"- Business methods (stateless EJBs/web services, servlets, JSF components, entities, etc.) are stateless and non-thread-safe" Developers are moving toward Statelessness technologies because it makes concurrency a LOT easier to manage on large systems The thread safety of a world is completely within the purview of the developer and always has been in Java. Swing isn't thread safe, We've only seen thread safe capable collections in the standard library for what, 5 years? Plus, EJB still has at its core the database transaction as an absolute thread safety net as long as you elect to use it. If you want to say anything about modern java, it would be that they haven't tackled the fundamental scaling issues in a larger variety of ways. But at least collections (Thanks Doug Lea) has made Java a little better place.
"- All data containers must adhere to the Java Bean specification; all mutable properties must either have a public setter method or the entire object must use field access" I'm missing your point. Maybe if you could elaborate on this, I could see what your problem is with the general Java bean philosophy.
"- Data objects are encumbered by persistence state, making complex operations on object graphs either costly (eager fetching) or perilous (lazy initialization exceptions, stale object state exceptions, etc.)" This has and always will be the case. Without those tools, you're forced to do all these fetches yourself. Sometimes to this day this is absolutely necessary to get the most effective and sometimes the only way to get a good performing query, but by in large ORM means that the rest of the data access-association boiler plate is kept to simple well known paradigms that anyone can pick up and use. This flexibility comes with a caveat in that you can only fetch within a transactional context, and this simple rule isn't that hard to follow once you understand WHY its relevant.
"- Most, if not all, user state is managed in the HTTP session or client (in the case of a fat client)" Sometimes people like to store things in database, and sometimes they like to store them in session data. The advantage of session data is that its really easy to toss away when the user goes away (automatic cleanup). Since any nice clustered AppServers will support replicated session data, it makes sense that this and/or the database would be the logical location to store session specific user data.
"This movement away from OOP has been driven largely by JEE and container-managed services, which are multi-threaded, clustered, and distributed. In order to do that efficiently, the programs have to separate data and logic." I would have to agree heavily on this one. Reliance on frameworks means that there's a very real problem of making anemic data classes with processing logic floating off in framework workflow stubs... Realistically, I have a hard time conceiving better ways to re-marry the data workloads with processing and deep associative processing. I hope some of the 'computer science' head cases in this topic can come up with solutions to real problems... *sigh* I can dream.
Why not? Because invariably they'll base their curriculum on X86 which is the most blasphemous instruction set in the world. F*ck you Segment offsets!!
By your logic, Universities should be teaching Cobol again. They STILL to this day 40 years after the language's hay day make massive amounts of money to basically maintain the ugly code of Cobol because nobody else wants to. Do you respect Cobol programming more than C? Then I suggest you detach the salary proposition from the equation.
I learned C in school and for years worked in companies where my job was in C. I was in a tight spot in 2001 when the bubble broke and I dove into a Java shop. I had done a Java course in school, but I would never consider myself competent in it at that point. The first thing I realized was "Damn, I can be so much more effective at coding in this language. I don't have to do any of the crap I had to deal with in the C world. It just works". I quickly fell in love with the language, and now years later I'm still a fan of the language even now that the sick plague of dynamically typed languages are flooding into popular use (again).
Really? This tools was a windows based password cracker. Instead, I'd suggest arresting any software developers that created safety critical hospital software using windows as a platform.
There may be a load of products / works that would get no benefit from black/grey markets, but there are a hell of a lot of them that would if done in the right way. Disney's scorched earth policy of protecting their works has just meant that fewer people are buying / watching their properties. There are so many alternatives to Disney these days that there are kids that are raised without their properties and are none the wiser. If a grey/black market for their products were still alive, at least you may see these kids screaming to go to Disneyland or buying plush toys, etc..
There are a lot of tin foil hats in Slashdot, and they'll complain until the end of their lives that their privacy is being encroached on BY EVERYONE. They're they type of person who would rather live on an abandoned void inaccessible by any sentient life if they could just keep all the creature comforts that modern connected society has so gracious blessed upon them. Why did I bother reading this article... I just knew it would be the same old cranks... later
And yet Google still remains my #1 used web site online. Some may only ever browse what others point you at, but I actually go out and find things. farms and SEO and the like may make searching more annoying, but it doesn't reduce my need to do so. Facebook or the like will never supplant that need.
