This only exists because they needed something to show off at CES because their next generation Navi cards aren’t ready. This is a Vega 20 part which is specifically designed for machine learning and heavy compute workloads. It’s basically just one of their MI50 cards with the double precision performance crippled intentionally. If NVidia weren’t jacking up the prices on their 2000 series cards, AMD probably wouldn’t be able to sell this since it’s expensive for them to make and comes at the cost of selling a several thousand dollar professional card instead.
This is just 7nm Vega.
They're not going to make more Vega 56 and 64. Might as well make it in 7nm and add a few tweaks.
nVidia can drop the prices tomorrow. Do you think doing that will kill this card?
I think after X time (1 year?), the H1B should belong to the employee rather than the employer. And the only requirement should be to maintain salary A from a US Company and pay B level of taxes every year. After 4 years, you have a choice for GC or get out. GC to Citizenship is the standard 10 years.
I think that simple ownership and mobility will be enough to fix the system. And we can also limit issuing new visas based on the number currently active. Example: if we have a high unemployment rate.
This was the case 20 years ago.
But, 20 years ago, H1B was a different system.
Hiring someone on H1B was immediate, no waiting, no lottery. After about 6 months to a year, you would switch them over to a green card and it would be done in 3 months.
It was owned by the employer because the employee could get another H1B easily if they found another employer.
Now, because H1Bs are "limited" and getting a new one involves waiting a year and a lottery, they have made it so that it now belongs to the employee and can transfer from one company to another.
Get rid of the H1B altogether.
Instead,add 30K green cards which require that these be for ppl that are working at that business and can not be contracted/sub-contracted out to any other company for 5 years.
By switching to green cards, these ppl can move around the companies, which means competition for salary. In addition, because they come here permanently, it does not require large numbers like 50 or 65K (and hillary promised a number of businesses to raise it to 500K for H1B; what a joke).
A small number of say 20-30K is plenty good.
Something like that already exists, it is called EB2.
But it is clogged and something that was designed to take a few months takes 1-2 years.
Another major problem is that there is a per country limit on green cards. Because of this, India and China have green card queues years or decades long. So, even if you made 30K green cards available, citizens of India and China would not be able to make use of it. But, a majority of applicants to H1B are from India and China.
H-1Bs were created in response to a trend that research turned up. More and more U.S. college and university graduates were accepting jobs overseas, resulting in a net drain of skilled graduates out of the country. The idea behind the H-1B was to make it so that a well-educated foreigner could get a job in the U.S. more easily, countering that trend.
If that was the idea, then the H-1B was (and is) a bad solution to that problem. Look north of the border for a more sensible approach.
The reason that the H-1B screws local workers over is that it's tied to a particular employer. So if you want to stay in (or come to) the US, you have to accept whatever conditions are offerred...and while on an H-1B, you basically have no leverage. This allows employers to depress wages.
Canada has a more sensible approach: there is something called a post-graduate work permit which automatically (well, you have to apply but you're 99% certain to get it) grants all foreign students the right to live and work in Canada after the end of their educational program, for a length of time equal to the length of that program. If you paid for some funny 6-12 month course just trying to get your foot in the door, you will get a 6-12 month work permit after that. If you did an academic Masters degree which is typically 2 years, you will get a 2 year work permit. If you did a PhD which typically lasts 4-5 years, you will get a 4-5 year work permit. There are no limits on your employment during this time and you can work for whoever you want (that will hire you). You can change as many jobs as you like (and can). Employees don't have the type of leverage over you that they have with an H-1B in the US. You can also use this time to apply for a PR (permanent residence permit). The more highly educated you are and the better your job, the more likely you are to get one. If your postgraduate permit expires while your PR application is being processed, it is automatically extended until you get a response for your PR application (provided you do not leave the country in the meantime).
This is a false statement that keeps getting repeated but is not true.
Almost 20 years ago, the laws were changed that H1Bs could be transferred from one company to another.
