts to lower subsidies). However, none of these economies will sink or stagnate because of this. Of the ones listed before, Japan is the only one in trouble - and this isn't because jobs are moving offshore, it's a mix of Japanese fiscal conservatism (at a personal level - nobody wants to buy stuff, they're all saving) and fiscal mismanagement (especially their banking sector).
Free trade is a good thing(TM). People that argue against it on economic (not talking environmental) grounds are normally trying to prop up dying industries or modern day McCarthyists. I find the parent post's idea that we're all going to end up working in jails quite ludicrous to be honest.
-- james
And that's how it works! Eventually the amount of money China makes from the "cheap junk" (btw, I would hardly call RAM from Taiwan "cheap junk") will raise the standard of living, education and level of innovation. Suddenly, the "cheap junk" China turns out won't be cheap or junky any more. Wages will go up, and quality of goods will go up - and with it, the prices of the goods. A hole will open for another poor country to start producing the "cheap junk".
China is already on the road out of "cheapness". Did you know that a very large selection of the good "English" hi-fi equipment is now made in China? The quality of these components is quite high, too.
Taiwan is on the road to be at a Japanese-level manufacturer, and China is on the road to be a Taiwanese-level manufacturer.
And, in case you hadn't guessed by now, this is all basic economics - otherwise known as the Trickle Down Theory.
-- james
This is OT, but it deserves a response.
It's not just the parts, but how they're put together that makes a product well designed. The fact is, the quality of components that go into making a Renault and a BMW and not that different. However, in most cases the BMW has had better initial design, so that the parts work together better. Stresses, tensions, component placement, etc all work in harmony. Or at least better than in Renaults (not that Renaults are bad cars). That's why people pay more for Beemers (or at least partly - if the build was crap, the brand's reputation wouldn't be that good).
Similarly, the amount of thought and design that goes into a Powerbook versus something like a Dell Latitude means that although the HD and memory and all the other commodity component parts are the same, the design of the cases and where these components are placed go into giving Apple some of the best built laptops in the industry.
-- james
This is what people used to say about Taiwan, and before Taiwan, Japan.
Now, Taiwan is responsible for producing a number of Apple's computers. They also supply memory to computer manufacturers all over the world.
Japan started out life by creating second-rate consumer goods like watches and cameras. While their watches haven't improved that much (j/k), Nikon et al produce some of the best cameras you can buy. Not that it was always like that. And what about Honda/Toyota, etc? When they first came out, those were the cars you bought when you'd just been declared bankrupt. Now, they're some of the most reliable cars you can buy; Japan pushed the just-in-time production model and numerous other innovations, and their automotive industry is one of the most vibrant in the world.
And so it will be with China. So while now you might say how crap they are, there's a US $100bn per year trade deficit between the US and China in China's favour (I think that figure is correct), and all that money will continue to go towards making China the new Japan.
-- james
Well, at least let the "association" that springs up to "protect" book writers have an appropriate acronym this time. RIAA/MPAA doesn't translate to something easily spoken...
:)
how about BwRAA... aka BRAA, or the Book Writers Association of America. Least that way they'll sound like the idiots they are.
or maybe BITCH - Book Industry Technology Control and Harmonisation
I'm sure people can come up with better names
-- james
omniweb has some stuff that apple could do well to integrate into safari - but they won't!
which is why I'm glad they've opened the engine up for third party use, because it means Apple can focus on speed and integration with the OS, and 3rd parties can get on with innovating.
The coolest feature in omniweb has to be the ability to customise urls in the url line; for example, I've set it up so if I type
fedex 574849
then it goes to the fedex order tracking site, and tracks order 574849. You can set these up for google, imdb, and anything else that gives results based on variables stored in the URL. It's awesome, and I haven't seen anything implemented like it anywhere else.
-- james
when you think about it - some of the key advantages that Apple technologies have slot in perfectly with what customers like the Navy would want. The G4 and the rest of the PPC line work very well in specialised applications where vectorisation can take place (and when they're being used for one specific application, this optimisation can be done), and what's more they'll perform very well while putting out less heat and using up less power.
When you're on a sub that requires every inch of space to be utilised, these are attributes that make a computing system very attractive.
Once Apple deploys the G5s into these puppies, I think there's going to be a lot of organisations looking at their present hardware rigs in a very critical light.
-- james
what's that, introduce hundreds of worm holes that will bring the internet to it's knees?
-- james
IANAL, but as I understand it you have the same rights in enforcing your copyright as the RIAA.
-- james
Is how the RIAA rolled Verizon. That was where things really started heading down the tubes - any idiot could walk into a courthouse, lodge a form with a court clerk and the process is started.