Java the language is not being sued about, so lets move on from this shall we? The patents are regarding Virtual Machines that most likely affect any language using dynamic code optimization. The copyright claims are regarding apparent line by line copying which if true is just a big fck up by Google, and not a slant against the language.
Which is precisely why people should stop fighting broken old religious organizations that the GP was mentioning instead to start a new church where their religious hopes and aspirations can be realized. Hell, why be a part of -organized- religion at all? If you're passionate about a given religion then you should be quite capable of being religious for and with yourself (No, this wasn't a joke about masturbation, but in retrospect it could've been...).
Your comments may be poorly worded, but basically correct. Anyone with half a clue about network security knows that a single compromised server from a random government office etc.. can be used to stage any type of attack upon a given government. For all we know, the NSA are the perpetrators of the attacks in order to justify ever higher budgets.
These stories are truly reprehensible in their blatantly racist nature. Shame on you all.
iPhone is defacto a non-starter in -developing markets- because they require a PC/Mac for key features of the platform. This is absolutely non-viable for developing markets where cell phones are often used over wired telcos because of poor power & wired telephone coverage. A cheap iPhone being 100 and 100% wireless updates / sync support have a chance, but that's about it.
That's a sad but true commentary. If I heard of a high profile Linux->Windows migration that failed in some way, I'm sure I would've jumped on it. The truth is that any new systems roll-out is hard, and the pressures on anything involving large amounts of money is even worse. That's why it takes forever to develop and deploy these systems. I hope their issue was something perceivable and easily addressable.
DellAmd keep prices consistent and lets assume that they save 'X' from the cost of producing systems HP drops AMD CPU's entirely because they "don't like to give money to their competitor" Intel raises prices by 'Y' for HP because they are the only provider that HP will deal with now
Result: Dell systems cost X cheaper HP will be forced to raise systems prices by Y or eat already narrow margins HP loses
I doubt HP or anyone else for that matter would all but drop AMD chips from their lineups entirely. They may seek a better price point, but I doubt they'd get it.
Why does every move in the computer space have to relate in some way to Apple? I think too many of the people reading these articles have blinders on from the market at large.
For no other reason, a Dell/AMD offering cuts margins on the floor which is a huge cost savings for the systems integration side of the business. Secondly, being in the same company means that Dell can exercise some control over the direction of their R&D/production so that they make better components for Dell designed systems.
This also gives Dell a good chunk of IP which would in some ways insulate them from a slew of patent holding competitors which could be edging into their business. With dell moving into mobile, this could be one avenue for bolstering their portfolio in the litigation heavy mobile space.
Why not compare the 'fragmentation' of android against platforms that actually have some history in the mobile game shall we? 1. Android 2.3 is brand new and I think anyone paying attention to Android will know that it takes at least 6 months before any amount of -normal- people can actually start using them. If Google released 2.3 in 6 months with 50% market update adoption, would that somehow change your perception of the OS? For the 10% on obsolete equipment, its your decision to support them or not into the future. If you don't care about the shrinking 10% of the market, then skip them and support at least 2.0 or 2.2. Frankly, for most non-games or niche phone-features applications, 1.6's API is more than enough. Developing my own applications, I never thought that my applications would ever break on OS upgrades and lo and behold they still work even though they're compiled against API 1.6 on practically any phone/device that android runs on. Native applications don't upgrade as smoothly as that, but thats the trade-off that you accept when you build targeted platforms. 2. Which platforms have a better upgrade cycle? 2a. Windows Mobile -- Did these phones ever get OS upgrades? I doubt that often 2b. Symbian -- Ditto from WP. You pretty much get what you paid for 2c. Apple -- They will release updates in timely basis or they'll just completely drop support for the phone. It seems that 2 years is the effective EOL for OS upgrades. 2d. Windows Phone 7 -- We'll wait and see, but if its anything like their old release cycles, then buyer beware.
I'm in the Nokia/WP7 nay sayers camp on this one. I'm pleasantly optimistic about Blackberry's moves. Their success isn't assured, but at least they seem to be making good moves to move their brand and company forward. For a company I threw in with MS, Palm, & Nokia, I think they have a chance to rebound. Nokia and Microsoft have yet to prove that they are making any kind of compelling solutions. WP7 is alright, but for a closed ecosystem product, it has to out-quack Apple. As for open-ish systems, Android will continue to eat competition in terms of Value and rapid innovation.
