This exactly. The real problem here isn't identity theft, it is the pathetic level of verification used by the lenders. I agree that putting all liability on the lenders is the right approach (there are already laws on the books to this effect for the most part), but there is virtually no way to totally eliminate the harassment that an ID theft victim gets, because the lenders are still going to pursue collection on the premise that you are just a deadbeat borrower.
99% of all ID theft would evaporate if federal law required an unobstructed front facing photograph and fingerprints of anyone applying for any credit as well as a scan of your government issued photo ID, as part of the credit application record. Put in a requirement for default 2 factor authentication via either a cell phone call, a call to the residence or snail mail to the residence of record.
If this were implemented, any ID thief is forced to leave their fingerprints and photo in every false credit application they make, and they would fail the 2 factor authentication, preventing them from receiving same day credit. The lenders don't want to implement it because it would cost them loans and add a 5% overhead to their cost of doing business, whereas eating ID theft today costs them 3% overhead... Meanwhile the ID theft victim spends an average of ~100h dealing with all the bullshit to clean up their credit and secure their ID.
"Given those measurements, viewers should sit 6 feet away from a 50-inch HDTV with a 24.5-inch tall screen. But they should sit just 3 feet from a UHDTV of the same size, closer than most Americans* prefer."
*Closer than anyone prefers
In other words, in a normal, living room application, HDTV and UHDTV with a 50" TV, the two are indistinguishable at comfortable viewing distances. Now if you have a 40" UHDTV as your computer monitor, you can still definitely tell the difference. The industry needs to find a new gimmick. HDTV was a good, reasonable upgrade, flat screen was also an improvement, but for typical applications, 4K and 8K TV is just not significant or even noticeable.
Beyond that, sitting that close to a TV for long periods increases your risk of eye strain and developing vision issues (your eyes need to relax periodically, which is why one should take periodic breaks from the computer.)
More dangerous: more likely to sustain injury or death during innocent activities, especially after dark.
In the US, outside of the gun grabbing left and right coasts and a few liberal big cities of the same mindset (i.e. Chicago), the middle of the country is very safe, mostly because criminals never know who has a concealed carry and will shoot them in the face.
OTOH, in the large EU metropolitan areas, any two bit thug with some physical strength and a big knife or brass knuckles is king and can pretty much do whatever harm he feels like to the unarmed sheep citizens with no concern for his life.
This is seriously true these days. "Hate speech" is entirely subjective and by the fascist progressive alt-left definition often infringes on other basic freedoms. How about everyone in the EU sack up and just ignore (or better yet, demonstrate the fallacies in) speech that they don't agree with, like every adult used to do 50 years ago...
OTOH, Facebook should be appealing to the US state department that foreign powers are trying to infringe on the basic constitutional rights of it's users. Yank all Facebook servers out of the EU and tell them to go to hell... What the liberal progressives don't realize is that 5-20 years from now we will have another fascist dictatorship in Europe, sprouted out of the EU (the Nazi party sprouted out of the German socialist progressive movement). The EU is already laying the groundwork.
As soon as a government can ban speech you don't agree with, they can also ban your speech because there is always someone who won't agree with it. (And no, we are not talking about incitement to actual violence, or material support for terrorists, that is also illegal in the US.)
Let me spell it out for you since you are clearly logically challenged and/or incapable of grasping basic concepts:
If a business or country hires/pays/blackmails/threatens a person to steal for them and then that entity receives the stolen goods, then that entity is morally and legally guilty of the theft. However, in the case of China, they literally don't give a shit what the rest of the world thinks or demands or what is legal/illegal, unless it actually costs them money or power in some way. The US has mountains of evidence from our counter espionage against China that they have stolen US IP hundreds if not thousands of times in the last 20 years. Evidence like photographic evidence of the thief dead dropping the data to a Chinese diplomat, electronic evidence of payouts to the thief from a Chinese state backed entity, testimony from the thief that his family back in China was under threat, etc.
You might want to do a little light reading, maybe have a few of the facts before you start making a fool of yourself. http://www.ipcommission.org/re...
I was going to try to reply to this, but it is just not worth it. My previous post stands. It is based on my 20 years of observation and first hand experience with Chinese manufacturing and dozens of companies that manufacture products in China.
