The thing that those laptops had that the Asus wont have is quality. By the time you've bought enough of those, you'd be far behind the $1200 models if you bought them used.
What could POSSIBLY be worth that much more money that a more conventional machine couldn't handle at a fraction of the price? A used Thinkpad, which has none of the limitations of either and a build quality well above Asus and Sony.
Of course, you could just go with the poorly built knockoff. It'll just cost more to repair in the long term.
Given that Sarko's trying his best Thatcher imitation on France, I wouldn't be surprised. Not only is he union hostile, he's trying to make up for lost time by becoming as "business friendly" by being hostile to anyone but a (non European multinational) business.
Maybe next time they'll look a bit closer and have Sarko as the "gentleman for turning".
We should do this while we still have the power to blow them off the face of the Earth. At least there are some who know what may have to be done if they become too much of a problem. Mod parent up.
And that "national security" legislation sure worked great when those Jap fucks started putting Ford out of business. It only needs to be updated to account for the problems. Unfortunately that may not come soon.
There are more than those 2. For example, "and not damage culture and good-will". It is claimed that excessive capitalism creates an "ugly" competitive selfish culture. Describes China perfectly.
Welcome to globalisation, America. It's a good thing, remember? Petty national interests, including your petty national interests, need to become a thing of the past. And the view that shipping is a strategic resource and communication is not is bizarre beyond belief, moreso in a democracy such as you supposedly inhabit.
Then, and if it ever came to that, I think that's ultimately why you have an army. Defending your own ports is certainly a better use for it than, say, overthrowing foreign governments because you think you can embarrass the French by showing the world that they are as moronically unethical in their arms sales as you are, when actually they aren't.... Then gamble on welcoming yourself to the finest US armaments on your doorstep when we decide to stop its pain (should the country in question hold a post-1980 trade treaty or MFN).
Unfortunately for you that the USA still retains a large enough capability to reverse the damaging effects of this form of globalization. Hopefully there will be a leader that will recognize the benefit of restoring our nation from nearly 30 years of its damage.
When American corporations stop bullying foreign governments, we can talk about how foreign governments should be nicer to American corporations. When foreign governments such as China's can no longer influence our government in any way wrt trade, then the discussion can begin. No sooner.
...to be the goals of the entire world, but only in so far as they inure solely to the benefit of the USA. I make no apologies to that issue as long as the nation in question threatens the USA's sovereignty in any form.
i think the USA should pull the plug on them, (physically remove their intertubes from connecting to the US intertubes)... Now if it takes care of the regime during the fsck, why not just forcibly deactivate that region and then fsck upon successfully reloading it?
Why would you want such a law passed? More information means more efficient market processes. Towards what end?
People with lower risk pay lower premiums, people with higher risk pay higher premiums. The only thing that will do will allow the affluent to have who-knows-what genetically passed condition and pass it on, while encouraging market-based eugenics for the majority.
Insurance companies now have to charge high premiums because they're having a hard time assessing the individual risk levels. When more tools are available to help measure this risk, they'll be able to charge the right premiums, which will be on average lower than what they are now. There are some things that can be helped, prescreening for uncurable disease/genetic predisposition is not one of them.
or Manga-reflex (If your pupils dialate at this then you are under 21) Let me guess that you want one of these. Be forewarned that it may take an extended test for some people.
(Score:0, Flamebait)
The sooner that country is leveled, the sooner the debts can be nullified. Balance would be restored, and offshoring would have one less place to circumvent regulations. How telling for moderation...
What we may have to do for national sovereignty does not mean capitulating to that country or any other of similar profile.
why don't you give them a job when they get out, instead of just throwing money at them? That would simultaneously make amends and give China a big Fuck you. That job is reserved for nuclear weapons and US regulations.
Emerging superpowers You misspelled "Developing countries".
^W^WDeveloping countries like China get away with it because the only people that can do anything about it (the US, possibly Russia) need China intact and powerful to prop up their own economies, and even if they didn't they know they couldn't realistically win a war with China. War would be a disaster, and economic sanctions would harm our economy more than theirs, so they can do whatever the hell they please. You horribly underestimate the US military. Also, there are ways of ignoring that part of the world while getting what we want domestically and enforcing our policies globally.
Sovereignty is why you don't let free trade go unchecked/unregulated.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing that those laptops had that the Asus wont have is quality. By the time you've bought enough of those, you'd be far behind the $1200 models if you bought them used.
Of course, you could just go with the poorly built knockoff. It'll just cost more to repair in the long term.
The major difference being that it was in a submarine. Sealed and cooled by a form of liquified lead.
Of the both of them, wouldnt Harvard be the older one? In that case, it'd just make it a battle of money and influence.
Tons of money. Ivies(and some places like Stanford and MIT) like to confuse merit and affluence for each other.
As opposed to your regular wife?
</xkcd>
Who needs proxies when you have ungodly amounts of power and influence?
Given that Sarko's trying his best Thatcher imitation on France, I wouldn't be surprised. Not only is he union hostile, he's trying to make up for lost time by becoming as "business friendly" by being hostile to anyone but a (non European multinational) business.
Maybe next time they'll look a bit closer and have Sarko as the "gentleman for turning".
But it has been cloned.
So much to say about someone who tried to game Digg.
Laziness, as they could just delete it as they have on certain discussions related to this post.
The user that incorrectly stated something about editorial policy would do well to be modded -6, Wrong.
Mod parent up.
One more reason to keep them out of goldfarming.
Then, and if it ever came to that, I think that's ultimately why you have an army. Defending your own ports is certainly a better use for it than, say, overthrowing foreign governments because you think you can embarrass the French by showing the world that they are as moronically unethical in their arms sales as you are, when actually they aren't.... Then gamble on welcoming yourself to the finest US armaments on your doorstep when we decide to stop its pain (should the country in question hold a post-1980 trade treaty or MFN).
Unfortunately for you that the USA still retains a large enough capability to reverse the damaging effects of this form of globalization. Hopefully there will be a leader that will recognize the benefit of restoring our nation from nearly 30 years of its damage. When American corporations stop bullying foreign governments, we can talk about how foreign governments should be nicer to American corporations. When foreign governments such as China's can no longer influence our government in any way wrt trade, then the discussion can begin. No sooner.
...to be the goals of the entire world, but only in so far as they inure solely to the benefit of the USA. I make no apologies to that issue as long as the nation in question threatens the USA's sovereignty in any form.Do we really need to bring out Eugenics? It may be one risk that cannot be mitigated, merely accepted.
Wouldn't you need something to open it up first?
The sooner that country is leveled, the sooner the debts can be nullified. Balance would be restored, and offshoring would have one less place to circumvent regulations. How telling for moderation...
What we may have to do for national sovereignty does not mean capitulating to that country or any other of similar profile.
The family of Shi Tao was reported to have been paid the cost of the execution and the current value of his organs.
Sovereignty is why you don't let free trade go unchecked/unregulated.