Sidekick guys were bought lock stock by Microsoft. The Kin devices were from that department and as we've seen, it died a horrible horrible death. HTC was originally MS and one could very well say got their legs by specializing in MS WinMo smart phones. Luckily, they were -agile- enough to jump onto Android when both HTC and Google really needed one another, now the rest is history.
Considering that anyone can walk into a train without even a ticket check means that the barrier for bombing a train is substantially lower currently. Secondly, the worst disaster that can happen from a train bombing is the loss of the occupants (Still horrible of course) but you don't get the massive impact of major symbolic landmarks like certain disasters of the past.
For short haul trips, trains could be a lot faster from door to door. As for medium haul, you will get there slower on a train, but I imagine that the fuel expenditure per occupant is significantly higher. If you don't really need a car, or you can support car sharing/rental services, the net gain for fuel efficiency should improve.
Roads and infrastructure improvements will do nothing to prevent the eventual sky-rocketing cost of oil supply that will rock the US sooner or later. Really, whomever thought that Oil sands could ever become an economically viable oil production source... how times change.
Repeatable yes, but that also requires programs to have well known and easily deliverable raw floating point number insertion points. Some will have tons and others won't have any. It seems analogous to the window flaw after all.
You are entering variables into the equation that have no basis as to the function of the job process.
"Let's say your next-door neighbor, who you have known for 15 years" Subjective and immaterial as to the job function
"is an experienced IT help desk operator" Can perform supplied tasks sufficiently
"whose wife is recovering from a bout with cancer. He is desperately in need of a good job." Subjective and immaterial as to the job function
"you will get slightly better service for slightly less money" Can perform supplied tasks sufficiently and better than said local peer
"somewhat less perceived value on the part of your customers... they don't like waiting a long time on the phone only to speak with someone they can hardly understand" Circumstantial and subjective assessment that has no proof of any substantial loss of income or customer good will.
You just dished out a great example of how in-groups can cause subjective decision making.
As per your example, lets take the offshore worker's shoes, what about them? Maybe they have two wives with cancer and 8 kids to feed? Who decides the value of their lives vs. the life of your local peer?
Due to some lack of sentence structure cleanliness, I'm not sure exactly what you're exactly trying to say, but my assumption is that you think that your neighbors aren't always looking out for your best interests, and that those around the world don't look for the common good, so I shouldn't either.
Firstly, you have to detach yourself from the argument because you keep jumping back and forth between two separate topics / arguments and interweave them together. Your arguments are: 1. The common good isn't being practiced by my neighbors hence Tribalism doesn't exist (or matters very little) 2. The common good isn't being practiced by foreigners hence I shouldn't feel compelled to do so either
To answer the first question, tribalism, "in group, out group" or whatever you want to call it is very much a reality in the world. The US may not be as xenophobic as many cultures, but you live a far distance from perfectly equitable and unbiased common good society. Some minor examples of tribalism in America: 1. Politicians are elected to serve and represent a given area which is their major if not whole concern. I think you'll find that the phrase "pork barrel" wouldn't exist without a very locally biased structure of representation 2. Religion is and will always be a barrier that raises discrimination and ire in society. Ask a Muslim if their religious tendencies have caused undue discrimination. If you live in the -western- world, I bet the answer will be yes. 3. Back to politics, you'll notice that many individuals will be tribal about their political parties. I've heard countless times "My father was a proud Democrat/Republican, and so am I". There may be a somewhat large group of floating voters sitting between the aisles, but you'll see large groups of people born raised and die within the political camps that they occupy, and will forever think less and discriminate against those of opposing factions. 4. Race / Skin tone etc..
Now that we know tribalism or some variation is rampant in America and basically everywhere else the question is: should I continue my tribal custom of exclusion/selection BECAUSE most people behave in the same manner? I find that the golden rule pretty much sums up my opinion of this point, but I'll leave it to the forum to find other points.
How do you know that the said outsourcing was in fact a step toward mediocrity? I've known several outsourcing initiatives that have caused significantly increased productivity and quality ratings ignoring price per employee entirely. Outsourcing doesn't necessarily mean bad.
