Don't know which part of US you are in, but here in Caltech, foreign students are actually more expensive, as almost all US citizens can get fellowships that are for citizens only, while the professors have to pay stipends to foreign students out of his own research funding.
I am a foreign graduate student in a US university, and I am seriously disturbed by the increasing restrictions on foreigners doing research in the US. First it was the visa problem that caused a vast drop of foreign graduate applications. Then they cut research fundings for fundamental sicence and prevented non-citizens from participating in DARPA funded research. Now we have this ridiculous license joke. US is at the forefront of scientific research because they were able to attract the smartest minds from all over the world, but it has come to a point that even I am seriously considering alternatives after graduating, and I am sure I am not alone in thinking about leaving.
If you keep driving smart people away like this, you will end up with none of the valuable knowledge you are trying to protect.
> And does anyone else get the warm and fuzzy feelings from looking at these pics, even though there's nothing you could possibly use that much power for?
Someone told me that it took the Earth simulator about a week to simulate air flow past a truck. I get warm and fuzzy feelings by simply looking at stuff around myself and appreciating the mind-boggling complexity of Mother Nature.
There is no medium that can slow down all frequencies. The asymptotic limit of the refractive index at high frequencies is always 1, because as you increase the frequency, sooner or later the atoms will not be able to respond fast enough. It is indeed this fact that leads to the mathematical proof by Sommerfield and Brillouin.
So let's say you send a step function waveform (or any function with a jump from 0 to something) through a dispersive medium, the waveform, which must contain all frequencies due to the discotinuity, will be distorted, but the first bit of information will always arrive at the other end at a speed of c. Everything else arrives at a speed less than c. Whether you can make such an ideal waveform at the input, and whether you can detect that first bit, however, are practical questions.
My knowledge of the proof comes second-hand from a book called "Modern Optics" by Robert Guenther, which does a qualitative explanation of the proof that is supposedly contained in a book called "Wave Propagation and Group Velocity" by Leon Brillouin. For more recent research, look for papers by Raymond Chiao from Berkeley, who seems to be the leading researcher on superluminal propagation.
This is a common misconception among undergraduates taught by clueless professors, that the group velocity cannot be larger than c. Actually the group velocity in certain materials can become larger than c, when the light frequency is near the resonance of the atoms in the medium. This still does not violate special relativity, because the group velocity is just the speed of the peak of the pulse, which doesn't carry the first bit of information. The real velocity at which the first bit of information travels is called the signal velocity, which is how fast a waveform shaped like a heaviside step function travels. It has been theoretically proven about fifty years ago by Sommerfield and Brillouin that this signal velocity is always c regardless of the dispersion of the medium. Interest in this topic was re-ignited recently only because technology nowadays allows the experimental observation of exotic group velocities, but theoretically the problem was solved long ago.
I think you are being too critical to their research. Granted I don't like the idea of using genetic algorithm for optics research either, but what they design are not conventional fibers, but holey fibers, (a.k.a. photonic crystal fibers or microstructure fibers) which can have varying hole patterns and sizes in the cladding, making fiber design much more complicated. These holey fibers are unique because they can have much higher effective nonlinearity (smaller core size) and unique dispersion properties (e.g. anomalous group-velocity dispersion at 800nm), and I believe there is no existing technique or program that tells you how to design those hole patterns to get desired dispersion properties.
As more people get broadband, it makes sense for spammers to pay someone to write viruses/worms so that more spam can be sent via the infected computers with fat pipes. It's harder to close down the offenders as there are so many, and difficult to trace back to the culprit. As a bonus they can use the zombies to initiate DDoS attacks against anti-spam sites.
I'm a subscriber too and a Linux user. The most annoying thing about their switch to Windows Media is that it is in the final days of the season, which means that now I cannot access the content I have already fully paid in advance. Granted the fee is very reasonable, but I would have thought twice before I subscribed it if they used Windows Media exclusively at the beginning. Real player for Linux worked like a charm without all the spyware/adware nuisances. I sent them an email complaint and all I get is a stock reply. Hope they get enough complaints to switch back.
> Much to the science world's astonishment, the work also appears to provide solutions to Zeno of Elea's famous motion paradoxes, almost 2500 years after they were originally conceived by the ancient Greek philosopher.
Zeno's paradoxes were solved three hundred years ago using calculus. Interested readers should refer to basic high school or college physics.
