Ain't nothing wrong with your enterprise, my friend. You sell it and people are looking to buy it; Free Enterprise at it's best. Sure these people are buying what is might be considered toxic and unsafe in the better developed countries, but what some of these people don't seem to understand is that they probably know that already. The fact that they're doing it isn't a reflection on the US or any of the other countries vaguely refered to in that artical. They aren't "evil" for inundating these poor, poor villagers with our junk. It's not as if we're secretly coming in black boats in the middle of the night to dump it on foriegn shores for some hapless villager to stumble across and say, "WHOA! We're in the world did all these computer parts come from!? They weren't here last night!" The people of these countries are DEMANDING it. And is it this guys fault he's selling "potentially" toxic items to them? Hell no. You could be accused of the same thing for selling your murcury filled thermometer in a garage sale. Surely you didn't intend for somebody to crack it open for the stuff inside, right? And if he does, is that your responsibility? Repeat after me: "NO." But somehow, China's pasting the blame everywhere else, simply because it's convinient. Their people want this junk. They are willing to dangerous thing to extract profit form this junk. If anything, thier desperation is a reflection on their government, not ours.
My hat is off to you, man. You've probably done more for some of these peoples lifestyle than half the humanitarian organizations out there by giving them another source of income beyond the bountiful wealth they're obviously recieving from their own governments.
There's a reason Chinese peasants are working on this stuff in primitive and dangerous conditions. It's because they're freakin' Chinese peasants. No boat, no lights, no motorcar, not a single luxury. The fact that their own government is all of a sudden caring for them is nothing but a smoke screen-- They are peasants because the government doesn't give a damn and still doesn't. Sure, there are ways to do this safely, but they probably A) Can't afford it and B) Would have to involve the government which is making damn sure they stay peasants anyway.
These are peasants doing this after all and it's probably not being done for cash, but on the barter system. Don't take my word for it, however. As far as why bother shipping it there to begin with, it probably cost less than what it costs to dispose of it in a nation that actually cares. Some places charge stiff penalties in doing so, so why not ship it off to somebody waiting in China? And why bother repairing the transformers at all? Sure, some might be salvagable, but that's quite a bit of copper and other metal to be used (size depending). 5 cents might not be much anywhere else, but when you and your friends are living in squalor, it's an economy. Hell, guys in places like Thailand survive off the used tabacco industry-- the process of picking the leftover tabacco out of peoples used buds and reconstituting them into "recycled" cigarettes.
Mod it as flamebait, but I have to be just a teense suspiscious whenever China does something for humanitarian reasons. "We don't want our citizens getting hurt rifling around in all this junk!" is the supposive claim. Then I read the first paragraph:
"Beijing has announced a clampdown on the import of electronic junk from the US and other developed countries which is being stripped by Chinese peasants in primitive and dangerous conditions."
Ladies and gentlemen, free entrerprise has come to China in a form they probably least expected. Beyond the "poor little girl poking her fingers in glass" and and "people washing in scab producing water" sypathy routine, I notice there is scarcely a word mentioned on what happens to this junk. These people are scavenging TV sets, computers, Xerox machines, video cameras and telephones, not to mention boiling circuit boards for valuble metals. Make no mistake: Money is being made by the private citizen, completely independent of the government and they don't like it one bit. Squash indepenence and bash the US in one blow, what could be better!?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the conditions the reporters mentioned bare some truth and it's kinda sad that happens that way, but beneath this sympathy propaganda piece there is a revolution taking place.
Actually, I think a lot of people would buy environmentally friendly cars if they could. take me for example. Flame this if you want, but it's probably pretty close to home for most people.