Your position is based on supposition and conjecture that show you may have some experience in business or economics, but no direct experience with the challenges vs benefits of manufacturing in China, or in fact manufacturing a physical product at all. Nearly every single one of you statements is a generalization based on zero evidence on topics that you clearly have no direct experience in.
As opposed to my-birth-certificate is none of your business or my-college-records are none of your business but I'm a Rhodes scholar and professor of constitutional law but get my EOs overturned at a record breaking level Obama?
By any number of metrics, the Obama administration was the least transparent administration in history, bar none. Just because you happened to agree with him doesn't change that fact. Obama had the largest number of lobbyists working in the white house in the last 50 years. The Obama administration lied to judges so they could spy on journalists and the AP to find white house leaks they didn't like. There is a list 3 feet long of incidence where the Obama admin concealed information from the public for political advantage.
"It's interesting to see how American institutions, politics, and bureaucracy, are steadily on the decline, both from within and without."
I agree, and it started about 8.5 years ago. It remains to be seen if the steps we took in the last election can make a correction and return the US to rule of law and public transparency and accountability.
Time to update the FOIA with teeth. Something along the lines of filing a lawsuit or other attempt to obstruct an FOIA request makes the government employees/elected officials involved automatically liable to felony obstruction charges if they lose the lawsuit and must personally pay the state legal fees and the legal fees of the FOIA requestor. Such lawsuits must be settled in 90 days or summary judgement is made for the FOIA requestor. Further, any elected officials who file such a lawsuit immediately lose their elected position for the duration of the lawsuit, government employees are immediately placed on paid leave. If they lose the lawsuit, they have to pay back the leave time and are summarily fired/removed from office.
Time to put all the little jack booted thugs in government on notice, the people are your boss!
Your argument is so full of fallacies, erroneous generalizations and just plain ignorance.
1. Automation requires more highly skilled engineers and technicians to design, build, implement and maintain. The engineers that design the automation are in the US, the engineers that design the products are in the US, the technicians who service the automation are in the US. The cheap unskilled labor doesn't enter the automation picture period full stop.
2. A US automation engineer and product engineer are VASTLY more skilled at cutting cost than a bunch of unskilled workers in China, especially when it comes to automated manufacture. So no, just flat wrong all the way around. There is a nearly continuous shitstorm for US engineers from Chinese contract manufacturers substituting alternative materials and parts which are not equivalent to save a few pennies per product, scrapping thousands of units in the process and causing delays, or worse, large numbers of defective returns.
3. It takes time for companies to shift manufacturing lines to different locations due to logistics, inertia and sunk cost, it usually doesn't happen until a new line is opened, but we are seeing it start to happen already as companies start to onshore manufacturing coupled with automation.
The two things China has going for it are very minimal environmental regulations and cheap, unskilled labor. Automation requires semi and highly skilled labor and engineering, neither of which are a strong selling point for China.
News flash: Companies and governments, including banks, are liable for what their employees do. The US doesn't need to prove that China is actively stealing IP from the US, there is literally a mountain of evidence, you only don't know this if you have been hiding under a rock for the last 20 years. In many cases there is direct evidence tying the theft to the Chinese government.
You are right, China doesn't fall under any court jurisdiction, so we are left with ICBMs or financial penalties. I outlined to methods for inflicting financial penalties. Hopefully that will get them to stop before we have to take drastic action.
OK, so you think one country stealing from another is cool as long as you don't like the country. Good to know that you have no morals, not really much point talking further to you after you established that...
If you think the US behaves like a petulant child, you are completely ignorant of reality and have experienced only first world problems in your life.
You are assuming that we do things the same way in the US that they do in China where labor is cheap. If US companies lose China as a source of cheap labor, they will hire a big team of engineers to design and build the robotics/automation necessary to make their goods economically in the US. Quality goes up, global pollution goes down, the jobs created are fewer than in China, but high paying engineer jobs, middle class wage technicians and operators, final cost of goods actually goes down, since robotics have better yields, lower amortized production costs than Chinese labor even now, don't make mistakes, get sick, need to sleep, commit suicide, etc.
Cheap Chinese labor has somewhat circumvented this process, but there is no reason that it cannot pick up where it left off as more manufacturing is on-shored.
The net result is cheaper, higher quality products, more high paying engineering jobs, more middle class technician/maintenance jobs, a net positive for the consumer and for the US job market.