> In doing so, its unlikely author, who originally attended university for just 6 months, is drawing comparisons to Albert Einstein
Drawing comparisons of a college drop-out to Albert Einstein? Why does that remind me of this guy?
> This is contrast to being sniggered at by local physicists when he originally approached them with the work, and once aware it had been accepted for publication, one informing the journal of the author's lack of formal qualification in an attempt to have them reject it.
They all laughed at Albert Einstein. They all laughed at Columbus. Unfortunately, they also all laughed at Bozo the Clown.
> A number of other outstanding issues to do with time in physics are also addressed, including cosmology and an argument against the theory of Imaginary time by British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking... Another impressed with the work is Princeton physics great, and collaborator of both Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman, John Wheeler, who said he admired Lynds' "boldness", while noting that it had often been individuals Lynds' age that "had pushed the frontiers of physics forward in the past."
The theory isn't any more credible by spouting big names. This is getting more laughable than Alex Chiu now.
> In contrast, an earlier referee had a different opinion of the controversial paper. "I have only read the first two sections as it is clear that the author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus. I'm afraid I am unwilling to waste any time reading further, and recommend terminal rejection."
Well duh.
> Lynds says that the paradoxes arose because people assumed wrongly that objects in motion had determined positions at any instant in time, thus freezing the bodies motion static at that instant and enabling the impossible situation of the paradoxes to be derived.
Crap. Measuring the precise position of an object in motion does not freeze the body. In classical mechanics this can be trivially done by measuring the velocity and integrate to get the position. Even in quantum mechanics, the collapse of a wave function does not mean that the object does not move. This guy is having trouble with his high school physics.
> Lynds' solution to all of the paradoxes lay in the realisation of the absence of an instant in time underlying a bodies motion and that its position was constantly changing over time and never determined. He comments, "With some thought it should become clear that no matter how small the time interval, or how slowly an object moves during that interval, it is still in motion and it's position is constantly changing, so it can't have a determined relative position at any time, whether during a interval, however small, or at an instant.
Thanks for redefining velocity for us. He needs to understand the concept of infinitestimal time.
> Indeed, if it did, it couldn't be in motion."
It appears that his whole argument is philosophical. To mean anything in physics he needs to at least present a theoretical model that would be consistent with existing theories and previous experimental results. I highly doubt that his paper would offer any, other than crap.
> Lynds also points out that in all cases a time value represents an interval on time, rather than an instant. "For example, if two separate events are measured to take place at either 1 hour or 10.00 seconds, these two values indicate the events occurred during the time intervals of 1 and 1.99999...hours and 10.00 and 10.0099999...seconds res
I just skimmed through the paper. Very intriguing. But I think the author overlooks one important factor in our civilization: Human stupidity. It's well known to be infinite, so his probability calculations would definitely blow up somewhere and his final result would be invalid. We are more likely to have some superpower with an idiot president to start a new world war which ends the human civilization, before we can develop the technology of a "matrix" to simulate human thoughts.
or in the case of down-shifting, phonons are created
Re:Something is bugging me
on
Mastering Light
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The energy indeed comes from the shock wave. When light is shifted from a lower frequency to a higher frequency, a photon with the lower frequency f1 and an acoustic phonon with the frequency f2 are annihiliated and a new photon with the high frequency f1 + f2 is created. Energy is conserved. This is called stimulated Brillouin scattering. I suspect that the mechanism suggested in the article is a multi-phonon process because usually acoustic waves do not have such high optical frequencies. So multiple phonons are annihiliated in multiple bounces to generate a significant frequency shift.
We can better understand the American mentality by looking at the Middle East. Americans are totally silent when Israel have serious human rights issues in Palestine, or when USA themselves bomb the shit out of Iraq, killing many civilians. Oh wait, they are not only silent, they actually support the atrocities! You have the nerve to call Beijing a supplier of weapons, when USA is the largest weapon supplier in the world of all! I'm not condoning what the communists do, but to accuse Chinese in this way is pure stupidity on your part.
I'd prefer Americans to come to universities and learn how to do the basic math first, but that's just my opinion (ps... not the '1+1=2' version either)
I base my stereotype about stupid Americans on irrelevant facts (chinese overrepresented in university), just as the parent troll bases his steoreotype about cold-blooded Chinese on irrelevant facts. If you feel insulted by my comments on Americans, Chinese would feel the same way about the parent troll.
