This means the end of flamebaiting...
on
Geocoding All Content
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
...or you will have to fear that some short-tempered angry man (or woman) will drive by your house and shoot you!
But seriously, it's a nice idea as long as it's opt-in. Can't think of too many great uses, though, other than the usual: Where's the next cinema/pharmacy/McDo's?
(If you are in any way offended by this post, please visit me at my home address: Saddam Hussein Boulevard 555, Baghdad, Iraq)
actually, what you said just gave me a scary thought: Another ten years and we WILL have robots with guns and with all likeliness a new crime problem: remote-controlled robots asking for your wallet, threatening with the gun - caught by the police won't make a difference to the criminal who keeps a radio (or Internet) distance from the crime site . . . and I have no clue how to solve that? The future can be scary sometimes.
my point with the manufacturer was that it would be impossible to produce at the same cost as in, for example, China
Obviously, you live in a different US than I do. Who could afford a video recorder, computer, toys, the amount of clothing, several bikes and other stuff thirty years ago. Cheap cars were foreign cars in the old days, before US government foolishly decided to limit imports which allowed the Japanese to go up-market.
Pretty sound theory you put up there. Pity that you forgot about "trade between nations". Without it, these days of globalization, your model becomes rubbish.
Think about this:
1. Sun will make extra profits from this model. Which will get extra taxes to the US government and extra profits to the mainly American stockholders.
2. Shirts that are made in Bolivia instead of US cost one dollar instead of ten. This makes Americans effectively richer because all Americans who have ten dollars can now afford ten shirts instead of one.
3. Are you suggesting that the best of all state economies has only domestic production? Well my dear Sir, not only is that foolish, if you really start thinking about it (no more Sony, Mercedes, Nintendo and even X-Box) but it is nothing but jingo!
4. Do you really trust the governments to make more wise decisions and do the right things?
would it be foolish of me to take up such a job? What makes me deserve something better than my Indian colleague? It is not too unrealistic that Sun would offer some Americans to settle over to India to guide the transition. Of course it is more realistic to get a better job in the States but my point is really:
Why should I not accept a job that an Indian is willing to accept and at the same time be jealous of him taking away my job?
For a nation to survive you need to continuously either automate or outsource. I know that it is tragic because many jobs get lost on the way. But if a nation gets stuck in their ways and wants to preserve all jobs rather than looking for new and more efficient (cheaper) methods it will certainly falter (remember the Luddites)
I know it sounds sarcastic: but if programming becomes a cheap job function then we need to move on. Programmers need to learn new jobs: sometimes executive programmers supervising, maybe, Indians, sometimes making burgers at McDonald's
Think about it this way: If Sun came out tomorrow with a programming language for computers that would replace all need for programmers - should we outlaw it, because it makes programmers jobless?
No it is not. Many of the things we buy today were not available back then. Almost all American earned less in the past making for cheaper labor. Ask any manufacturer to start producing all those goods which state "Made in China" in the US at the same price and he will tell you to go to hell.
Also talk to your parents or your beloved historians and ask them whether the American standard of living has improved or not.
So you're point is that American developers dont have families to provide for. Since we can only put one roof over our children's head we are less worthy than if two could be housed elsewhere?
No that's not my point. My point is... and anyone familiar with probalities and statistics must agree with this. That a dollar spent in India can support many people for a couple of days, whereas a dollar spent in the US will buy you two cans of Coke.
Thats not racism it's nationalism (or more derisively jingoism). If the contention was that caucasions were being replaced with Indians then that would be racism.
There is an Indian race and an American race (both are wild mixes, like all races). There is an American nation and an Indian nation. I used the word "racism" because it has a negative taint (for good reasons), unfortunately nationalism, for many, does not have a negative taint. Maybe the use of the word "nationalism" or "jingoism" would have been more appropriate but I don't think using the word "racism" is wrong and it does bring my point across more clearly.
Lowered operating costs dont always translate to lower costs, usually it means higher profit margins. Customer benefit is suspect at best.
I agree - that's why I wrote "either" make profit "or" sell at lower price. I know that Sun will prefer to keep that extra profit, but sometimes (and you agree with that) increased competition could lead to a price drop - rather than Sun shutting down the business.
Only problem with your suggestion is that if we had these same labour laws everywhere, most Americans wouldn't be able to afford things like cars, clothes, toys, computers, etc. since most of these industries depend on cheap labor to manufacture.
Not any worse than Americans is asking a long way, but I agree with you that there need to be minimum standards, but this would have to be way below what the US has or we must stop our current luxurious ways (and I mean 90% of the US live in "luxury" compared to the ROW) immediately.