"What will happen to those without the means to sustain their wealth without access to jobs? What happens when companies simply don't need large masses of people, and most people don't have access to methods of gaining money? How much longer can we run our economy this way? How valuable is the role of a human, in a society ostensibly built for human freedom?"
Well, it means we're heading toward a society that looks an awful lot like communism/socialism or else we'll be seeing a lot of poor pathetic wretches dieing on the street as we drive into our fully militarized private neighborhoods guarded by robotic kill-bots. Only those who happen to be wealthy enough to have power and influence before paper money becomes meaningless will be left with a viable future.
I can't say for the functionality, benefits, complexity, etc.. of the article's software, but I can think of many better things to spend 36K on than licensing Exchange. Don't even mention the server side licensing (Unless they've subsequently dropped server CAL requirements for exchange boxes), server first time costs, and yearly subscription fees to keep up to date with all the latest updates and support features that you list so highly. Throwing money at a problem may be -a- solution for -some- companies, but that can't be said for everyone. Of course that all assumes that Exchange is the better maintenance system, but as I see nobody doing empirical analysis, or even anecdotes, its hard for you, me, or the rest of the mob to come up with any sort of rational discourse.
"Here is what happens with an open source product:"
I really like how you pulled the old bait and switch here. Instead of listing the behavior of quoted product, you instead drill into why open source software is bad. Well, if you just took the software and didn't pay a dime for it, then maybe a few of those points apply. Maybe if you paid for the software, you could get paid support and the assurance that when a problem is found that it can actually be addressed without waiting quarters before a company decides to release an update to fix a bug. For real money, you can (for a lot cheaper seemingly) get a system that does more or less what Exchange does. As said earlier, I'd like someone who's actually used both systems in a real world scenario to talk about pros and cons, but since that isn't happening yet, lets keep the rhetoric to ourselves.
Slashdot Mirror
"- Business methods (stateless EJBs/web services, servlets, JSF components, entities, etc.) are stateless and non-thread-safe"
Developers are moving toward Statelessness technologies because it makes concurrency a LOT easier to manage on large systems
The thread safety of a world is completely within the purview of the developer and always has been in Java. Swing isn't thread safe, We've only seen thread safe capable collections in the standard library for what, 5 years? Plus, EJB still has at its core the database transaction as an absolute thread safety net as long as you elect to use it. If you want to say anything about modern java, it would be that they haven't tackled the fundamental scaling issues in a larger variety of ways. But at least collections (Thanks Doug Lea) has made Java a little better place.
"- All data containers must adhere to the Java Bean specification; all mutable properties must either have a public setter method or the entire object must use field access"
I'm missing your point. Maybe if you could elaborate on this, I could see what your problem is with the general Java bean philosophy.
"- Data objects are encumbered by persistence state, making complex operations on object graphs either costly (eager fetching) or perilous (lazy initialization exceptions, stale object state exceptions, etc.)"
This has and always will be the case. Without those tools, you're forced to do all these fetches yourself. Sometimes to this day this is absolutely necessary to get the most effective and sometimes the only way to get a good performing query, but by in large ORM means that the rest of the data access-association boiler plate is kept to simple well known paradigms that anyone can pick up and use. This flexibility comes with a caveat in that you can only fetch within a transactional context, and this simple rule isn't that hard to follow once you understand WHY its relevant.
"- Most, if not all, user state is managed in the HTTP session or client (in the case of a fat client)"
Sometimes people like to store things in database, and sometimes they like to store them in session data. The advantage of session data is that its really easy to toss away when the user goes away (automatic cleanup). Since any nice clustered AppServers will support replicated session data, it makes sense that this and/or the database would be the logical location to store session specific user data.
"This movement away from OOP has been driven largely by JEE and container-managed services, which are multi-threaded, clustered, and distributed. In order to do that efficiently, the programs have to separate data and logic."
I would have to agree heavily on this one. Reliance on frameworks means that there's a very real problem of making anemic data classes with processing logic floating off in framework workflow stubs... Realistically, I have a hard time conceiving better ways to re-marry the data workloads with processing and deep associative processing. I hope some of the 'computer science' head cases in this topic can come up with solutions to real problems... *sigh* I can dream.