Funny story about H1B and depressed wages. My company hired an H1B and by law his salary had to be posted on the company board. All the other engineers were mad about how much more he was making and ended up with the company having to give raises across the board. On the other hand, a young engineer was given a job offer right after college for $40K/yr and he accepted. He stayed for almost two years before realizing that he could easily make twice just switching jobs.
Something similar was proposed for the US, called it "stapling the green card with the diploma". However, lots of other stuff was tacked on to the bill and it became unpassable and was killed.
Weren't H-1B's supposed to be to get people who had skills not available locally... which would be people with higher education? Now we have fallen back to simply 'favoring' those people.
No. Experience matters more.
Person A with 4 years of vehicle design has more skills than someone who has a masters education.
I’ve read the summary; I’ve read the comments... but I’m still unclear on why I should care in the least whether or not Elon Musk gets a green card from China.
China - lots of hate
Musk - lots of hate and lots of stans.
China and Musk in the same article? Click gold mine!
I can't get used to successful companies doing big layoffs just to rebalance for the current workload. I guess it is rational given the assumption that plenty of well-qualified people will always be looking for work - although I'm surprised this is the case here - but beside that if there is no weight given to continuity for employees it just seems impossible to have a stable career + marriage + life.
Assumption is that when you want a "stable career + marriage + life", you will work somewhere else.
SpaceX etc are companies that you make your career out of. You work there first in your 20s and early 30s and then, you work somewhere else and find a stable, low-stress job.
That's ridiculous. This is a *personal debt* that an individual signed up for, to pay for a personal service. Why should the rest of us end up on the hook for personal choices/mistakes?
If it's taxes, then I should get a say in what people study, since they are government employees, and also get a say in what they do afterwards. Otherwise, pay for it yourself, and if you can't afford to go to college - DON'T.
So is extracurricular activities in school. Are you mad that you have to pay for public schools that offer choices of sports? You paid taxes, you should be able to dictate what each student is allowed to do.
This is a copy-paste that I wrote for somewhere else, do as you will with it.
I have observed something, and it has increased with time, having recently brought it up to my father-in-law, who is also a tech field worker, he agreed with me.
The people - both voluntarily and at some prodding are giving up control and ownership of everything - slowly.
What brought it to my attention is streaming services. Despite being a quite technical individual I skipped out on the early part of the streaming fad, due in part to living in an area with unreliable web access and literally working in a faraday cage without WiFi access during that time period. I doubled down on the previous fad - ripping and compressing, instead and continue that to this day.
The result - people are lost without access to Spotify. No Netflix, no movies. You unplug the average person from the Internet these days and they no longer have the ability to use their entertainment systems.
We are watching the formation of dependence culture.
Young people aren't driving anymore, which like everything else is a mix of good and bad. Even when I was privileged enough to be able to bike to work and back, and even for my grocery shopping and most everything else I still kept a license and a vehicle. Something I've noted at work - the younger a coworker is the less likely they are to have any damned tools to work with, and it doesn't appear to be tied to not having had enough time to accumulate them. While doing a little research about that tidbit I stumbled across an article about the non-ownership topic from the other perspective written in a way that meets my approval.
It's important after that last article I make myself clear. I am not condemning the passing of materialism culture. Far from it. I personally have reduced my materialism and even the footprint of what I personally own. I am however against submission and dependence culture - both of which are adopted when you give up your ability to do for yourself by depending on services - AKA being served - exclusively.
I want to go back to tools. Even though I've reduced the amount of junk I personally own, something I do own a healthy share of is tools. Tools are to me, a different kind of possession. They aren't possessions that say "Look at me!", they aren't something that I use as a status symbol, they aren't pointless possessions. No - tools are something that says "I've got this." I use my tools to make a living, to do for myself, to teach. My tools give me independence and if used properly can even be used to spread independence.
I think we're heading down a dangerous path. When most of the people rent someone still has to own what was rented. When people do nothing but stream someone still has control of the source material. When you don't have your own tools you have to depend on someone to provide them for you. When you can't control your own propulsion you can only go where others will take you. In situations where the many are dependent on the few, the few tend to get fewer in time as they are bought out or consolidated after deaths, etc... In turn the fewer the sources of provision are, the more power the providers have.