Because who besides China and Russia are investing in US treasuries while simultaneously engaged in state sponsored corporate espionage against US firms with no laws against such activity?
If you are a country of moral laws (i.e. it is illegal to steal other people's shit) you have nothing to worry about. If China and Russia stop stealing our shit, they have nothing to worry about. Make nice with everyone or get the shaft, that is the way the world works everywhere else...
Really, it is either this approach, or every time it is 50 cruise missiles spread over every internet backbone facility and server farm within 1000 miles of the origin of the hack...
You missed the point, the issue is not that terrorism is statistically rare alone, the problem is that while statistically rare, terrorism is driven by intelligent intent. It is like trying to predict the path of a river just before a construction crew comes in and diverts the river into a man-made aqueduct. All of your predictions are invalid due to intelligent intervention.
It is like trying to predict the casualties of a war. It is statistically impossible to do because the intent of a war is to kill people on the other side and the variables and unknowns are unknowable until after the fact. Many people have tried to predict such things, but if they tell you they can, they are full of horse shit. By all accounts, WW1 should have been a small skirmish between a couple of minor states settled in less than a few months, but instead it exploded into a giant war with over 18 million deaths. Similarly, the entirety of Europe should have been able to contain Hitler's Nazi Germany, but Germany's unanticipated development and use of tanks and aircraft flipped the tables and Germany was able to invade and occupy most of western Europe and involve much of the world in WW2.
The bottom line is terrorism is such an asymmetrical threat that it cannot be quantified by statistics except as a part of historical record. Intelligent intent by definition allows for a significantly non-zero chance of a massive casualty attack that can never be discounted by any valid statistical method.
Except that unlike debt, this is a state taking money from another state based on a defined law to penalize and recover damages for state sponsored stealing. The analogy would be if you borrowed $100k from a bank and then 3 weeks later the bank employees come to your house and steal your car (and in China's case, your boat, your RV, your motorcycle, the solar panels off your roof, the siding off your walls and damn near everything else that isn't bolted down).
You take them to court and get the value of the stolen property plus punitive damages awarded to the tune of $60k, which is then taken off of your bank debt by the court. In this case, both the court and the victim of theft are the US citizens, but right now there is no mechanism to recover against China for their rampant state sponsored theft, and that must change. The scenario above would not affect the borrowers credit rating, nor would the US voiding treasuries issued to China for their acts of stealing against US companies affect the US bond rates. It is a clearly defined cause and effect outside of the credit ratings purview that only put investors at risk if they engage in corporate or state espionage against the US.
Yes and no. The risk to an individual investor or bank in say Europe or Canada that his/her US treasury will be voided is nil, and thus the treasury rates wouldn't be affected, since good faith investors would not have any additional risk. However in the case of government level investment for the purpose of manipulation, like China, it flips the risk/reward for corporate espionage and the original intent of buying US treasuries (to have leverage over the US government/economy).
OTOH, an automatic 1% import tax on items from China for a year cumulative per incident (5% for military contractors) would also decimate the Chinese economy in short order and they would have to decide if they like trading with the US or stealing our trade secrets, because it would rapidly become mutually exclusive.
Maybe try learning to write in complete sentences, and the difference between your and you're? They make your post very difficult to read.
The majority of stuff we buy from China falls into two categories, cheap garbage that just ends up in the landfill in less than a year that has preexisting higher quality/higher cost alternatives made in the US/Europe already. The other category is things designed in the US that we have China manufacture for us (i.e. the iPhone, microchips, etc.) because it is cheaper there and they have minimal environmental regulations. On both counts, we would actually benefit on both the consumer and GPD sides from pulling those back to the US and manufacturing them here with greater automation. The entire trade relationship with China was intended to liberalize and eventually democratize the country as individuals become more powerful and less reliant on the government. It has worked to a degree, but over the last 20 years or so, the Chicom government has figured out how to game this arrangement to their advantage.
Regarding the rest of the world, much of it is horrible, rampant with disease, malnourishment, war, sectarian violence, criminal gangs etc. I don't have to visit someplace to know about it, and I know that both Russia and China are demonstrably less free than the US or Europe and both have intentions to take over the world if they think they can get away with it. If you think otherwise, you might want to educate yourself a bit on the topic, maybe ask the people in Crimea and Taiwan for a reality check...