I want a new car, and a "green" car would be nice, but I'm far from the richest guy in the world. In one corner I have the 2002 Hyundai Elantra offering a 10 year warrenty, lots of standard options and road side assistance for 5 years totalling up to $11,900 after tax, title and registration. In the other corner is the Honda Insight Hybrid. After a quick price check there's no way I'm getting that sucker out the door for under $19,000 w/o options last I looked. I can have all the good intentions in the world, but the simple facts are that "green" isn't affordable yet. Hell, even that Segway scooter is $8,000. A car that will get me everywhere or a little scooter of limited mobility... Hmmm... Technology in that sector is going to have to be a lot cheaper before the real world goes green.
I saw this in a science magazine way back and just remebered it while crusising through this hate filled, biased thread.
"Sprinkling iron on the ocean may recreate the climate changes seen in Ocean scientists believe they have recreated one of the key processes that triggers the beginning and end of ice ages."
I'll let you read the rest of the article, but it also theorizes on how to prevent or stave off global warming effects. Have fun.
In otherwords you're reading a quite a bit into that comment. Did I say the ends justified the means? Did I advocate screwing people for a buck? I didn't even imply it.
In otherwords you're an angry little man who is taking things WAY out of context. What this artical, and you apparently, is implying is that all.com businessmen are rich, greedy bastards with no soul or conscious. Yep, they're all Enron bastards.
Thanks, but I'll take their results over both of your stereotyping opinions anyday of the week. hell, you don't even know who these people are. Class racism. Fun stuff.
I think people sell the resiliance of the American system of government way too short. Back in the day it was Mccarthyism, the Witchunt for Communist and so forth. The technology has changed, but the situation really hasn't. While politics and security may wander to either extreem, the US has always survived and prospered because of it's inherent stability. People have a voice in this government and that's why it works. You can say it's corrupt and all, but if it didn't work, we'd have been well on our way to a dictatorship or monarchy a long time ago. Fight for your rights all you want, but at the same time, have a little faith.
LOL... When has the democratic party ever been terrified to speak? You're too much, man ^__^ If I remember correctly, their accusations that Bush knew of the 9/11 attack before hand were recently all over the news. Oh, wait.. That was a different Democratic party, right? LOL!
Ok, so cameras were invading your privacy in the private sector long before the government stepped up their campaign. And I still don't have a problem with cameras in some public locations. you're never going to see them on every corner (or traffic light), if simply because of the logistics involved. They've been limited to ptential high crime/abuse areas thus far, so take a chill pill.
No, A drivers license is to prove you can operate a vehical. A state ID is the minimum form of identification you are pining after. Woe be it to all those people without cars if what you say is true. And what is wrong with such a form of identification? Some form needs to exist in order to prove your citizenship and participate in governmental process, as opposed to Joe Foriegner walking in and voting on something that is far from our best interest as a nation. How else am I supposed to be identified? My Charm? Because I said so? Some database needs to exist. But I will admit the system is way too flawed right now. Hell, they might as well just give IDs away in cereal boxes right now...
I won't argue the gun issue. Databases exist and they shouldn't have to. I made the point to illustrate that the system does work and BS can be fought.
What do seatbelts have to do with anything? All it means is some special intrest group like MAD capitalized on public sypathy and pushed it to law! Lets stop concentrating on your big word of the day "obtuse" and realize this has doesn't have much to do with survellence of any kind.
I'm done with this thread. You can't hold reasonable discussions with a blithering idiot.
You both have it right. Security doesn't mean jack if you don't have the freedom to enjoy it and Liberty doesn't mean nothing if you're always living in fear for your life. The two must be balanced otherwise the entire house of cards will collapse. They are mutually supportive. Also, keep in mind it wasn't the masses who fought the Revolutionary war. Only 10% of colonies total population actually participated directly in it...
"...a bunch of rich, fat, overpaid, overhyped dot-con executives blathering on and on about some "business lessons" they supposedly learned while they were out wasting millions of dollars of venture capitalists' money..."
Whether they learned something or not, they are apparently making more money than you are. Your opinions over their results... Hmmmm...
"Government seldom gives up the powers it's given voluntarily" That's not to say they can't be taken back or that the system doesn't work.
