Umm, linkage to a site that isn't election-year propaganda? Granted, Bush is an asshat, but there's no political reason for him to push through incentives for companies to move jobs away from America, unless specific companies already knew they were going to do just that, and were sending kickbacks to Bush himself (via the mechanisms of a privately-funded representative democracy) so they could get paid to do it, or possibly just not penalized so much.
Umm...we in the US don't live in anything close to a free market, in terms of international commerce. The US gov't rigs markets all the time. For a great example, look into corn subsidies.
The government skews the market all the time. Every time they do, it results in decreased efficiency, and thus less wealth for the country as a whole. Sometimes the tradeoff is worth it, and sometimes it ain't. A little less efficiency in our stock markets might be worth it so that we can all sleep a little easier at night. Flu shot production is something we might want to pay a little more for, in order to have more control over the production. However, it might not be worth it to be paying farmers to produce so much corn that we let it rot (ethanol) and add it to gasoline, just to use it up. IMHO, the US probably errs on the side of over-protectionism right now. It just sucks that the computer programmers are among the first groups to start losing their protection from foreign competition.
First off, your value judgements ("too much") have no place in a logical debate. American cars use too much gas for your tastes? Who gives a crap about your tastes? You obviously don't live here. (Petrol? It's spelled "gas")
The trade deficit is the natural byproduct of a country that more wealth than most of the rest of the world. The wealth leaks out. It doesn't mean we're wasteful; it just means we're pumping money back into the free market instead of hoarding it like greedy bastards.
I think you're putting the cart before the horse with the "live cheap" mantra. The problem is not that programmers have expensive tastes. The problem is that a flood of cheap foreign programming "labor" makes it less attractive economically to Americans to be programmers. Those of us Stateside who invested our time and effort to become programmers probably didn't forsee this when we committed ourselves to the profession, so it looks like a bait-and-switch. By the time it was apparent, it was too late to easily change paths. I don't think anyone deliberately deceived geeky high-schoolers into taking up CS. It's just that things changed in the meantime.
But back to my original point. Foreign workers increasing the supply of programing labor, and increasing competition, decreases our value to American society. It's not that we're too greedy to accept our diminished salaries as a result; it's simply an unpleasant surprise. It's not like we couldn't live cheap if we wanted to. Remember that 4-year period where we all subsisted on ramen noodles? It's just that we'd rather not do that any more.
At the end of the day, cheap foreign labor is a boon to the USA on the whole. People from other countries do work for us on the cheap: net win. I don't blame the employers. It'd be irrational to exclude the cheap labor, possibly endagering your company's financial future. I don't blame the foreign workers. I'd do the same thing in that position. I don't blame the US gov't. Cheap labor is good for just about the entire US, except for the other workers in the pool the fogeign labor is entering. The government is motivated to do what the majority of the voting citizenry wants it to do. However, it can only strengthen our (US-born programmers') position to spread around a little nationalist propaganda every now and then.
Nothing personal. I just like my big American car.
Wanna keep some shred of privacy while purchasing you postage for your parcel, and have a good time doing it? Wear a mask! Preferrably one of a long-dead celebrity. Favorites include: Herbert Hoover (cross-dressing spy) Stalin (All-around nice guy) Benjamin Franklin (First Postmaster General of the US)
Lemme guess: Are you an MBA by any chance? You lost me at the phrase "integrated with the larger domain for more efficiency". Geesh, if I wanted bulls*it, I'd RTFA...
The US Federal Reserve has just announced a new space-age digital holographic RFID watermarking scheme to prevent currency counterfeiting. The technology will be used exclusively on US $1 bills (the most frequently counterfeited), and cost approximately $35 per bill to implement.
Well, it's because people often think that the ones affected are the people are the ones they'd miss the least if they died. I mean, people who have lots of partners (male and female) and intravenous drug users are the top contenders for the disease. Most victims got infected as a result of having sex or doing drugs. The "moral majority" that elected Bush wouldn't shed too many tears if they all dropped dead tomorrow.