The US needs to make China aware that this state sponsored economic terrorism will no longer be tolerated. I vote that every time there is a theft of US technology, we VOID $10 billion (minimum) of US treasuries held by China. Make it $50 billion if it is a military contractor. If they want to steal our technology, they are going to pay out the ass for it. If they run out of US debt, start putting a 1% tariff on all goods imported for a year, per incident. Watch companies start to flee China as the cost of producing goods there to import to the US skyrockets while the Chinese economy craters.
We cannot survive as a nation with the parasite of China continuously stealing our manufacturing, manipulating trade deficits and now stealing our technology. We either have to change or we are going to collapse.
And to all you globalists out there rooting for the US to fail, I hope you like living under a jack booted dictatorship with zero freedom and can speak Russian or Mandarin, because that is what will happen to you about 10 days after a US collapse.
If what they claim were actually true, then I know a ton of people who aren't conscious even as adults. It is a simplistic effort to quantify something that is both extremely complex and elusive (as is life it'self). I would agree that infants comprehension of the world starts off very rudimentary, and their attentiveness is also very limited, but anyone who says that babies aren't fully conscious is pushing an agenda or intentionally trying to deceive you. From the moment they are born, babies are both sponges of information and little scientists looking for logical patterns and cause and effect events. It is how they learn essentially everything about the world around them. To engage in those activities requires consciousness.
Prevalence is a tricky thing when it comes to terrorism. Yes, you are right that based on the last 15 years of attacks, terrorist attack related deaths are in the margins of any individuals chance of dying, however, statistics can not be used when evaluating the threat of someone trying to kill you.
For example, lets say N Korea sells nuclear bomb technology to Iran (if it hasn't happened already) and Iran sells a bomb to any number of terrorist organizations.
Then that terrorist organization manages to smuggle a nuclear bomb into the city center of a large European city. They could kill millions of people. The threat to human life from terrorist attack is clearly not marginal. The same is true of a biological attack with small pox or a weaponized influenza (the Spanish Flu killed 100 million people in 1918.)
Statistics are only valid when events follow a normal (in the statistical sense of the word) distribution. When occurrences are driven by intelligent intent, statistics are 100% non predictive of future risk.
It depends on the kind of failure. I am sure that the designers will make every effort to make the more likely failures (power loss, reasonable or minor track damage, etc.) survivable. You won't ever have many of the risks associated with conventional trains (inattentive conductors, cars or other obstructions on the track, excessive speed for the track, etc.) That said, if a terrorist blows up the track just short of the train in motion (less than stopping distance) you are very likely going to be red paste in the wreckage.
Compare the risk of death in an airplane: loss of power - very likely everyone dies unless there is a runway nearby any failure that causes loss of control - everyone dies etc.
The main problem I see with the hyperloop is that in this era of terrorism, it is virtually impossible to secure hundreds of miles of tracks, whereas airports are fairly well secured, and planes are immune to terrorist attack from outside while in flight (so far terrorists haven't managed to design and build stinger missiles, fighter jets or SAM missile batteries.)
I don't approve of that kind of language, not that I haven't heard the same language a billion times in online games. Its pretty common. The saddest part of the story is all the snowflakes convinced that they will melt into a puddle at the first "micro-transgression."
FFS grow a spine, focus on what matters and move on with your life. You will be better off for it. Words are just words, nothing more, nothing less. If you want to see some real problems that need champions look to Africa or the Middle East, where people are still starving to death, genocide is still happening, and women still don't have basic rights.
Armchair offense takers in the West need to drink a big cup of STFU with a MYOB chaser...
Not that I care about PDP, but this is definitely an abuse of the DMCA, as reviews, both professional and personal are fair use, and if the dev doesn't back down immediately, PDP should counter sue for punitive damages from a frivolous DMCA and a frivolous lawsuit. He definitely has the money and the law on his side. The only way the corporations learn to behave and respect the rights of others is when one of them gets a 10% haircut off the bottom line.
Slashdot Mirror
This exactly. The real problem here isn't identity theft, it is the pathetic level of verification used by the lenders. I agree that putting all liability on the lenders is the right approach (there are already laws on the books to this effect for the most part), but there is virtually no way to totally eliminate the harassment that an ID theft victim gets, because the lenders are still going to pursue collection on the premise that you are just a deadbeat borrower.