Most, if not all, of his "observations" are laughable. Chinese are apparently disinterested with human rights in China, not because they have no ethics or they are okay with it, but because the Chinese are AFRAID of the oppressive government, and the government restricts all the info available to its citizens that many of them simply do not believe the atrocities by the government actually happened.
It's all too easy commenting on human rights of China in an AI when you do not need to risk your safety. If a (mainland) Chinese is that outspoken in that respect, he can forget going back to his own country forever, and risk the safety of his family back home.
I talk to many mainland Chinese students here in US, and some seem to condone the Tienanmen Massacre, because they believe what the government told them. The situation is kinda like here in US, many Americans believe Iraq is really a threat and condone the war. But even without all the information, many mainland Chinese privately know that this event is unforgivable, but they are so afraid of the government that they do not want to talk about it publicly.
For Chinese who have access to the information about the Tiananmen Massacre, like those in HK, the response cannot be more drastic. A MILLION Hong Kong people, that's one-sixth of the total population, went to the streets to voice their support of the students before the massacre.
For HK people, many of which had already escaped once from mainland because of the cultural revolution, they had witnessed the brutality of the "communist" government before, which was going to take over HK in a few years. Yet A MILLION people had the courage to voice their support for the "infidels," facing probable future probes by the communists. And the parent troll concludes by saying that Chinese have no ethics.
The parent claims that HK and Taiwan businesses immediately invested in China after the massacre, without anything to back his claims up. All I know is that now US probably has the largest investment in China, more than anyone else. So is it ok to invest after the brutality is forgotten? Remember the same government still violates human rights now and then, probably now armed with cash from US.
Hong Kong people sounded optimistic about the reunion because they had to. Some were too afraid of the communists to say otherwise, and some hoped naively that China would change. Those who were less optimistic made up the large flux of emmigration to other countries.
Those Chinese who support the destruction of Falun-Gong because they believe what the Chinese government tells them. I still read that many Falun-Gong members in Mainland and overseas actively supporting their own group. If they are cowards as the parent suggests surely they can just choose to forgo their belief?
The parent still has more bullshit that I don't have time to address. I just don't understand why the troll has so much time to make up inaccurate claims against the Chinese, it makes one wonder what his agenda is up to. Meanwhile I'll carry on my research and hope naively that science can make the world a better place, without all the stereotype and politics.
I feel really sad to see this kind of comment posted by Americans and supported by American moderators. It certainly damage the diversity of our society, and reinforce the stereotype that Americans are racist idiots, who talk out of their arses and cannot think with their brains. Americans have already been heavily discriminated against in universities because many regard them as intellectually challenged. I certainly don't want to see more of them being abused because of this kind of mindless comments.
Yeah right. Everything related to China must be some secret propaganda campaign made up by the communists to conquer the world. Thanks for another mindless conspiracy shit. You will find the Chinese government nowadays more concerned about economy than anything else, and no one, at least in the government, would give a shit about this kind of stuff.
Zheng He's naval journeys (1405-1433, 80+ years before Columbus) have long been documented. The traditional belief is that Africa was the farthest he had sailed, and he had around 60 ships and 90,000 people to travel with him each time. Given the size of his fleet and his past record if he did went a bit farther in another direction and reached Australia or America I would not be too surprised. If not I don't think the Chinese will be more bothered than you are.
> We (the US) are not God, we are not the world's baby sitter, we are not ultimately responsible for every other governments ineptitude and disregard for its own people.
When YOU are doing harm to people in other countries it is the responsibility of the other countries. When the other countries are doing harm to their own people it suddenly becomes your responsibility. How ironic.
I cannot believe that this comment is modded as insightful.
1. The people there are too poor that they have to make a little money off your toxic garbage, risking their lives probably without knowing it. Why are you still selling the stuff to them when you know it is going to kill them?
2. Well do you think they know the stuff is toxic or have the proper knowledge of how to dispose of the harzardous material? They are all lowly educated farmers or workers for fsck's sake. If I let a 3-year-old kid drink detergent or whatever, can I still say without guilt something like "Don't complain to someone else because you decide to crap there"?
3. Just because you commit murder in a foreign country where the government is too incompetent to charge you it doesn't mean you are doing something right.
If you fully know your old computer will end up killing some poor people in China or India, why don't you spend a little bit more, probably insignificant to your well being, to save them from being exploited? Or do you think a life in China is not worth your $30?
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know which part of US you are in, but here in Caltech, foreign students are actually more expensive, as almost all US citizens can get fellowships that are for citizens only, while the professors have to pay stipends to foreign students out of his own research funding.