Note: I do not feel this way. Death is almost always* a bad thing.
Umm, point of order. The energy that windmills take out of the wind isn't destroyed either. It's converted into electricity (and a bit of heat), then used by us humans, and eventually ends up as heat and is released into the atmosphere. Some of it might have even been radiated off into space, rather than just heating up the atmosphere, but most of it was going to stick around. The big point that lots of people miss is, that wind energy was going to end up as heat eventually anyway, when wind resistance (read "friction") slowed it down. Friction's a bitch.
When you burn stuff, you take chemical potential energy and turn it into (electricity -> heat). You "liberate" some energy that probably would have stayed locked up for in that coal a long time, energy that was stored by ancient organisms, energy that came to Earth from the Sun long ago. When you put a few extra steps in between the wind energy turning into heat energy, you probably don't cause any direct net change in the amount of energy in the atmosphere. However, maybe you stop some of the important climate-y things that kinetic energy was gonna do before it ended up as heat too, like move huge amounts of heat around the globe and keep French people warm.
Slashdot Mirror
Good reviews have plenty of facts about the product that they're "detailing in detail". Example:
Fact: "Game stutters"
Opinion: "Stuttering makes game unplayable"
Check out mags like Consumer Reports for examples of just-the-facts type reviews.
Way to establish your street creed.
Way to expose your own deficiencies while nitpicking others'. I believe the word you were searching for was "cred", as short for "credibility".
True we have found limits to materials hence we need to think out of the box and find new materials.
Intel's new materials consist mainly of chewing gum and duct tape to glue a bunch of P4's onto a single die.
Next project: ogle.com, the porn search engine.
Thousands arrested in pirate sting. Still no word on the fate of the confiscated parrots.
Umm, linkage to a site that isn't election-year propaganda? Granted, Bush is an asshat, but there's no political reason for him to push through incentives for companies to move jobs away from America, unless specific companies already knew they were going to do just that, and were sending kickbacks to Bush himself (via the mechanisms of a privately-funded representative democracy) so they could get paid to do it, or possibly just not penalized so much.
Care to provide linkage re: incentives to use foreign labor?
Umm...we in the US don't live in anything close to a free market, in terms of international commerce. The US gov't rigs markets all the time. For a great example, look into corn subsidies.
The government skews the market all the time. Every time they do, it results in decreased efficiency, and thus less wealth for the country as a whole. Sometimes the tradeoff is worth it, and sometimes it ain't. A little less efficiency in our stock markets might be worth it so that we can all sleep a little easier at night. Flu shot production is something we might want to pay a little more for, in order to have more control over the production. However, it might not be worth it to be paying farmers to produce so much corn that we let it rot (ethanol) and add it to gasoline, just to use it up. IMHO, the US probably errs on the side of over-protectionism right now. It just sucks that the computer programmers are among the first groups to start losing their protection from foreign competition.
First off, your value judgements ("too much") have no place in a logical debate. American cars use too much gas for your tastes? Who gives a crap about your tastes? You obviously don't live here. (Petrol? It's spelled "gas")
The trade deficit is the natural byproduct of a country that more wealth than most of the rest of the world. The wealth leaks out. It doesn't mean we're wasteful; it just means we're pumping money back into the free market instead of hoarding it like greedy bastards.
I think you're putting the cart before the horse with the "live cheap" mantra. The problem is not that programmers have expensive tastes. The problem is that a flood of cheap foreign programming "labor" makes it less attractive economically to Americans to be programmers. Those of us Stateside who invested our time and effort to become programmers probably didn't forsee this when we committed ourselves to the profession, so it looks like a bait-and-switch. By the time it was apparent, it was too late to easily change paths. I don't think anyone deliberately deceived geeky high-schoolers into taking up CS. It's just that things changed in the meantime.
But back to my original point. Foreign workers increasing the supply of programing labor, and increasing competition, decreases our value to American society. It's not that we're too greedy to accept our diminished salaries as a result; it's simply an unpleasant surprise. It's not like we couldn't live cheap if we wanted to. Remember that 4-year period where we all subsisted on ramen noodles? It's just that we'd rather not do that any more.