99% of all ID theft would evaporate if federal law required an unobstructed front facing photograph and fingerprints of anyone applying for any credit as well as a scan of your government issued photo ID, as part of the credit application record. Put in a requirement for default 2 factor authentication via either a cell phone call, a call to the residence or snail mail to the residence of record.
If this were implemented, any ID thief is forced to leave their fingerprints and photo in every false credit application they make, and they would fail the 2 factor authentication, preventing them from receiving same day credit. The lenders don't want to implement it because it would cost them loans and add a 5% overhead to their cost of doing business, whereas eating ID theft today costs them 3% overhead... Meanwhile the ID theft victim spends an average of ~100h dealing with all the bullshit to clean up their credit and secure their ID.
"Given those measurements, viewers should sit 6 feet away from a 50-inch HDTV with a 24.5-inch tall screen. But they should sit just 3 feet from a UHDTV of the same size, closer than most Americans* prefer."
*Closer than anyone prefers
In other words, in a normal, living room application, HDTV and UHDTV with a 50" TV, the two are indistinguishable at comfortable viewing distances. Now if you have a 40" UHDTV as your computer monitor, you can still definitely tell the difference. The industry needs to find a new gimmick. HDTV was a good, reasonable upgrade, flat screen was also an improvement, but for typical applications, 4K and 8K TV is just not significant or even noticeable.
Beyond that, sitting that close to a TV for long periods increases your risk of eye strain and developing vision issues (your eyes need to relax periodically, which is why one should take periodic breaks from the computer.)
Let me help you out there Mr. Yar.
More dangerous: more likely to sustain injury or death during innocent activities, especially after dark.
In the US, outside of the gun grabbing left and right coasts and a few liberal big cities of the same mindset (i.e. Chicago), the middle of the country is very safe, mostly because criminals never know who has a concealed carry and will shoot them in the face.
OTOH, in the large EU metropolitan areas, any two bit thug with some physical strength and a big knife or brass knuckles is king and can pretty much do whatever harm he feels like to the unarmed sheep citizens with no concern for his life.
Where Free Speech is not acceptable!
This is seriously true these days. "Hate speech" is entirely subjective and by the fascist progressive alt-left definition often infringes on other basic freedoms. How about everyone in the EU sack up and just ignore (or better yet, demonstrate the fallacies in) speech that they don't agree with, like every adult used to do 50 years ago...
OTOH, Facebook should be appealing to the US state department that foreign powers are trying to infringe on the basic constitutional rights of it's users. Yank all Facebook servers out of the EU and tell them to go to hell... What the liberal progressives don't realize is that 5-20 years from now we will have another fascist dictatorship in Europe, sprouted out of the EU (the Nazi party sprouted out of the German socialist progressive movement). The EU is already laying the groundwork.
As soon as a government can ban speech you don't agree with, they can also ban your speech because there is always someone who won't agree with it. (And no, we are not talking about incitement to actual violence, or material support for terrorists, that is also illegal in the US.)
Let me spell it out for you since you are clearly logically challenged and/or incapable of grasping basic concepts:
If a business or country hires/pays/blackmails/threatens a person to steal for them and then that entity receives the stolen goods, then that entity is morally and legally guilty of the theft. However, in the case of China, they literally don't give a shit what the rest of the world thinks or demands or what is legal/illegal, unless it actually costs them money or power in some way. The US has mountains of evidence from our counter espionage against China that they have stolen US IP hundreds if not thousands of times in the last 20 years. Evidence like photographic evidence of the thief dead dropping the data to a Chinese diplomat, electronic evidence of payouts to the thief from a Chinese state backed entity, testimony from the thief that his family back in China was under threat, etc.
You might want to do a little light reading, maybe have a few of the facts before you start making a fool of yourself. http://www.ipcommission.org/re...
Some other pertinent information:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundi...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...
http://www.sciencemag.org/news...
http://www.politifact.com/pund...
I was going to try to reply to this, but it is just not worth it. My previous post stands. It is based on my 20 years of observation and first hand experience with Chinese manufacturing and dozens of companies that manufacture products in China.