Eventually we all become slaves existing at the leisure of those who control the resources.
I just realized after typing that last line that it sounds like some sort of socialist manifesto - at least when that line stands alone. Quit
It was never "your music" unless you made it. You never owned it, even on CD. What distinguishes us from communists isn't the ability to buy a Ariana Grande CD.
I disagree. I would LOVE to see Sony / EMI / RCA / AG / DG / Polydor / MCA / Decca come into my house and retrive my LP / CD of
You see, you OWN the CD, but not the music in it. But you own the physical object in which said music came in.
With the "streamers" if they say "Well, no more bad 80's synthpop for YOU" then *poof* there goes your ability to stream that. With no recourse.
But they absolutely can't reach into your house and remove all your horrible 80's synthpop records and CDs.
Yet.
Sounds like some people would love nothing more than to do just that.
Why is that so hard to see?
Streaming and CDs are completely different.
Streaming services gives you access to millions of albums for a monthly fee.
CDs give you music for one album without a time limit.
You can buy music per album basis and save it as FLACs/MP3s which does the same thing as CDs.
While y'all are so busy yelling at each other like a divided bunch of little schoolchildren about blue this and red that, you've all been not noticing the corporations (all of them, really) moving to models that reduce or eliminate ownership.
And what's one of the most tangible ways we had to distinguish ourselves from heathen communists? Ownership. C'mon, boys and girls, all together now: Ow - ner- ship. It's your house, not the State's. It's your car, not the state's.
It's your music, not theirs.
But nooooo, you short-sighted, divided morons continue to fight amongst yourselves and you don't see this.. this thievery happening right under your noses.
You don't own your house. The state owns it and you're buying a license to use it. Again with the cliche, try not paying taxes or using your house that is not allowed by your state and see what happens.
Same with the car. The government owns your car. All you have is a title to use it in a manner that is as defined by the state.
It's all an illusion of ownership. All that is different is that the license are a little more permissive than others.
I bought my first CD in 1981, and guess what, it still works. That is close to 40 years old. I've got records that still play from the 70's, albeit with some scratches now. Do you really believe your streaming service will be around in 2060?
I still have my CDs but all they do is take up space. I'd rather listen to the stream than pop the CD in.
I look at those old CDs and a wave of memories flows through and I can't get myself to throw them away.
Before Trump: Slashdot and Media: We're worried about China, they don't play fair , steal our tech, and they have horrible human rights and they destroy our jobs in exchange for cheap trinkets. We should restrict ties with them.
After Trump: Slashdot and Media: I LOVE CHINA: UNLIMITED OPENNESS OF ALL OUR SECRETS AND EXCHANGE OF EVERYTHING 4EVA!
The online trolling campaigns are taking a break. There is no political election near.
Just wait until the 2020 election comes around. Things will be back to full swing then.
If you look how Chinese companies are structured, by their law, a Chinese official has to be on the board, and has the ultimate decision authority. It is equivalent to having someone from the NSA, CIA, DHS, or DEA be the deciding person on a US company's board in every decision made. Yes people argue, but US companies can give the middle finger to the government. Not so in China where attempts to do so will have people and their families send off somewhere to be "re-educated".
Even a foreign company doing business on Chinese soil cannot do so unless a Chinese counterpart (and thus the PRC) owns 51% of the venture.
So, yes, China is a threat, as anything Huawei gets, the Chinese government gets, and that info can be easily sold. They may not hurt you or your family, but they can find someone who can.
When data caps were introduced, we all just grumbled and tolerated it because there was nothing we could do.
When net neutrality was revoked, we all just grumbled and tolerated it because there was nothing we could do.
You have one provider for your house. What are you going to do?
Yes, you'll just grumble and then get the extra data plan that has 2TB cap instead of 1TB cap for $25 more. There will be also the $50 more 5TB cap plan that is such a deal and $75 10TB cap. But, a promotion will get you the 5TB plan for $20 more per month for 6 months.
