From what I remember reading on ChinaOnline.com, Windows has about 95 percent of the country's market share, but is being loaded on only about 90 percent of all new machines sold. Since retail sales of Linux exceeded those of Windows for the first time this past summer, it seems inconceivable that more than 10 percent of all Windows users in China are using legitimate copies.
Frankly, I think you'd have to be either stupid or foreign to buy a registered copy of the OS when you can pick up an illegal one for only a few yuan.
I wanted to respond to the comments I've read in many of the above posts that attribute the "slow" speed of domestic access to international content to China's content-control policies (including its Great Firewall).
While I've never used the Internet in China myself, I have studied the subject, and it seems that the real culprit for the slow loadtime of foreign webpages is probably the fact that the country has only 1234 Mbps of international bandwidth. Considering the pace of growth in Chinese internet use, I'm not surprised to discover that accessing foreign websites takes time.
While official statistics peg the total number of "Internet users" at 16.9 million today, it's revealing that the government agency responsible for these estimates, CNNIC, reveals that Chinese citizens have a total of 65 million email accounts. Even this figures probably underestimates the situation, considering that many Chinese use foreign-based webmail services such as hotmail (it's not clear to me if THESE accounts are factored into the 65 million estimate).
So bascially, China has about as much international bandwidth as a large American university has domestic bandwidth (and think of what Napster ALONE did to those networks....), with literally millions upon millions of more users accessing "foreign" content. While this renders right-wing fears of DOS attacks from China somewhat silly, it explains perfectly well why accessing American sites may take a lot of time if you're in China.
Wrong Greg. Canadians pay for their own health care through income tax. It's a deal when compared to the American private system, but is absolutely not a "free ride" as your post implies. Health Care in Canada is not like Altavista Internet Access (RIP), where users exchange their "privacy" for cheaper service.
It's worthwhile to note that this act was put in place by the right-wing provincial government. As part of their campaign to privatize health care, it is necessary to have legislation governing under what circumstances public companies (hospitals) can hand patient records over to private companies. THAT's why we're seeing this legislation. This is a story about privatization, and only marginally one about privacy.
Re:Come on... this guy is a space monkey
on
The Regulon
·
· Score: 1
That seems a sensible answer. And I'd probably agree with it.
But that's tantamount to admitting that ideas spread because PEOPLE are biologically conditioned to favour some ideas over others (perhaps, say, ideas which make life easier/more enjoyable).
Ergo, ideas (or memes) do not self-replicate.
Re:Evolution doesn't just apply to DNA
on
The Regulon
·
· Score: 1
DNA replicates itself. Because of this, all other changes to the DNA (adaptations) will necessarily ALSO replicate themselves.
Ideas do not replicate themselves. Therefore Dawkins cannot make an evolutionary argument.
It's a cute idea. But completely illogical. At the least, it's not an evolutionary argument.
Nice post! Natural selection is a biological theory. It was never intended to explain social phenomena because there is no comparable feedback mechanism to DNA.
I'd be curious to hear what "feedback process" this guy thinks has regulated the evolution of information for the last 2000 years.
Come on... this guy is a space monkey
on
The Regulon
·
· Score: 2
This is exactly as idiotic as those arguments about "cultural evolution" that were sexy in the late-60s.
The theory of evolution can ONLY be applied to biological phenomena, because it relies on a positive-feedback mechanism that works at the level of human DNA.
Expecting it to apply to "information" or "culture" or any other "social" (non-biological) phenomena is just plain stupid. There is no identifiable feedback mechanism.
Anyone who considers this insightful should probably build themselves a giant bomb-shelter and stock it full of cheap cybernetic fiction... all the better to shelter themselves from the H-bomb of 'information-overload' their systems just can't take.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly, I think you'd have to be either stupid or foreign to buy a registered copy of the OS when you can pick up an illegal one for only a few yuan.
(not that I'm advocating piracy....)
I wanted to respond to the comments I've read in many of the above posts that attribute the "slow" speed of domestic access to international content to China's content-control policies (including its Great Firewall).
While I've never used the Internet in China myself, I have studied the subject, and it seems that the real culprit for the slow loadtime of foreign webpages is probably the fact that the country has only 1234 Mbps of international bandwidth. Considering the pace of growth in Chinese internet use, I'm not surprised to discover that accessing foreign websites takes time.
While official statistics peg the total number of "Internet users" at 16.9 million today, it's revealing that the government agency responsible for these estimates, CNNIC, reveals that Chinese citizens have a total of 65 million email accounts. Even this figures probably underestimates the situation, considering that many Chinese use foreign-based webmail services such as hotmail (it's not clear to me if THESE accounts are factored into the 65 million estimate).
So bascially, China has about as much international bandwidth as a large American university has domestic bandwidth (and think of what Napster ALONE did to those networks....), with literally millions upon millions of more users accessing "foreign" content. While this renders right-wing fears of DOS attacks from China somewhat silly, it explains perfectly well why accessing American sites may take a lot of time if you're in China.
Wrong Greg. Canadians pay for their own health care through income tax. It's a deal when compared to the American private system, but is absolutely not a "free ride" as your post implies. Health Care in Canada is not like Altavista Internet Access (RIP), where users exchange their "privacy" for cheaper service. It's worthwhile to note that this act was put in place by the right-wing provincial government. As part of their campaign to privatize health care, it is necessary to have legislation governing under what circumstances public companies (hospitals) can hand patient records over to private companies. THAT's why we're seeing this legislation. This is a story about privatization, and only marginally one about privacy.
But that's tantamount to admitting that ideas spread because PEOPLE are biologically conditioned to favour some ideas over others (perhaps, say, ideas which make life easier/more enjoyable).
Ergo, ideas (or memes) do not self-replicate.
Ideas do not replicate themselves. Therefore Dawkins cannot make an evolutionary argument.
It's a cute idea. But completely illogical. At the least, it's not an evolutionary argument.
Where is the DNA of a meme?
I'd be curious to hear what "feedback process" this guy thinks has regulated the evolution of information for the last 2000 years.
The theory of evolution can ONLY be applied to biological phenomena, because it relies on a positive-feedback mechanism that works at the level of human DNA.
Expecting it to apply to "information" or "culture" or any other "social" (non-biological) phenomena is just plain stupid. There is no identifiable feedback mechanism.
Anyone who considers this insightful should probably build themselves a giant bomb-shelter and stock it full of cheap cybernetic fiction... all the better to shelter themselves from the H-bomb of 'information-overload' their systems just can't take.