...if I was a younger, lower-paid engineer from India. Think about it this way: for the money you pay an American worker, Sun probably hires two Indian engineers and still makes a profit. The two Indian engineers will be able to support many more people and relieve them from poverty whereas the American engineer would probably waste a large part of his money on the unnecessary things in life. If you are not a racist and think that Americans are better than Indians, then you should applaud Sun. If you are either a customer or shareholder of Sun then you should also applaud them: they either make more profit or able to sell at lower prices.
I think nobody is paying attention. It seems that CmdrTaco did not even read the original article with enough care. Or he does not understand English language very well or probably never went to university and therefore does not understand the concept of "academic article"
Yes but free articles are free because author's decided to give them away for free. If Yahoo offers "premium content" it is content which is NOT FREE because the authors decide to charge for it.
Even Citeseer cannot offer paid-for articles for free.
This service will help you search academic articles for free and then allow you to read them online if you pay for them.
Libraries only keep a small selection of the millions of academic articles that are out there and to search and read through them "offline" is an arduous task.
Academic articles are not normally published on university websites because the copyright is owned by publishing houses who charge for the articles.
A search site run by a small company would have the same problem: They cannot give you something for free which is not free.
Yahoo will not offer a pay-per search (ZDNet's mistake, repeated by Slashdot) but a pay-per-view service for academic papers.
Since most academic papers are copyrighted by publishers and charged for, there is no way that Yahoo or Google or Slashdot anybody else could offer such a service for free. (without throwing away money)
Ok, but even if all your points are agreed to,
Where does the conclusion that "Apple is worse than Microsoft" come from?
Surely NO company in the world is currently worse than Microsoft.
Apple has done some things in the past to choose "profit over public" but less so than other companies. And I think that if the whole corporate environment was a bit more "open-source" Apple would still be the company who is leading the way, being more open-source than the other corporates.
REMEMBER: If Apple does not make profits by selling OSs etc., share prices would fall and someone like Bill Gates could buy up Apple. Apple is not a non-profit, after all - If it suddenly decided to act like one, share-holder would rebell and sack CEOs, many employees could not be supported anymore and would be fired as well, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
damn, I was just about to say that this was "inspired" by the Swiss artist team Fischli and Weiss.
3 0/ qid%3D1050333367/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/104-3 118912-3971146
Honda still made a good ad and we should thank them for that. But the credit for the original ideas for this belong to the Swiss.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/63045516
...or you will have to fear that some short-tempered angry man (or woman) will drive by your house and shoot you!
But seriously, it's a nice idea as long as it's opt-in. Can't think of too many great uses, though, other than the usual: Where's the next cinema/pharmacy/McDo's?
(If you are in any way offended by this post, please visit me at my home address: Saddam Hussein Boulevard 555, Baghdad, Iraq)
but the robots could be produced on a distant far-away planet (Star Wars II)
actually, what you said just gave me a scary thought: Another ten years and we WILL have robots with guns and with all likeliness a new crime problem: remote-controlled robots asking for your wallet, threatening with the gun - caught by the police won't make a difference to the criminal who keeps a radio (or Internet) distance from the crime site . . . and I have no clue how to solve that? The future can be scary sometimes.
I agree with you. Those native Americans should never have let in those damn settlers in the first place...
because the Indians are cheaper... Sun's decision is colour-blind. It is purely based on financial data.
?hugh?
my point with the manufacturer was that it would be impossible to produce at the same cost as in, for example, China
Obviously, you live in a different US than I do. Who could afford a video recorder, computer, toys, the amount of clothing, several bikes and other stuff thirty years ago. Cheap cars were foreign cars in the old days, before US government foolishly decided to limit imports which allowed the Japanese to go up-market.
Thanks for your lessons in economics...
Pretty sound theory you put up there. Pity that you forgot about "trade between nations". Without it, these days of globalization, your model becomes rubbish.
Think about this:
1. Sun will make extra profits from this model. Which will get extra taxes to the US government and extra profits to the mainly American stockholders.
2. Shirts that are made in Bolivia instead of US cost one dollar instead of ten. This makes Americans effectively richer because all Americans who have ten dollars can now afford ten shirts instead of one.
3. Are you suggesting that the best of all state economies has only domestic production? Well my dear Sir, not only is that foolish, if you really start thinking about it (no more Sony, Mercedes, Nintendo and even X-Box) but it is nothing but jingo!
4. Do you really trust the governments to make more wise decisions and do the right things?
why an idiot? what's your point?
would it be foolish of me to take up such a job? What makes me deserve something better than my Indian colleague?
It is not too unrealistic that Sun would offer some Americans to settle over to India to guide the transition.
Of course it is more realistic to get a better job in the States but my point is really:
Why should I not accept a job that an Indian is willing to accept and at the same time be jealous of him taking away my job?
For a nation to survive you need to continuously either automate or outsource.