They can aggressively price their cars, offer incentives and it will sell.
Those cars sold more in the previous years because they got the dealerships to sell more with financial incentives.
Go out buying a car and the prices of cars are all over the place. There are leases being offered that are hundreds of dollars different between the same class of cars. Even the same car can be leased for $300 one year and it's $550 the next year.
I've noticed that east and west coast don't have many American cars. When I was in California, the most prevalent American car was Tesla. Since I don't live there I don't what's going on there.
It's like asking why you'd want to script web pages...
Every big application has scripting. Office, photoshop etc etc. If people use it for 1000s of hours, it needs scripting.
It's just sad that there is no standard way of scripting your application. Visual Studio scripting, Office scripting, some other application scripting are all different. They all use different underlying languages, either DCOM, RPC or some other IPC or newer ones just some REST with a built in HTTP, TCP server.
You're one of these people who pretend both to have knowledge, and to not have any knowledge, at the same time.
Which is it? Do you know something about mergers and acquisitions, or not? Do you know if your words are exceptions that easily prove the rule, for example?
Setting up a straw man is bad enough, but do you have to be so weak and wishy-washy about it? I'd think when you're working with a pure straw man you could at least come to a powerful conclusion.
And the obvious question is, can a Chinese person create their own US company, and compete with Whirlpool here? Yes. Yes they can. Can a US person do that in China? No. No they cannot.
I'm not a paid consultant. Why are you asking for my credentials?
A Chinese company cannot just buy an American company. There are many many examples where a sale of an American company to a Chinese company has not been allowed by the US government.
I linked an article and gave you two more examples. You have the entire internet and google to take you further.
I saw an error in your comment and trying to notify you.
China is renowned for manipulating currency and closing off their markets, and the US has HUGE trade deficits with them as a result. Does anyone disagree with this?
So, then the question becomes, "How do we correct this?" China isn't going to give up the treasure willingly. Whoever the President is won't get results by asking politely. You'll never win by trying to negotiate from a point of weekness. What other tool does the President hold to negotiate a trade agreement other than the threat of tariffs? How effective is a threat once you demonstrate that you are unwilling to use it?
Manipulating currency and closing off their markets affects the Chinese. They are paid less than they deserve and don't have access to as many good products and services.
So, as an American, we have access to cheaper goods and services (and those made from cheaper Chinese raw materials and parts), and a more diverse goods and services.
As a result, our per capital is more than 10 times that of China.
The main problem is that they are accumulating dollars and using it to move into industries that are high margin so their per capita gets higher and is in level with ours. That is what we don't want.
We could go on and on with exploiting with their resources and labor, but not at the expense of it resulting in them getting ahead.
That is the purpose of the tariffs.
It is to stop China from advancing technologically. We would like to maximize the length of time we exploit their resources and labor.
It's worth taking some time out to do some thinking. At one time America was the best. Our people ruled the world, we made all our own products. They might have been more expensive than imported goods, but the trade-off that our own people were employed and could afford to purchase said goods was held to be more important. What happened that we decided that cost of goods suddenly took not just first place, but only place? Why did we destroy our own people for the promise of cheap goods from hostile countries? Why was this the only possible way forward? Who told us this? What else are the same people wrong about today?
Cheap goods from other countries are the only thing keeping us going right now.
We as a country have made decisions to slowly reduce our social programs and benefits, and made the worker more fragile by accepting more risk for health, retirement etc.
Slashdot Mirror
This only exists because they needed something to show off at CES because their next generation Navi cards aren’t ready. This is a Vega 20 part which is specifically designed for machine learning and heavy compute workloads. It’s basically just one of their MI50 cards with the double precision performance crippled intentionally. If NVidia weren’t jacking up the prices on their 2000 series cards, AMD probably wouldn’t be able to sell this since it’s expensive for them to make and comes at the cost of selling a several thousand dollar professional card instead.
This is just 7nm Vega.