Your position is based on supposition and conjecture that show you may have some experience in business or economics, but no direct experience with the challenges vs benefits of manufacturing in China, or in fact manufacturing a physical product at all. Nearly every single one of you statements is a generalization based on zero evidence on topics that you clearly have no direct experience in.
OK, so you think ...
No, but don't let that stand in the way of you little rant...
AKA your position is indefensible and when pointed out you go smartass rather than admitting that you are wrong.
As opposed to my-birth-certificate is none of your business or my-college-records are none of your business but I'm a Rhodes scholar and professor of constitutional law but get my EOs overturned at a record breaking level Obama?
By any number of metrics, the Obama administration was the least transparent administration in history, bar none. Just because you happened to agree with him doesn't change that fact. Obama had the largest number of lobbyists working in the white house in the last 50 years. The Obama administration lied to judges so they could spy on journalists and the AP to find white house leaks they didn't like. There is a list 3 feet long of incidence where the Obama admin concealed information from the public for political advantage.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://reason.com/archives/201...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/o...
"It's interesting to see how American institutions, politics, and bureaucracy, are steadily on the decline, both from within and without."
I agree, and it started about 8.5 years ago. It remains to be seen if the steps we took in the last election can make a correction and return the US to rule of law and public transparency and accountability.
Time to update the FOIA with teeth. Something along the lines of filing a lawsuit or other attempt to obstruct an FOIA request makes the government employees/elected officials involved automatically liable to felony obstruction charges if they lose the lawsuit and must personally pay the state legal fees and the legal fees of the FOIA requestor. Such lawsuits must be settled in 90 days or summary judgement is made for the FOIA requestor. Further, any elected officials who file such a lawsuit immediately lose their elected position for the duration of the lawsuit, government employees are immediately placed on paid leave. If they lose the lawsuit, they have to pay back the leave time and are summarily fired/removed from office.
Time to put all the little jack booted thugs in government on notice, the people are your boss!
Your argument is so full of fallacies, erroneous generalizations and just plain ignorance.
1. Automation requires more highly skilled engineers and technicians to design, build, implement and maintain. The engineers that design the automation are in the US, the engineers that design the products are in the US, the technicians who service the automation are in the US. The cheap unskilled labor doesn't enter the automation picture period full stop.
2. A US automation engineer and product engineer are VASTLY more skilled at cutting cost than a bunch of unskilled workers in China, especially when it comes to automated manufacture. So no, just flat wrong all the way around. There is a nearly continuous shitstorm for US engineers from Chinese contract manufacturers substituting alternative materials and parts which are not equivalent to save a few pennies per product, scrapping thousands of units in the process and causing delays, or worse, large numbers of defective returns.
3. It takes time for companies to shift manufacturing lines to different locations due to logistics, inertia and sunk cost, it usually doesn't happen until a new line is opened, but we are seeing it start to happen already as companies start to onshore manufacturing coupled with automation.
The two things China has going for it are very minimal environmental regulations and cheap, unskilled labor. Automation requires semi and highly skilled labor and engineering, neither of which are a strong selling point for China.
News flash: Companies and governments, including banks, are liable for what their employees do. The US doesn't need to prove that China is actively stealing IP from the US, there is literally a mountain of evidence, you only don't know this if you have been hiding under a rock for the last 20 years. In many cases there is direct evidence tying the theft to the Chinese government.
You are right, China doesn't fall under any court jurisdiction, so we are left with ICBMs or financial penalties. I outlined to methods for inflicting financial penalties. Hopefully that will get them to stop before we have to take drastic action.
OK, so you think one country stealing from another is cool as long as you don't like the country. Good to know that you have no morals, not really much point talking further to you after you established that...
If you think the US behaves like a petulant child, you are completely ignorant of reality and have experienced only first world problems in your life.
You are assuming that we do things the same way in the US that they do in China where labor is cheap. If US companies lose China as a source of cheap labor, they will hire a big team of engineers to design and build the robotics/automation necessary to make their goods economically in the US. Quality goes up, global pollution goes down, the jobs created are fewer than in China, but high paying engineer jobs, middle class wage technicians and operators, final cost of goods actually goes down, since robotics have better yields, lower amortized production costs than Chinese labor even now, don't make mistakes, get sick, need to sleep, commit suicide, etc.