I know that it is tragic because many jobs get lost on the way. But if a nation gets stuck in their ways and wants to preserve all jobs rather than looking for new and more efficient (cheaper) methods it will certainly falter (remember the Luddites)
I know it sounds sarcastic: but if programming becomes a cheap job function then we need to move on. Programmers need to learn new jobs: sometimes executive programmers supervising, maybe, Indians, sometimes making burgers at McDonald's
Think about it this way: If Sun came out tomorrow with a programming language for computers that would replace all need for programmers - should we outlaw it, because it makes programmers jobless?
No it is not. Many of the things we buy today were not available back then.
Almost all American earned less in the past making for cheaper labor.
Ask any manufacturer to start producing all those goods which state "Made in China" in the US at the same price and he will tell you to go to hell.
Also talk to your parents or your beloved historians and ask them whether the American standard of living has improved or not.
No that's not my point. My point is... and anyone familiar with probalities and statistics must agree with this. That a dollar spent in India can support many people for a couple of days, whereas a dollar spent in the US will buy you two cans of Coke.
There is an Indian race and an American race (both are wild mixes, like all races). There is an American nation and an Indian nation. I used the word "racism" because it has a negative taint (for good reasons), unfortunately nationalism, for many, does not have a negative taint.
Maybe the use of the word "nationalism" or "jingoism" would have been more appropriate but I don't think using the word "racism" is wrong and it does bring my point across more clearly.
I agree - that's why I wrote "either" make profit "or" sell at lower price. I know that Sun will prefer to keep that extra profit, but sometimes (and you agree with that) increased competition could lead to a price drop - rather than Sun shutting down the business.
You don't actually believe that that is the case, do you? Obviously you are not a racist, but certainly an ignorant and unaware jingoist.
No, in my personal opinion he only deserves the job because he offers the same qualities at a cheaper rate.
I like you... you are so philanthropic...
Only problem with your suggestion is that if we had these same labour laws everywhere, most Americans wouldn't be able to afford things like cars, clothes, toys, computers, etc. since most of these industries depend on cheap labor to manufacture.
Not any worse than Americans is asking a long way, but I agree with you that there need to be minimum standards, but this would have to be way below what the US has or we must stop our current luxurious ways (and I mean 90% of the US live in "luxury" compared to the ROW) immediately.
and I would take that job in India... better than being unemployed!
...if I was a younger, lower-paid engineer from India.
Think about it this way: for the money you pay an American worker, Sun probably hires two Indian engineers and still makes a profit.
The two Indian engineers will be able to support many more people and relieve them from poverty whereas the American engineer would probably waste a large part of his money on the unnecessary things in life.
If you are not a racist and think that Americans are better than Indians, then you should applaud Sun. If you are either a customer or shareholder of Sun then you should also applaud them: they either make more profit or able to sell at lower prices.
Long live capitalism!
Well - I hope not!
Great, that means I can't listen to my music, DVDs, use my software when I am on holidays, on a business trip or at my second home?
I think nobody is paying attention. It seems that CmdrTaco did not even read the original article with enough care. Or he does not understand English language very well or probably never went to university and therefore does not understand the concept of "academic article"
Yes but free articles are free because author's decided to give them away for free. If Yahoo offers "premium content" it is content which is NOT FREE because the authors decide to charge for it.
Even Citeseer cannot offer paid-for articles for free.
This service will help you search academic articles for free and then allow you to read them online if you pay for them.
Libraries only keep a small selection of the millions of academic articles that are out there and to search and read through them "offline" is an arduous task.
Academic articles are not normally published on university websites because the copyright is owned by publishing houses who charge for the articles.
A search site run by a small company would have the same problem: They cannot give you something for free which is not free.
Yahoo will offer a pay-per-view service for reading academic articles. There is no free alternative for that!
it is not pay-per-search, it is pay-per-view
Yahoo will not offer a pay-per search (ZDNet's mistake, repeated by Slashdot) but a pay-per-view service for academic papers.
Since most academic papers are copyrighted by publishers and charged for, there is no way that Yahoo or Google or Slashdot anybody else could offer such a service for free. (without throwing away money)
Ok, but even if all your points are agreed to, Where does the conclusion that "Apple is worse than Microsoft" come from? Surely NO company in the world is currently worse than Microsoft. Apple has done some things in the past to choose "profit over public" but less so than other companies. And I think that if the whole corporate environment was a bit more "open-source" Apple would still be the company who is leading the way, being more open-source than the other corporates. REMEMBER: If Apple does not make profits by selling OSs etc., share prices would fall and someone like Bill Gates could buy up Apple. Apple is not a non-profit, after all - If it suddenly decided to act like one, share-holder would rebell and sack CEOs, many employees could not be supported anymore and would be fired as well, etc.