They're not going to make more Vega 56 and 64. Might as well make it in 7nm and add a few tweaks.
nVidia can drop the prices tomorrow. Do you think doing that will kill this card?
I think after X time (1 year?), the H1B should belong to the employee rather than the employer. And the only requirement should be to maintain salary A from a US Company and pay B level of taxes every year. After 4 years, you have a choice for GC or get out. GC to Citizenship is the standard 10 years.
I think that simple ownership and mobility will be enough to fix the system. And we can also limit issuing new visas based on the number currently active. Example: if we have a high unemployment rate.
This was the case 20 years ago.
But, 20 years ago, H1B was a different system.
Hiring someone on H1B was immediate, no waiting, no lottery. After about 6 months to a year, you would switch them over to a green card and it would be done in 3 months.
It was owned by the employer because the employee could get another H1B easily if they found another employer.
Now, because H1Bs are "limited" and getting a new one involves waiting a year and a lottery, they have made it so that it now belongs to the employee and can transfer from one company to another.
Get rid of the H1B altogether. Instead,add 30K green cards which require that these be for ppl that are working at that business and can not be contracted/sub-contracted out to any other company for 5 years. By switching to green cards, these ppl can move around the companies, which means competition for salary. In addition, because they come here permanently, it does not require large numbers like 50 or 65K (and hillary promised a number of businesses to raise it to 500K for H1B; what a joke). A small number of say 20-30K is plenty good.
Something like that already exists, it is called EB2.
But it is clogged and something that was designed to take a few months takes 1-2 years.
Another major problem is that there is a per country limit on green cards. Because of this, India and China have green card queues years or decades long. So, even if you made 30K green cards available, citizens of India and China would not be able to make use of it. But, a majority of applicants to H1B are from India and China.
H-1Bs were created in response to a trend that research turned up. More and more U.S. college and university graduates were accepting jobs overseas, resulting in a net drain of skilled graduates out of the country. The idea behind the H-1B was to make it so that a well-educated foreigner could get a job in the U.S. more easily, countering that trend.
If that was the idea, then the H-1B was (and is) a bad solution to that problem. Look north of the border for a more sensible approach.
The reason that the H-1B screws local workers over is that it's tied to a particular employer. So if you want to stay in (or come to) the US, you have to accept whatever conditions are offerred...and while on an H-1B, you basically have no leverage. This allows employers to depress wages.
Canada has a more sensible approach: there is something called a post-graduate work permit which automatically (well, you have to apply but you're 99% certain to get it) grants all foreign students the right to live and work in Canada after the end of their educational program, for a length of time equal to the length of that program. If you paid for some funny 6-12 month course just trying to get your foot in the door, you will get a 6-12 month work permit after that. If you did an academic Masters degree which is typically 2 years, you will get a 2 year work permit. If you did a PhD which typically lasts 4-5 years, you will get a 4-5 year work permit. There are no limits on your employment during this time and you can work for whoever you want (that will hire you). You can change as many jobs as you like (and can). Employees don't have the type of leverage over you that they have with an H-1B in the US. You can also use this time to apply for a PR (permanent residence permit). The more highly educated you are and the better your job, the more likely you are to get one. If your postgraduate permit expires while your PR application is being processed, it is automatically extended until you get a response for your PR application (provided you do not leave the country in the meantime).
This is a false statement that keeps getting repeated but is not true.
Almost 20 years ago, the laws were changed that H1Bs could be transferred from one company to another.
Funny story about H1B and depressed wages. My company hired an H1B and by law his salary had to be posted on the company board. All the other engineers were mad about how much more he was making and ended up with the company having to give raises across the board. On the other hand, a young engineer was given a job offer right after college for $40K/yr and he accepted. He stayed for almost two years before realizing that he could easily make twice just switching jobs.
Something similar was proposed for the US, called it "stapling the green card with the diploma". However, lots of other stuff was tacked on to the bill and it became unpassable and was killed.
Weren't H-1B's supposed to be to get people who had skills not available locally... which would be people with higher education? Now we have fallen back to simply 'favoring' those people.