Cameras in airports are a bad thing? (debatable, admittedly). Use wisely, young Jedi. Drivers license to prove your qualified to operate a vehical? That's bad? Gun databases? The Brady Act that required tracking on a national scale was overturned in a lawsuit by the NRA. Seatbelts? Granted, you can't beat intelligence into the stupid but how does this in anyway benefit the government? I do agree it doesn't really need to be a law however.
It's not a bad goal, actually, just one we can't achieve because we haven't really put in the time or effort. It's a good idea if we'd get off our collective butts and make it a reality.
"As has been pointed out time and time again, you can increase security all you like, lock down men, women and children in their little homes with their little TVs just so they can't be harmed, and bring in all the laws you want. But at the end of the day if someone wants to inflict horrible damage upon you and your population, then they will."
So you're saying we shouldn't even try to stop them? Not even attempt to minimize casulties?
"Privacy and rights are not mindless. It's standing up for what makes the human race so great - individuality, and the ability to think and speak for oneself."
Glad we agree.
"...(which is currently a rarity, thanks to the loss of freedom of speech)..."
Wow... When did this happen? Must be a lot of doctors and psychologists going to jail because of our stringent speech laws that allow people to critize their own government daily without fear of retribution. Oh, that loss of free speech?
"Don't claim that security through obscurity is going to help anything, because it's not"
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have my profuse and unending respect for having suggested that, as I totally and without reservation agree with you. Everybody should be as wise as you, my friend. Except for maybe the Republicrats crack;) Still, your solution would solve a good many problems.
Don't read between the lines too much, Ace. I'm just sick of people screaming about privacy every time there is an increase in some agencies power. You may have noticed that I mentioned I like privacy, but unlike some people (notably the author of the artical) I realize that with the increase of threat there needs to be an increase in security. Screaming privacy all day long isn't going to stop that terrrorist cell from doing it's work. To clarify, this increase in power should not be a permanent one, but to handcuff them in such an hour is idiocy of the highest order. Where you got the idea that I was advocating a society with no privacy is beyond me.
Agreed. All I see is people here saying "I want privacy. I have no suggestions on how to guard this country against terrorism. I have no ideas on how the government can take a pro-active stance against the threat. I even believe that terrorist have the right to privacy... At least until they run another plane into my house. In short, I have nothing to offer but a call to privacy for it's own sake, even if it's at the cost of thousands of lives."
Real world suggestions, not mindless privacy prattle, people. Idiots can make vague suggestions to policy all day long, but they can't give you answers to questions like: How will you keep a local terrorist cell from detonating a large bomb (nuclear or otherwise) in my city? Oh, yeah... Privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
When did that happen? If that were the case, we'd be living like you guys.
Well, I got a chuckle out of it ^__^ I'll mod you +3(funny)
"But then, it should be any surprise this goes on considering what America does with its nuclear waste..."
Um, bury it in holes in the desert?
Ain't nothing wrong with your enterprise, my friend. You sell it and people are looking to buy it; Free Enterprise at it's best. Sure these people are buying what is might be considered toxic and unsafe in the better developed countries, but what some of these people don't seem to understand is that they probably know that already. The fact that they're doing it isn't a reflection on the US or any of the other countries vaguely refered to in that artical. They aren't "evil" for inundating these poor, poor villagers with our junk. It's not as if we're secretly coming in black boats in the middle of the night to dump it on foriegn shores for some hapless villager to stumble across and say, "WHOA! We're in the world did all these computer parts come from!? They weren't here last night!" The people of these countries are DEMANDING it. And is it this guys fault he's selling "potentially" toxic items to them? Hell no. You could be accused of the same thing for selling your murcury filled thermometer in a garage sale. Surely you didn't intend for somebody to crack it open for the stuff inside, right? And if he does, is that your responsibility? Repeat after me: "NO." But somehow, China's pasting the blame everywhere else, simply because it's convinient. Their people want this junk. They are willing to dangerous thing to extract profit form this junk. If anything, thier desperation is a reflection on their government, not ours.