Cheap Chinese labor has somewhat circumvented this process, but there is no reason that it cannot pick up where it left off as more manufacturing is on-shored.
The net result is cheaper, higher quality products, more high paying engineering jobs, more middle class technician/maintenance jobs, a net positive for the consumer and for the US job market.
Because who besides China and Russia are investing in US treasuries while simultaneously engaged in state sponsored corporate espionage against US firms with no laws against such activity?
If you are a country of moral laws (i.e. it is illegal to steal other people's shit) you have nothing to worry about. If China and Russia stop stealing our shit, they have nothing to worry about. Make nice with everyone or get the shaft, that is the way the world works everywhere else...
Really, it is either this approach, or every time it is 50 cruise missiles spread over every internet backbone facility and server farm within 1000 miles of the origin of the hack...
You missed the point, the issue is not that terrorism is statistically rare alone, the problem is that while statistically rare, terrorism is driven by intelligent intent. It is like trying to predict the path of a river just before a construction crew comes in and diverts the river into a man-made aqueduct. All of your predictions are invalid due to intelligent intervention.
It is like trying to predict the casualties of a war. It is statistically impossible to do because the intent of a war is to kill people on the other side and the variables and unknowns are unknowable until after the fact. Many people have tried to predict such things, but if they tell you they can, they are full of horse shit. By all accounts, WW1 should have been a small skirmish between a couple of minor states settled in less than a few months, but instead it exploded into a giant war with over 18 million deaths. Similarly, the entirety of Europe should have been able to contain Hitler's Nazi Germany, but Germany's unanticipated development and use of tanks and aircraft flipped the tables and Germany was able to invade and occupy most of western Europe and involve much of the world in WW2.
The bottom line is terrorism is such an asymmetrical threat that it cannot be quantified by statistics except as a part of historical record. Intelligent intent by definition allows for a significantly non-zero chance of a massive casualty attack that can never be discounted by any valid statistical method.
Except that unlike debt, this is a state taking money from another state based on a defined law to penalize and recover damages for state sponsored stealing. The analogy would be if you borrowed $100k from a bank and then 3 weeks later the bank employees come to your house and steal your car (and in China's case, your boat, your RV, your motorcycle, the solar panels off your roof, the siding off your walls and damn near everything else that isn't bolted down).
You take them to court and get the value of the stolen property plus punitive damages awarded to the tune of $60k, which is then taken off of your bank debt by the court. In this case, both the court and the victim of theft are the US citizens, but right now there is no mechanism to recover against China for their rampant state sponsored theft, and that must change. The scenario above would not affect the borrowers credit rating, nor would the US voiding treasuries issued to China for their acts of stealing against US companies affect the US bond rates. It is a clearly defined cause and effect outside of the credit ratings purview that only put investors at risk if they engage in corporate or state espionage against the US.
Yes and no. The risk to an individual investor or bank in say Europe or Canada that his/her US treasury will be voided is nil, and thus the treasury rates wouldn't be affected, since good faith investors would not have any additional risk. However in the case of government level investment for the purpose of manipulation, like China, it flips the risk/reward for corporate espionage and the original intent of buying US treasuries (to have leverage over the US government/economy).
OTOH, an automatic 1% import tax on items from China for a year cumulative per incident (5% for military contractors) would also decimate the Chinese economy in short order and they would have to decide if they like trading with the US or stealing our trade secrets, because it would rapidly become mutually exclusive.
Maybe try learning to write in complete sentences, and the difference between your and you're? They make your post very difficult to read.
The majority of stuff we buy from China falls into two categories, cheap garbage that just ends up in the landfill in less than a year that has preexisting higher quality/higher cost alternatives made in the US/Europe already. The other category is things designed in the US that we have China manufacture for us (i.e. the iPhone, microchips, etc.) because it is cheaper there and they have minimal environmental regulations. On both counts, we would actually benefit on both the consumer and GPD sides from pulling those back to the US and manufacturing them here with greater automation. The entire trade relationship with China was intended to liberalize and eventually democratize the country as individuals become more powerful and less reliant on the government. It has worked to a degree, but over the last 20 years or so, the Chicom government has figured out how to game this arrangement to their advantage.