No. Experience matters more.
Person A with 4 years of vehicle design has more skills than someone who has a masters education.
I’ve read the summary; I’ve read the comments... but I’m still unclear on why I should care in the least whether or not Elon Musk gets a green card from China.
China - lots of hate
Musk - lots of hate and lots of stans.
China and Musk in the same article? Click gold mine!
I can't get used to successful companies doing big layoffs just to rebalance for the current workload. I guess it is rational given the assumption that plenty of well-qualified people will always be looking for work - although I'm surprised this is the case here - but beside that if there is no weight given to continuity for employees it just seems impossible to have a stable career + marriage + life.
Assumption is that when you want a "stable career + marriage + life", you will work somewhere else.
SpaceX etc are companies that you make your career out of. You work there first in your 20s and early 30s and then, you work somewhere else and find a stable, low-stress job.
That's ridiculous. This is a *personal debt* that an individual signed up for, to pay for a personal service. Why should the rest of us end up on the hook for personal choices/mistakes?
If it's taxes, then I should get a say in what people study, since they are government employees, and also get a say in what they do afterwards. Otherwise, pay for it yourself, and if you can't afford to go to college - DON'T.
So is extracurricular activities in school. Are you mad that you have to pay for public schools that offer choices of sports? You paid taxes, you should be able to dictate what each student is allowed to do.
This is a copy-paste that I wrote for somewhere else, do as you will with it.
I have observed something, and it has increased with time, having recently brought it up to my father-in-law, who is also a tech field worker, he agreed with me. The people - both voluntarily and at some prodding are giving up control and ownership of everything - slowly.
What brought it to my attention is streaming services. Despite being a quite technical individual I skipped out on the early part of the streaming fad, due in part to living in an area with unreliable web access and literally working in a faraday cage without WiFi access during that time period. I doubled down on the previous fad - ripping and compressing, instead and continue that to this day.
The result - people are lost without access to Spotify. No Netflix, no movies. You unplug the average person from the Internet these days and they no longer have the ability to use their entertainment systems.
I originally contemplated the pros and cons of going all online versus what I was doing - are we really missing anything by not owning our media? In time I began to realize it didn't stop at media.
Younger people don't want to own anything.
We are watching the formation of dependence culture.
Young people aren't driving anymore, which like everything else is a mix of good and bad. Even when I was privileged enough to be able to bike to work and back, and even for my grocery shopping and most everything else I still kept a license and a vehicle. Something I've noted at work - the younger a coworker is the less likely they are to have any damned tools to work with, and it doesn't appear to be tied to not having had enough time to accumulate them. While doing a little research about that tidbit I stumbled across an article about the non-ownership topic from the other perspective written in a way that meets my approval.
It's important after that last article I make myself clear. I am not condemning the passing of materialism culture. Far from it. I personally have reduced my materialism and even the footprint of what I personally own. I am however against submission and dependence culture - both of which are adopted when you give up your ability to do for yourself by depending on services - AKA being served - exclusively.
I want to go back to tools. Even though I've reduced the amount of junk I personally own, something I do own a healthy share of is tools. Tools are to me, a different kind of possession. They aren't possessions that say "Look at me!", they aren't something that I use as a status symbol, they aren't pointless possessions. No - tools are something that says "I've got this." I use my tools to make a living, to do for myself, to teach. My tools give me independence and if used properly can even be used to spread independence.
I think we're heading down a dangerous path. When most of the people rent someone still has to own what was rented. When people do nothing but stream someone still has control of the source material. When you don't have your own tools you have to depend on someone to provide them for you. When you can't control your own propulsion you can only go where others will take you. In situations where the many are dependent on the few, the few tend to get fewer in time as they are bought out or consolidated after deaths, etc... In turn the fewer the sources of provision are, the more power the providers have. Eventually we all become slaves existing at the leisure of those who control the resources.
I just realized after typing that last line that it sounds like some sort of socialist manifesto - at least when that line stands alone. Quit
It was never "your music" unless you made it. You never owned it, even on CD. What distinguishes us from communists isn't the ability to buy a Ariana Grande CD.