I am a foreign graduate student in a US university, and I am seriously disturbed by the increasing restrictions on foreigners doing research in the US. First it was the visa problem that caused a vast drop of foreign graduate applications. Then they cut research fundings for fundamental sicence and prevented non-citizens from participating in DARPA funded research. Now we have this ridiculous license joke. US is at the forefront of scientific research because they were able to attract the smartest minds from all over the world, but it has come to a point that even I am seriously considering alternatives after graduating, and I am sure I am not alone in thinking about leaving.
If you keep driving smart people away like this, you will end up with none of the valuable knowledge you are trying to protect.
ever heard of political science?
> And does anyone else get the warm and fuzzy feelings from looking at these pics, even though there's nothing you could possibly use that much power for?
Someone told me that it took the Earth simulator about a week to simulate air flow past a truck. I get warm and fuzzy feelings by simply looking at stuff around myself and appreciating the mind-boggling complexity of Mother Nature.
There is no medium that can slow down all frequencies. The asymptotic limit of the refractive index at high frequencies is always 1, because as you increase the frequency, sooner or later the atoms will not be able to respond fast enough. It is indeed this fact that leads to the mathematical proof by Sommerfield and Brillouin.
So let's say you send a step function waveform (or any function with a jump from 0 to something) through a dispersive medium, the waveform, which must contain all frequencies due to the discotinuity, will be distorted, but the first bit of information will always arrive at the other end at a speed of c. Everything else arrives at a speed less than c. Whether you can make such an ideal waveform at the input, and whether you can detect that first bit, however, are practical questions.
My knowledge of the proof comes second-hand from a book called "Modern Optics" by Robert Guenther, which does a qualitative explanation of the proof that is supposedly contained in a book called "Wave Propagation and Group Velocity" by Leon Brillouin. For more recent research, look for papers by Raymond Chiao from Berkeley, who seems to be the leading researcher on superluminal propagation.
This is a common misconception among undergraduates taught by clueless professors, that the group velocity cannot be larger than c. Actually the group velocity in certain materials can become larger than c, when the light frequency is near the resonance of the atoms in the medium. This still does not violate special relativity, because the group velocity is just the speed of the peak of the pulse, which doesn't carry the first bit of information. The real velocity at which the first bit of information travels is called the signal velocity, which is how fast a waveform shaped like a heaviside step function travels. It has been theoretically proven about fifty years ago by Sommerfield and Brillouin that this signal velocity is always c regardless of the dispersion of the medium. Interest in this topic was re-ignited recently only because technology nowadays allows the experimental observation of exotic group velocities, but theoretically the problem was solved long ago.
I think you are being too critical to their research. Granted I don't like the idea of using genetic algorithm for optics research either, but what they design are not conventional fibers, but holey fibers, (a.k.a. photonic crystal fibers or microstructure fibers) which can have varying hole patterns and sizes in the cladding, making fiber design much more complicated. These holey fibers are unique because they can have much higher effective nonlinearity (smaller core size) and unique dispersion properties (e.g. anomalous group-velocity dispersion at 800nm), and I believe there is no existing technique or program that tells you how to design those hole patterns to get desired dispersion properties.
As more people get broadband, it makes sense for spammers to pay someone to write viruses/worms so that more spam can be sent via the infected computers with fat pipes. It's harder to close down the offenders as there are so many, and difficult to trace back to the culprit. As a bonus they can use the zombies to initiate DDoS attacks against anti-spam sites.
I'm a subscriber too and a Linux user. The most annoying thing about their switch to Windows Media is that it is in the final days of the season, which means that now I cannot access the content I have already fully paid in advance. Granted the fee is very reasonable, but I would have thought twice before I subscribed it if they used Windows Media exclusively at the beginning. Real player for Linux worked like a charm without all the spyware/adware nuisances. I sent them an email complaint and all I get is a stock reply. Hope they get enough complaints to switch back.
correction...
The knowledge that the object is in motion (non-zero momentum) alone is enough to say that there is a non-zero uncertainty in position.
> Much to the science world's astonishment, the work also appears to provide solutions to Zeno of Elea's famous motion paradoxes, almost 2500 years after they were originally conceived by the ancient Greek philosopher.
Zeno's paradoxes were solved three hundred years ago using calculus. Interested readers should refer to basic high school or college physics.