At the end of the day, cheap foreign labor is a boon to the USA on the whole. People from other countries do work for us on the cheap: net win. I don't blame the employers. It'd be irrational to exclude the cheap labor, possibly endagering your company's financial future. I don't blame the foreign workers. I'd do the same thing in that position. I don't blame the US gov't. Cheap labor is good for just about the entire US, except for the other workers in the pool the fogeign labor is entering. The government is motivated to do what the majority of the voting citizenry wants it to do. However, it can only strengthen our (US-born programmers') position to spread around a little nationalist propaganda every now and then.
Nothing personal. I just like my big American car.
You better listen to Doctor Thompson. To make it to the status of "famous" in the field of glacier professory, you have to be REALLY good...
Well, what do you do with *your* enemas? Did you even read the directions on the box?
stouch (adj.) So staunch, it hurts.
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
Well spank me hard and call me Shirley. I got my Hoovers mixed up.
They all suck...
Wanna keep some shred of privacy while purchasing you postage for your parcel, and have a good time doing it? Wear a mask! Preferrably one of a long-dead celebrity. Favorites include:
Herbert Hoover (cross-dressing spy)
Stalin (All-around nice guy)
Benjamin Franklin (First Postmaster General of the US)
Homework? Bah! I'm waiting for the firmware hack that lets me send it to assassinate my enimies.
That, or the fellatio adapter.
C'mon, you know you were thinking it. That's why God invented midget hookers!
Lemme guess: Are you an MBA by any chance? You lost me at the phrase "integrated with the larger domain for more efficiency". Geesh, if I wanted bulls*it, I'd RTFA...
The US Federal Reserve has just announced a new space-age digital holographic RFID watermarking scheme to prevent currency counterfeiting. The technology will be used exclusively on US $1 bills (the most frequently counterfeited), and cost approximately $35 per bill to implement.
And in still more related news, assault rifle sales nationwide have skyrocketed.
Well, it's because people often think that the ones affected are the people are the ones they'd miss the least if they died. I mean, people who have lots of partners (male and female) and intravenous drug users are the top contenders for the disease. Most victims got infected as a result of having sex or doing drugs. The "moral majority" that elected Bush wouldn't shed too many tears if they all dropped dead tomorrow.
Note: I do not feel this way. Death is almost always* a bad thing.
* Except in the case of spammers.
I'm impotent, allergic to trees, and have lost the use of my right hand.
Yowza, I hope those 3 conditions ain't related...
From Demons:
Honest is easy.
Fiction is where genius lies.
It's a neat song, all about how much fun it is to lie. It's good. Go download it.
Frankly, I love it. Look at today's stock action. Maybe this'll push SCOX back up above $5 so I can short sell 'em some more.
I love that diagram on the website. Future press conference transcript excerpt:
Reporter: "Yes Mr. Zubrin, it's certainly an impressive design. What will be in the nose of the craft?"
Mr. Zurbin: "As you can see from this diagram, the nose of the craft will contain "science". Next question."
Umm, point of order. The energy that windmills take out of the wind isn't destroyed either. It's converted into electricity (and a bit of heat), then used by us humans, and eventually ends up as heat and is released into the atmosphere. Some of it might have even been radiated off into space, rather than just heating up the atmosphere, but most of it was going to stick around. The big point that lots of people miss is, that wind energy was going to end up as heat eventually anyway, when wind resistance (read "friction") slowed it down. Friction's a bitch.
When you burn stuff, you take chemical potential energy and turn it into (electricity -> heat). You "liberate" some energy that probably would have stayed locked up for in that coal a long time, energy that was stored by ancient organisms, energy that came to Earth from the Sun long ago. When you put a few extra steps in between the wind energy turning into heat energy, you probably don't cause any direct net change in the amount of energy in the atmosphere. However, maybe you stop some of the important climate-y things that kinetic energy was gonna do before it ended up as heat too, like move huge amounts of heat around the globe and keep French people warm.