I disagree. I would LOVE to see Sony / EMI / RCA / AG / DG / Polydor / MCA / Decca come into my house and retrive my LP / CD of
You see, you OWN the CD, but not the music in it. But you own the physical object in which said music came in.
With the "streamers" if they say "Well, no more bad 80's synthpop for YOU" then *poof* there goes your ability to stream that. With no recourse.
But they absolutely can't reach into your house and remove all your horrible 80's synthpop records and CDs.
Yet.
Sounds like some people would love nothing more than to do just that.
Why is that so hard to see?
Streaming and CDs are completely different.
Streaming services gives you access to millions of albums for a monthly fee.
CDs give you music for one album without a time limit.
You can buy music per album basis and save it as FLACs/MP3s which does the same thing as CDs.
While y'all are so busy yelling at each other like a divided bunch of little schoolchildren about blue this and red that, you've all been not noticing the corporations (all of them, really) moving to models that reduce or eliminate ownership.
And what's one of the most tangible ways we had to distinguish ourselves from heathen communists? Ownership. C'mon, boys and girls, all together now: Ow - ner- ship. It's your house, not the State's. It's your car, not the state's.
It's your music, not theirs.
But nooooo, you short-sighted, divided morons continue to fight amongst yourselves and you don't see this .. this thievery happening right under your noses.
You don't own your house. The state owns it and you're buying a license to use it. Again with the cliche, try not paying taxes or using your house that is not allowed by your state and see what happens.
Same with the car. The government owns your car. All you have is a title to use it in a manner that is as defined by the state.
It's all an illusion of ownership. All that is different is that the license are a little more permissive than others.
I bought my first CD in 1981, and guess what, it still works. That is close to 40 years old. I've got records that still play from the 70's, albeit with some scratches now. Do you really believe your streaming service will be around in 2060?
I still have my CDs but all they do is take up space. I'd rather listen to the stream than pop the CD in.
I look at those old CDs and a wave of memories flows through and I can't get myself to throw them away.
Why the fuck is US tech going to benefit China?
We're not building any here.
China are pursuing nuclear technology. They will do it with our without American tech.
Without China, this American tech will just be whitepapers and simulations.
Before Trump: Slashdot and Media: We're worried about China, they don't play fair , steal our tech, and they have horrible human rights and they destroy our jobs in exchange for cheap trinkets. We should restrict ties with them. After Trump: Slashdot and Media: I LOVE CHINA: UNLIMITED OPENNESS OF ALL OUR SECRETS AND EXCHANGE OF EVERYTHING 4EVA!
The online trolling campaigns are taking a break. There is no political election near.
Just wait until the 2020 election comes around. Things will be back to full swing then.
If you look how Chinese companies are structured, by their law, a Chinese official has to be on the board, and has the ultimate decision authority. It is equivalent to having someone from the NSA, CIA, DHS, or DEA be the deciding person on a US company's board in every decision made. Yes people argue, but US companies can give the middle finger to the government. Not so in China where attempts to do so will have people and their families send off somewhere to be "re-educated".
Even a foreign company doing business on Chinese soil cannot do so unless a Chinese counterpart (and thus the PRC) owns 51% of the venture.
So, yes, China is a threat, as anything Huawei gets, the Chinese government gets, and that info can be easily sold. They may not hurt you or your family, but they can find someone who can.
Sounds like FUD.
No way is any of this even logistically possible.
When data caps were introduced, we all just grumbled and tolerated it because there was nothing we could do.
When net neutrality was revoked, we all just grumbled and tolerated it because there was nothing we could do.
You have one provider for your house. What are you going to do?
Yes, you'll just grumble and then get the extra data plan that has 2TB cap instead of 1TB cap for $25 more. There will be also the $50 more 5TB cap plan that is such a deal and $75 10TB cap. But, a promotion will get you the 5TB plan for $20 more per month for 6 months.
We won't do anything about it but pay more.
They lost sales because they cost too much.