Why not? Because invariably they'll base their curriculum on X86 which is the most blasphemous instruction set in the world. F*ck you Segment offsets!!
By your logic, Universities should be teaching Cobol again. They STILL to this day 40 years after the language's hay day make massive amounts of money to basically maintain the ugly code of Cobol because nobody else wants to. Do you respect Cobol programming more than C? Then I suggest you detach the salary proposition from the equation.
I learned C in school and for years worked in companies where my job was in C. I was in a tight spot in 2001 when the bubble broke and I dove into a Java shop. I had done a Java course in school, but I would never consider myself competent in it at that point. The first thing I realized was "Damn, I can be so much more effective at coding in this language. I don't have to do any of the crap I had to deal with in the C world. It just works". I quickly fell in love with the language, and now years later I'm still a fan of the language even now that the sick plague of dynamically typed languages are flooding into popular use (again).
Really? This tools was a windows based password cracker. Instead, I'd suggest arresting any software developers that created safety critical hospital software using windows as a platform.
I thought most devs were caught in the XP trap, not the Xbox trap.. *shrugs*
Free Advertising
Brand Creation / Recognition
etc..
There may be a load of products / works that would get no benefit from black/grey markets, but there are a hell of a lot of them that would if done in the right way. Disney's scorched earth policy of protecting their works has just meant that fewer people are buying / watching their properties. There are so many alternatives to Disney these days that there are kids that are raised without their properties and are none the wiser. If a grey/black market for their products were still alive, at least you may see these kids screaming to go to Disneyland or buying plush toys, etc..
There are a lot of tin foil hats in Slashdot, and they'll complain until the end of their lives that their privacy is being encroached on BY EVERYONE. They're they type of person who would rather live on an abandoned void inaccessible by any sentient life if they could just keep all the creature comforts that modern connected society has so gracious blessed upon them. Why did I bother reading this article... I just knew it would be the same old cranks... later
And yet Google still remains my #1 used web site online. Some may only ever browse what others point you at, but I actually go out and find things. farms and SEO and the like may make searching more annoying, but it doesn't reduce my need to do so. Facebook or the like will never supplant that need.
Java the language is not being sued about, so lets move on from this shall we? The patents are regarding Virtual Machines that most likely affect any language using dynamic code optimization. The copyright claims are regarding apparent line by line copying which if true is just a big fck up by Google, and not a slant against the language.
Which is precisely why people should stop fighting broken old religious organizations that the GP was mentioning instead to start a new church where their religious hopes and aspirations can be realized. Hell, why be a part of -organized- religion at all? If you're passionate about a given religion then you should be quite capable of being religious for and with yourself (No, this wasn't a joke about masturbation, but in retrospect it could've been...).
My laptop was $300 which may have been really really good deal but generally, I doubt people would buy an iPad over a laptop based on price.
Your comments may be poorly worded, but basically correct. Anyone with half a clue about network security knows that a single compromised server from a random government office etc.. can be used to stage any type of attack upon a given government. For all we know, the NSA are the perpetrators of the attacks in order to justify ever higher budgets.
These stories are truly reprehensible in their blatantly racist nature. Shame on you all.
iPhone is defacto a non-starter in -developing markets- because they require a PC/Mac for key features of the platform. This is absolutely non-viable for developing markets where cell phones are often used over wired telcos because of poor power & wired telephone coverage. A cheap iPhone being 100 and 100% wireless updates / sync support have a chance, but that's about it.
Who the hell uses facebook to stage an investor's revolution. I would've been more scared if it was legitimate.
That's a sad but true commentary. If I heard of a high profile Linux->Windows migration that failed in some way, I'm sure I would've jumped on it. The truth is that any new systems roll-out is hard, and the pressures on anything involving large amounts of money is even worse. That's why it takes forever to develop and deploy these systems. I hope their issue was something perceivable and easily addressable.
DellAmd keep prices consistent and lets assume that they save 'X' from the cost of producing systems
HP drops AMD CPU's entirely because they "don't like to give money to their competitor"
Intel raises prices by 'Y' for HP because they are the only provider that HP will deal with now
Result:
Dell systems cost X cheaper
HP will be forced to raise systems prices by Y or eat already narrow margins
HP loses
I doubt HP or anyone else for that matter would all but drop AMD chips from their lineups entirely. They may seek a better price point, but I doubt they'd get it.