> In doing so, its unlikely author, who originally attended university for just 6 months, is drawing comparisons to Albert Einstein
Drawing comparisons of a college drop-out to Albert Einstein? Why does that remind me of this guy?
> This is contrast to being sniggered at by local physicists when he originally approached them with the work, and once aware it had been accepted for publication, one informing the journal of the author's lack of formal qualification in an attempt to have them reject it.
They all laughed at Albert Einstein. They all laughed at Columbus. Unfortunately, they also all laughed at Bozo the Clown.
> A number of other outstanding issues to do with time in physics are also addressed, including cosmology and an argument against the theory of Imaginary time by British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking... Another impressed with the work is Princeton physics great, and collaborator of both Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman, John Wheeler, who said he admired Lynds' "boldness", while noting that it had often been individuals Lynds' age that "had pushed the frontiers of physics forward in the past."
The theory isn't any more credible by spouting big names. This is getting more laughable than Alex Chiu now.
> In contrast, an earlier referee had a different opinion of the controversial paper. "I have only read the first two sections as it is clear that the author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus. I'm afraid I am unwilling to waste any time reading further, and recommend terminal rejection."
Well duh.
> Lynds says that the paradoxes arose because people assumed wrongly that objects in motion had determined positions at any instant in time, thus freezing the bodies motion static at that instant and enabling the impossible situation of the paradoxes to be derived.
Crap. Measuring the precise position of an object in motion does not freeze the body. In classical mechanics this can be trivially done by measuring the velocity and integrate to get the position. Even in quantum mechanics, the collapse of a wave function does not mean that the object does not move. This guy is having trouble with his high school physics.
> Lynds' solution to all of the paradoxes lay in the realisation of the absence of an instant in time underlying a bodies motion and that its position was constantly changing over time and never determined. He comments, "With some thought it should become clear that no matter how small the time interval, or how slowly an object moves during that interval, it is still in motion and it's position is constantly changing, so it can't have a determined relative position at any time, whether during a interval, however small, or at an instant.
Thanks for redefining velocity for us. He needs to understand the concept of infinitestimal time.
> Indeed, if it did, it couldn't be in motion."
It appears that his whole argument is philosophical. To mean anything in physics he needs to at least present a theoretical model that would be consistent with existing theories and previous experimental results. I highly doubt that his paper would offer any, other than crap.
> Lynds also points out that in all cases a time value represents an interval on time, rather than an instant. "For example, if two separate events are measured to take place at either 1 hour or 10.00 seconds, these two values indicate the events occurred during the time intervals of 1 and 1.99999...hours and 10.00 and 10.0099999...seconds res
I just skimmed through the paper. Very intriguing. But I think the author overlooks one important factor in our civilization: Human stupidity. It's well known to be infinite, so his probability calculations would definitely blow up somewhere and his final result would be invalid. We are more likely to have some superpower with an idiot president to start a new world war which ends the human civilization, before we can develop the technology of a "matrix" to simulate human thoughts.
or in the case of down-shifting, phonons are created
The energy indeed comes from the shock wave. When light is shifted from a lower frequency to a higher frequency, a photon with the lower frequency f1 and an acoustic phonon with the frequency f2 are annihiliated and a new photon with the high frequency f1 + f2 is created. Energy is conserved. This is called stimulated Brillouin scattering. I suspect that the mechanism suggested in the article is a multi-phonon process because usually acoustic waves do not have such high optical frequencies. So multiple phonons are annihiliated in multiple bounces to generate a significant frequency shift.
We can better understand the American mentality by looking at the Middle East. Americans are totally silent when Israel have serious human rights issues in Palestine, or when USA themselves bomb the shit out of Iraq, killing many civilians. Oh wait, they are not only silent, they actually support the atrocities! You have the nerve to call Beijing a supplier of weapons, when USA is the largest weapon supplier in the world of all! I'm not condoning what the communists do, but to accuse Chinese in this way is pure stupidity on your part.
I'd prefer Americans to come to universities and learn how to do the basic math first, but that's just my opinion (ps... not the '1+1=2' version either)
I base my stereotype about stupid Americans on irrelevant facts (chinese overrepresented in university), just as the parent troll bases his steoreotype about cold-blooded Chinese on irrelevant facts. If you feel insulted by my comments on Americans, Chinese would feel the same way about the parent troll.