They can aggressively price their cars, offer incentives and it will sell.
Those cars sold more in the previous years because they got the dealerships to sell more with financial incentives.
Go out buying a car and the prices of cars are all over the place. There are leases being offered that are hundreds of dollars different between the same class of cars. Even the same car can be leased for $300 one year and it's $550 the next year.
I've noticed that east and west coast don't have many American cars. When I was in California, the most prevalent American car was Tesla. Since I don't live there I don't what's going on there.
Anyone know why you'd want to script CAD documents anyway? Honestly curious.
It's like asking why you'd want to script web pages ...
Every big application has scripting. Office, photoshop etc etc. If people use it for 1000s of hours, it needs scripting.
It's just sad that there is no standard way of scripting your application. Visual Studio scripting, Office scripting, some other application scripting are all different. They all use different underlying languages, either DCOM, RPC or some other IPC or newer ones just some REST with a built in HTTP, TCP server.
Why do you love the Communist Chinese government?
You hate science because you hate the Chinese government?
If I love science and they also love science, does it mean I love the Chinese government?
You're one of these people who pretend both to have knowledge, and to not have any knowledge, at the same time.
Which is it? Do you know something about mergers and acquisitions, or not? Do you know if your words are exceptions that easily prove the rule, for example?
Setting up a straw man is bad enough, but do you have to be so weak and wishy-washy about it? I'd think when you're working with a pure straw man you could at least come to a powerful conclusion.
And the obvious question is, can a Chinese person create their own US company, and compete with Whirlpool here? Yes. Yes they can. Can a US person do that in China? No. No they cannot.
I'm not a paid consultant. Why are you asking for my credentials?
A Chinese company cannot just buy an American company. There are many many examples where a sale of an American company to a Chinese company has not been allowed by the US government.
I linked an article and gave you two more examples. You have the entire internet and google to take you further.
I saw an error in your comment and trying to notify you.
China is renowned for manipulating currency and closing off their markets, and the US has HUGE trade deficits with them as a result. Does anyone disagree with this?
So, then the question becomes, "How do we correct this?" China isn't going to give up the treasure willingly. Whoever the President is won't get results by asking politely. You'll never win by trying to negotiate from a point of weekness. What other tool does the President hold to negotiate a trade agreement other than the threat of tariffs? How effective is a threat once you demonstrate that you are unwilling to use it?
Manipulating currency and closing off their markets affects the Chinese. They are paid less than they deserve and don't have access to as many good products and services.
So, as an American, we have access to cheaper goods and services (and those made from cheaper Chinese raw materials and parts), and a more diverse goods and services.
As a result, our per capital is more than 10 times that of China.
The main problem is that they are accumulating dollars and using it to move into industries that are high margin so their per capita gets higher and is in level with ours. That is what we don't want.
We could go on and on with exploiting with their resources and labor, but not at the expense of it resulting in them getting ahead.
That is the purpose of the tariffs.
It is to stop China from advancing technologically. We would like to maximize the length of time we exploit their resources and labor.
How do we get them to knock this shit off?
Why do you hate science?
It's worth taking some time out to do some thinking. At one time America was the best. Our people ruled the world, we made all our own products. They might have been more expensive than imported goods, but the trade-off that our own people were employed and could afford to purchase said goods was held to be more important. What happened that we decided that cost of goods suddenly took not just first place, but only place? Why did we destroy our own people for the promise of cheap goods from hostile countries? Why was this the only possible way forward? Who told us this? What else are the same people wrong about today?
Cheap goods from other countries are the only thing keeping us going right now.
We as a country have made decisions to slowly reduce our social programs and benefits, and made the worker more fragile by accepting more risk for health, retirement etc.
anybody in the world can open a US company, or buy one
What?
China is routinely blocked from buying US companies.
Lattice
Whirlpool, Qualcomm and many others.
I am retiring the instant I meet my relevant financial goals for doing so.
But how do you factor in the unexpected medical expenses?
I find that keeps people to stretch what they are willing to retire at way way further because of this.