There should be a higher burden of proof - a judge should be looking over it. Or, you'll clog the court system, as is happening with the RIAA and it's 900+ subpoenas. It would also encourage them to go after the serious people (those making money through piracy) as opposed to the college kids and grandparents (who will normally just roll over instantly due to potential legal costs).
However, I don't think it's going to take them much longer to hit critical mass for "people fucked off". Then it'll start to get interesting again. No more Mickey Mouse Preservation Acts, etc then: they'll blow the goodwill the $$$ in politicians pockets bought them.
-- james
As reported by the SFG, the DMCA is not AOK with the SBC, and they're taking on the RIAA ASAP. AFAIK, this is not a LOL matter, but be warned, IANAL
TTYL
-- james
I'm sorry, but I can't imagine that any major defense/anti-terrorism organisation could not have forseen this.
When I saw this, one thing came to mind: honeypot. And when they say you're "untraceable", it only emphasises it. They're going to pay you millions on the back of a big bet, and you're going to be untraceable? Yeah, right.
-- james
Not that I'm the biggest MS supporter, but you want a few good reasons why they shouldn't just roll on out a new system:
1. Retraining costs. For an entire Government
2. Required software doesn't exist, or isn't as functional as under MS-platforms. Exchange is the biggest kicker - there are free alternatives, but not much matches the functionality. It is de facto.
3. Support staff. You've got an entire IS infrastructure built around supporting the platform. I agree, the tail should not wag the dog, but the cost of retraining these guys to become necessarily savvy with Linux may even be more than point 1.
4. MS has a support infrastructure that is much better suited to helping large organisations meet their IS roles than any Linux based organisation, especially here in Australia.
These are just off the top of my head. Like I said, standard slashdot disclaimer - I'm hardly an MS sympathiser - but with the en masse discounts MS offers big organisations like Governments, and the potential pitfalls that changing to Linux could involve, I would want the Government to be very wary of wandering down this path. I especially agree with the "mandatory" selection of an OS - as always, it should be best tool for the job.
-- james
Yeah, I mean it's only a Government Department. They do absolutely nothing important.
Who gives a toss that all their systems are built around MS? Screw feasibility studies, let's just roll Linux out! No long and hard thinking required!
I mean, come on!
-- james
buddy, if you're looking for women, don't mention the word "Linux".
Just a gentle hint.
-- james
And what's more, it's made up of more hot gas than your typical North Korean President.
-- james
dammit, why stop there.
USS Bill Clinton gets really close to some of the not-quite-commissioned submarines, and gets them to stick torpedoes in places where torpedoes shouldn't be stuck.
Then there's the USS George W Bush, which comes with faulty radar that is always detecting incoming Weapons of Mass Destruction.
-- james
Can we quit with the Ronald Reagan/Alzheimer's jokes? I hardly think you'd be laughing so hard if someone you knew or was close to had the misfortune of having it.
Of all the degenerative diseases, in my opinion this would have to be one of the worst - losing all the memories most cherished to you. You might as well be dead.
You also join an elite group of people like Colonel Gaddafi for making such tasteless jokes.
--- james
What about USS Richard Nixon - gets caught spying on the Army, then jumps on a helicopter and is never heard from again...
-- james
Which is no different to selling on CDs. It's not the quality of the original. It's compressed to facilitate distribution.
To insist on getting original quality for every piece of artwork is totally infeasible - it either requires everyone to be at the source, or a massive reproduction and distribution network to be set up.
-- james
If this was really true, it would have stopped already.
-- james
I was waiting for the privacy bridgade to show up.
If it's used to impinge on people's privacy, then deal with it as and when it shows up. But don't bash on the tech simply because it has nasty uses.
Computers can have nasty uses - they can be used to track people in a variety of ways.
Likewise, imagine how helpful this technology could be for the troops in the US right now, trying to deal with what is in effect urban guerilla warfare.
-- james
All these people saying it's not like Star Wars!
It sounds just like Episode 2 to me.
-- james
oops, not HAD enabled it, but HADN'T enabled it. Stoopid me
that's like saying because they used GIMP instead of Photoshop on the Xeon, the Xeon is at a disadvantage.
SO? The image may turn out the same, but Apple were doing benchmarks using GCC compiler. Until Intel want to provide a compiler for the PPC 970, it's the only way to standardise the test.
The other thing that really shits me about this is that all the same people crying "foul" were the same ones pointing at that Adobe Premiere article not so long back, where the P4 beat the G4. Well, other than the fact the stupid reviewer had enabled the server renderer trick to take advantage of the 2nd CPU on the G4, all it shows is Adobe Premiere performance.
Just like, all this shows is SPECs compiled with GCC.
-- james