Most, if not all, of his "observations" are laughable. Chinese are apparently disinterested with human rights in China, not because they have no ethics or they are okay with it, but because the Chinese are AFRAID of the oppressive government, and the government restricts all the info available to its citizens that many of them simply do not believe the atrocities by the government actually happened.
It's all too easy commenting on human rights of China in an AI when you do not need to risk your safety. If a (mainland) Chinese is that outspoken in that respect, he can forget going back to his own country forever, and risk the safety of his family back home.
I talk to many mainland Chinese students here in US, and some seem to condone the Tienanmen Massacre, because they believe what the government told them. The situation is kinda like here in US, many Americans believe Iraq is really a threat and condone the war. But even without all the information, many mainland Chinese privately know that this event is unforgivable, but they are so afraid of the government that they do not want to talk about it publicly.
For Chinese who have access to the information about the Tiananmen Massacre, like those in HK, the response cannot be more drastic. A MILLION Hong Kong people, that's one-sixth of the total population, went to the streets to voice their support of the students before the massacre.
For HK people, many of which had already escaped once from mainland because of the cultural revolution, they had witnessed the brutality of the "communist" government before, which was going to take over HK in a few years. Yet A MILLION people had the courage to voice their support for the "infidels," facing probable future probes by the communists. And the parent troll concludes by saying that Chinese have no ethics.
The parent claims that HK and Taiwan businesses immediately invested in China after the massacre, without anything to back his claims up. All I know is that now US probably has the largest investment in China, more than anyone else. So is it ok to invest after the brutality is forgotten? Remember the same government still violates human rights now and then, probably now armed with cash from US.
Hong Kong people sounded optimistic about the reunion because they had to. Some were too afraid of the communists to say otherwise, and some hoped naively that China would change. Those who were less optimistic made up the large flux of emmigration to other countries.
Those Chinese who support the destruction of Falun-Gong because they believe what the Chinese government tells them. I still read that many Falun-Gong members in Mainland and overseas actively supporting their own group. If they are cowards as the parent suggests surely they can just choose to forgo their belief?
The parent still has more bullshit that I don't have time to address. I just don't understand why the troll has so much time to make up inaccurate claims against the Chinese, it makes one wonder what his agenda is up to. Meanwhile I'll carry on my research and hope naively that science can make the world a better place, without all the stereotype and politics.
I feel really sad to see this kind of comment posted by Americans and supported by American moderators. It certainly damage the diversity of our society, and reinforce the stereotype that Americans are racist idiots, who talk out of their arses and cannot think with their brains. Americans have already been heavily discriminated against in universities because many regard them as intellectually challenged. I certainly don't want to see more of them being abused because of this kind of mindless comments.
> the Army is so risk-adverse they are willing to do almost anything, at > any cost, to avoid American combat casualties.
Oh the irony.
Yeah right. Everything related to China must be some secret propaganda campaign made up by the communists to conquer the world. Thanks for another mindless conspiracy shit. You will find the Chinese government nowadays more concerned about economy than anything else, and no one, at least in the government, would give a shit about this kind of stuff.
Zheng He's naval journeys (1405-1433, 80+ years before Columbus) have long been documented. The traditional belief is that Africa was the farthest he had sailed, and he had around 60 ships and 90,000 people to travel with him each time. Given the size of his fleet and his past record if he did went a bit farther in another direction and reached Australia or America I would not be too surprised. If not I don't think the Chinese will be more bothered than you are.
> We (the US) are not God, we are not the world's baby sitter, we are not ultimately responsible for every other governments ineptitude and disregard for its own people.
When YOU are doing harm to people in other countries it is the responsibility of the other countries. When the other countries are doing harm to their own people it suddenly becomes your responsibility. How ironic.
I cannot believe that this comment is modded as insightful.
1. The people there are too poor that they have to make a little money off your toxic garbage, risking their lives probably without knowing it. Why are you still selling the stuff to them when you know it is going to kill them?
2. Well do you think they know the stuff is toxic or have the proper knowledge of how to dispose of the harzardous material? They are all lowly educated farmers or workers for fsck's sake. If I let a 3-year-old kid drink detergent or whatever, can I still say without guilt something like "Don't complain to someone else because you decide to crap there"?
3. Just because you commit murder in a foreign country where the government is too incompetent to charge you it doesn't mean you are doing something right.
If you fully know your old computer will end up killing some poor people in China or India, why don't you spend a little bit more, probably insignificant to your well being, to save them from being exploited? Or do you think a life in China is not worth your $30?