My hat is off to you, man. You've probably done more for some of these peoples lifestyle than half the humanitarian organizations out there by giving them another source of income beyond the bountiful wealth they're obviously recieving from their own governments.
There's a reason Chinese peasants are working on this stuff in primitive and dangerous conditions. It's because they're freakin' Chinese peasants. No boat, no lights, no motorcar, not a single luxury. The fact that their own government is all of a sudden caring for them is nothing but a smoke screen-- They are peasants because the government doesn't give a damn and still doesn't. Sure, there are ways to do this safely, but they probably A) Can't afford it and B) Would have to involve the government which is making damn sure they stay peasants anyway.
These are peasants doing this after all and it's probably not being done for cash, but on the barter system. Don't take my word for it, however. As far as why bother shipping it there to begin with, it probably cost less than what it costs to dispose of it in a nation that actually cares. Some places charge stiff penalties in doing so, so why not ship it off to somebody waiting in China? And why bother repairing the transformers at all? Sure, some might be salvagable, but that's quite a bit of copper and other metal to be used (size depending). 5 cents might not be much anywhere else, but when you and your friends are living in squalor, it's an economy. Hell, guys in places like Thailand survive off the used tabacco industry-- the process of picking the leftover tabacco out of peoples used buds and reconstituting them into "recycled" cigarettes.
Sad little man. I'll mod him -12 to make up for Slashdot's oversight.
Mod it as flamebait, but I have to be just a teense suspiscious whenever China does something for humanitarian reasons. "We don't want our citizens getting hurt rifling around in all this junk!" is the supposive claim. Then I read the first paragraph:
"Beijing has announced a clampdown on the import of electronic junk from the US and other developed countries which is being stripped by Chinese peasants in primitive and dangerous conditions."
Ladies and gentlemen, free entrerprise has come to China in a form they probably least expected. Beyond the "poor little girl poking her fingers in glass" and and "people washing in scab producing water" sypathy routine, I notice there is scarcely a word mentioned on what happens to this junk. These people are scavenging TV sets, computers, Xerox machines, video cameras and telephones, not to mention boiling circuit boards for valuble metals. Make no mistake: Money is being made by the private citizen, completely independent of the government and they don't like it one bit. Squash indepenence and bash the US in one blow, what could be better!?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the conditions the reporters mentioned bare some truth and it's kinda sad that happens that way, but beneath this sympathy propaganda piece there is a revolution taking place.
Actually, I think a lot of people would buy environmentally friendly cars if they could. take me for example. Flame this if you want, but it's probably pretty close to home for most people.
I want a new car, and a "green" car would be nice, but I'm far from the richest guy in the world. In one corner I have the 2002 Hyundai Elantra offering a 10 year warrenty, lots of standard options and road side assistance for 5 years totalling up to $11,900 after tax, title and registration. In the other corner is the Honda Insight Hybrid. After a quick price check there's no way I'm getting that sucker out the door for under $19,000 w/o options last I looked. I can have all the good intentions in the world, but the simple facts are that "green" isn't affordable yet. Hell, even that Segway scooter is $8,000. A car that will get me everywhere or a little scooter of limited mobility... Hmmm... Technology in that sector is going to have to be a lot cheaper before the real world goes green.
I saw this in a science magazine way back and just remebered it while crusising through this hate filled, biased thread.
"Sprinkling iron on the ocean may recreate the climate changes seen in Ocean scientists believe they have recreated one of the key processes that triggers the beginning and end of ice ages."
I'll let you read the rest of the article, but it also theorizes on how to prevent or stave off global warming effects. Have fun.
It warms me down to my tippy-toes to know you care ^__^
In otherwords you're reading a quite a bit into that comment. Did I say the ends justified the means? Did I advocate screwing people for a buck? I didn't even imply it.
.com businessmen are rich, greedy bastards with no soul or conscious. Yep, they're all Enron bastards.