Why does every move in the computer space have to relate in some way to Apple? I think too many of the people reading these articles have blinders on from the market at large.
For no other reason, a Dell/AMD offering cuts margins on the floor which is a huge cost savings for the systems integration side of the business. Secondly, being in the same company means that Dell can exercise some control over the direction of their R&D/production so that they make better components for Dell designed systems.
This also gives Dell a good chunk of IP which would in some ways insulate them from a slew of patent holding competitors which could be edging into their business. With dell moving into mobile, this could be one avenue for bolstering their portfolio in the litigation heavy mobile space.
Why not compare the 'fragmentation' of android against platforms that actually have some history in the mobile game shall we?
1. Android 2.3 is brand new and I think anyone paying attention to Android will know that it takes at least 6 months before any amount of -normal- people can actually start using them. If Google released 2.3 in 6 months with 50% market update adoption, would that somehow change your perception of the OS? For the 10% on obsolete equipment, its your decision to support them or not into the future. If you don't care about the shrinking 10% of the market, then skip them and support at least 2.0 or 2.2. Frankly, for most non-games or niche phone-features applications, 1.6's API is more than enough. Developing my own applications, I never thought that my applications would ever break on OS upgrades and lo and behold they still work even though they're compiled against API 1.6 on practically any phone/device that android runs on. Native applications don't upgrade as smoothly as that, but thats the trade-off that you accept when you build targeted platforms.
2. Which platforms have a better upgrade cycle?
2a. Windows Mobile -- Did these phones ever get OS upgrades? I doubt that often
2b. Symbian -- Ditto from WP. You pretty much get what you paid for
2c. Apple -- They will release updates in timely basis or they'll just completely drop support for the phone. It seems that 2 years is the effective EOL for OS upgrades.
2d. Windows Phone 7 -- We'll wait and see, but if its anything like their old release cycles, then buyer beware.
I'm in the Nokia/WP7 nay sayers camp on this one. I'm pleasantly optimistic about Blackberry's moves. Their success isn't assured, but at least they seem to be making good moves to move their brand and company forward. For a company I threw in with MS, Palm, & Nokia, I think they have a chance to rebound. Nokia and Microsoft have yet to prove that they are making any kind of compelling solutions. WP7 is alright, but for a closed ecosystem product, it has to out-quack Apple. As for open-ish systems, Android will continue to eat competition in terms of Value and rapid innovation.
Sidekick guys were bought lock stock by Microsoft. The Kin devices were from that department and as we've seen, it died a horrible horrible death. HTC was originally MS and one could very well say got their legs by specializing in MS WinMo smart phones. Luckily, they were -agile- enough to jump onto Android when both HTC and Google really needed one another, now the rest is history.
Considering that anyone can walk into a train without even a ticket check means that the barrier for bombing a train is substantially lower currently. Secondly, the worst disaster that can happen from a train bombing is the loss of the occupants (Still horrible of course) but you don't get the massive impact of major symbolic landmarks like certain disasters of the past.
For short haul trips, trains could be a lot faster from door to door. As for medium haul, you will get there slower on a train, but I imagine that the fuel expenditure per occupant is significantly higher. If you don't really need a car, or you can support car sharing/rental services, the net gain for fuel efficiency should improve.
Roads and infrastructure improvements will do nothing to prevent the eventual sky-rocketing cost of oil supply that will rock the US sooner or later. Really, whomever thought that Oil sands could ever become an economically viable oil production source... how times change.
Repeatable yes, but that also requires programs to have well known and easily deliverable raw floating point number insertion points. Some will have tons and others won't have any. It seems analogous to the window flaw after all.
You are entering variables into the equation that have no basis as to the function of the job process.
"Let's say your next-door neighbor, who you have known for 15 years"
Subjective and immaterial as to the job function
"is an experienced IT help desk operator"
Can perform supplied tasks sufficiently
"whose wife is recovering from a bout with cancer. He is desperately in need of a good job."