Regarding the rest of the world, much of it is horrible, rampant with disease, malnourishment, war, sectarian violence, criminal gangs etc. I don't have to visit someplace to know about it, and I know that both Russia and China are demonstrably less free than the US or Europe and both have intentions to take over the world if they think they can get away with it. If you think otherwise, you might want to educate yourself a bit on the topic, maybe ask the people in Crimea and Taiwan for a reality check...
The US needs to make China aware that this state sponsored economic terrorism will no longer be tolerated. I vote that every time there is a theft of US technology, we VOID $10 billion (minimum) of US treasuries held by China. Make it $50 billion if it is a military contractor. If they want to steal our technology, they are going to pay out the ass for it. If they run out of US debt, start putting a 1% tariff on all goods imported for a year, per incident. Watch companies start to flee China as the cost of producing goods there to import to the US skyrockets while the Chinese economy craters.
We cannot survive as a nation with the parasite of China continuously stealing our manufacturing, manipulating trade deficits and now stealing our technology. We either have to change or we are going to collapse.
And to all you globalists out there rooting for the US to fail, I hope you like living under a jack booted dictatorship with zero freedom and can speak Russian or Mandarin, because that is what will happen to you about 10 days after a US collapse.
If what they claim were actually true, then I know a ton of people who aren't conscious even as adults. It is a simplistic effort to quantify something that is both extremely complex and elusive (as is life it'self). I would agree that infants comprehension of the world starts off very rudimentary, and their attentiveness is also very limited, but anyone who says that babies aren't fully conscious is pushing an agenda or intentionally trying to deceive you. From the moment they are born, babies are both sponges of information and little scientists looking for logical patterns and cause and effect events. It is how they learn essentially everything about the world around them. To engage in those activities requires consciousness.
Prevalence is a tricky thing when it comes to terrorism. Yes, you are right that based on the last 15 years of attacks, terrorist attack related deaths are in the margins of any individuals chance of dying, however, statistics can not be used when evaluating the threat of someone trying to kill you.
For example, lets say N Korea sells nuclear bomb technology to Iran (if it hasn't happened already) and Iran sells a bomb to any number of terrorist organizations.
Then that terrorist organization manages to smuggle a nuclear bomb into the city center of a large European city. They could kill millions of people. The threat to human life from terrorist attack is clearly not marginal. The same is true of a biological attack with small pox or a weaponized influenza (the Spanish Flu killed 100 million people in 1918.)
Statistics are only valid when events follow a normal (in the statistical sense of the word) distribution. When occurrences are driven by intelligent intent, statistics are 100% non predictive of future risk.
It depends on the kind of failure. I am sure that the designers will make every effort to make the more likely failures (power loss, reasonable or minor track damage, etc.) survivable. You won't ever have many of the risks associated with conventional trains (inattentive conductors, cars or other obstructions on the track, excessive speed for the track, etc.) That said, if a terrorist blows up the track just short of the train in motion (less than stopping distance) you are very likely going to be red paste in the wreckage.
Compare the risk of death in an airplane:
loss of power - very likely everyone dies unless there is a runway nearby
any failure that causes loss of control - everyone dies
etc.
The main problem I see with the hyperloop is that in this era of terrorism, it is virtually impossible to secure hundreds of miles of tracks, whereas airports are fairly well secured, and planes are immune to terrorist attack from outside while in flight (so far terrorists haven't managed to design and build stinger missiles, fighter jets or SAM missile batteries.)
I don't approve of that kind of language, not that I haven't heard the same language a billion times in online games. Its pretty common. The saddest part of the story is all the snowflakes convinced that they will melt into a puddle at the first "micro-transgression."
FFS grow a spine, focus on what matters and move on with your life. You will be better off for it. Words are just words, nothing more, nothing less. If you want to see some real problems that need champions look to Africa or the Middle East, where people are still starving to death, genocide is still happening, and women still don't have basic rights.
Armchair offense takers in the West need to drink a big cup of STFU with a MYOB chaser...
Not that I care about PDP, but this is definitely an abuse of the DMCA, as reviews, both professional and personal are fair use, and if the dev doesn't back down immediately, PDP should counter sue for punitive damages from a frivolous DMCA and a frivolous lawsuit. He definitely has the money and the law on his side. The only way the corporations learn to behave and respect the rights of others is when one of them gets a 10% haircut off the bottom line.