Subjective and immaterial as to the job function
"you will get slightly better service for slightly less money"
Can perform supplied tasks sufficiently and better than said local peer
"somewhat less perceived value on the part of your customers... they don't like waiting a long time on the phone only to speak with someone they can hardly understand"
Circumstantial and subjective assessment that has no proof of any substantial loss of income or customer good will.
You just dished out a great example of how in-groups can cause subjective decision making.
As per your example, lets take the offshore worker's shoes, what about them? Maybe they have two wives with cancer and 8 kids to feed? Who decides the value of their lives vs. the life of your local peer?
Due to some lack of sentence structure cleanliness, I'm not sure exactly what you're exactly trying to say, but my assumption is that you think that your neighbors aren't always looking out for your best interests, and that those around the world don't look for the common good, so I shouldn't either.
Firstly, you have to detach yourself from the argument because you keep jumping back and forth between two separate topics / arguments and interweave them together. Your arguments are:
1. The common good isn't being practiced by my neighbors hence Tribalism doesn't exist (or matters very little)
2. The common good isn't being practiced by foreigners hence I shouldn't feel compelled to do so either
To answer the first question, tribalism, "in group, out group" or whatever you want to call it is very much a reality in the world. The US may not be as xenophobic as many cultures, but you live a far distance from perfectly equitable and unbiased common good society.
Some minor examples of tribalism in America:
1. Politicians are elected to serve and represent a given area which is their major if not whole concern. I think you'll find that the phrase "pork barrel" wouldn't exist without a very locally biased structure of representation
2. Religion is and will always be a barrier that raises discrimination and ire in society. Ask a Muslim if their religious tendencies have caused undue discrimination. If you live in the -western- world, I bet the answer will be yes.
3. Back to politics, you'll notice that many individuals will be tribal about their political parties. I've heard countless times "My father was a proud Democrat/Republican, and so am I". There may be a somewhat large group of floating voters sitting between the aisles, but you'll see large groups of people born raised and die within the political camps that they occupy, and will forever think less and discriminate against those of opposing factions.
4. Race / Skin tone
etc..
Now that we know tribalism or some variation is rampant in America and basically everywhere else the question is: should I continue my tribal custom of exclusion/selection BECAUSE most people behave in the same manner? I find that the golden rule pretty much sums up my opinion of this point, but I'll leave it to the forum to find other points.
How do you know that the said outsourcing was in fact a step toward mediocrity? I've known several outsourcing initiatives that have caused significantly increased productivity and quality ratings ignoring price per employee entirely. Outsourcing doesn't necessarily mean bad.
"What will happen to those without the means to sustain their wealth without access to jobs? What happens when companies simply don't need large masses of people, and most people don't have access to methods of gaining money? How much longer can we run our economy this way? How valuable is the role of a human, in a society ostensibly built for human freedom?"
Well, it means we're heading toward a society that looks an awful lot like communism/socialism or else we'll be seeing a lot of poor pathetic wretches dieing on the street as we drive into our fully militarized private neighborhoods guarded by robotic kill-bots. Only those who happen to be wealthy enough to have power and influence before paper money becomes meaningless will be left with a viable future.
I can't say for the functionality, benefits, complexity, etc.. of the article's software, but I can think of many better things to spend 36K on than licensing Exchange. Don't even mention the server side licensing (Unless they've subsequently dropped server CAL requirements for exchange boxes), server first time costs, and yearly subscription fees to keep up to date with all the latest updates and support features that you list so highly. Throwing money at a problem may be -a- solution for -some- companies, but that can't be said for everyone. Of course that all assumes that Exchange is the better maintenance system, but as I see nobody doing empirical analysis, or even anecdotes, its hard for you, me, or the rest of the mob to come up with any sort of rational discourse.
"Here is what happens with an open source product:"
I really like how you pulled the old bait and switch here. Instead of listing the behavior of quoted product, you instead drill into why open source software is bad. Well, if you just took the software and didn't pay a dime for it, then maybe a few of those points apply. Maybe if you paid for the software, you could get paid support and the assurance that when a problem is found that it can actually be addressed without waiting quarters before a company decides to release an update to fix a bug. For real money, you can (for a lot cheaper seemingly) get a system that does more or less what Exchange does. As said earlier, I'd like someone who's actually used both systems in a real world scenario to talk about pros and cons, but since that isn't happening yet, lets keep the rhetoric to ourselves.