In otherwords you're an angry little man who is taking things WAY out of context. What this artical, and you apparently, is implying is that all
Thanks, but I'll take their results over both of your stereotyping opinions anyday of the week. hell, you don't even know who these people are. Class racism. Fun stuff.
You're my hero, Man ^__^
I think people sell the resiliance of the American system of government way too short. Back in the day it was Mccarthyism, the Witchunt for Communist and so forth. The technology has changed, but the situation really hasn't. While politics and security may wander to either extreem, the US has always survived and prospered because of it's inherent stability. People have a voice in this government and that's why it works. You can say it's corrupt and all, but if it didn't work, we'd have been well on our way to a dictatorship or monarchy a long time ago. Fight for your rights all you want, but at the same time, have a little faith.
LOL... When has the democratic party ever been terrified to speak? You're too much, man ^__^ If I remember correctly, their accusations that Bush knew of the 9/11 attack before hand were recently all over the news. Oh, wait.. That was a different Democratic party, right? LOL!
Ok, so cameras were invading your privacy in the private sector long before the government stepped up their campaign. And I still don't have a problem with cameras in some public locations. you're never going to see them on every corner (or traffic light), if simply because of the logistics involved. They've been limited to ptential high crime/abuse areas thus far, so take a chill pill.
No, A drivers license is to prove you can operate a vehical. A state ID is the minimum form of identification you are pining after. Woe be it to all those people without cars if what you say is true. And what is wrong with such a form of identification? Some form needs to exist in order to prove your citizenship and participate in governmental process, as opposed to Joe Foriegner walking in and voting on something that is far from our best interest as a nation. How else am I supposed to be identified? My Charm? Because I said so? Some database needs to exist. But I will admit the system is way too flawed right now. Hell, they might as well just give IDs away in cereal boxes right now...
I won't argue the gun issue. Databases exist and they shouldn't have to. I made the point to illustrate that the system does work and BS can be fought.
What do seatbelts have to do with anything? All it means is some special intrest group like MAD capitalized on public sypathy and pushed it to law! Lets stop concentrating on your big word of the day "obtuse" and realize this has doesn't have much to do with survellence of any kind.
I'm done with this thread. You can't hold reasonable discussions with a blithering idiot.
Of course, I doubt the author of that article can make that kind of judgement call as to their character.
You both have it right. Security doesn't mean jack if you don't have the freedom to enjoy it and Liberty doesn't mean nothing if you're always living in fear for your life. The two must be balanced otherwise the entire house of cards will collapse. They are mutually supportive. Also, keep in mind it wasn't the masses who fought the Revolutionary war. Only 10% of colonies total population actually participated directly in it...
Excuse me while I sit in the corner and LMAO.
"...a bunch of rich, fat, overpaid, overhyped dot-con executives blathering on and on about some "business lessons" they supposedly learned while they were out wasting millions of dollars of venture capitalists' money..."
Whether they learned something or not, they are apparently making more money than you are. Your opinions over their results... Hmmmm...
"Government seldom gives up the powers it's given voluntarily" That's not to say they can't be taken back or that the system doesn't work.
Cameras in airports are a bad thing? (debatable, admittedly). Use wisely, young Jedi.
Drivers license to prove your qualified to operate a vehical? That's bad?
Gun databases? The Brady Act that required tracking on a national scale was overturned in a lawsuit by the NRA.
Seatbelts? Granted, you can't beat intelligence into the stupid but how does this in anyway benefit the government? I do agree it doesn't really need to be a law however.
It's not a bad goal, actually, just one we can't achieve because we haven't really put in the time or effort. It's a good idea if we'd get off our collective butts and make it a reality.
"As has been pointed out time and time again, you can increase security all you like, lock down men, women and children in their little homes with their little TVs just so they can't be harmed, and bring in all the laws you want. But at the end of the day if someone wants to inflict horrible damage upon you and your population, then they will."
So you're saying we shouldn't even try to stop them? Not even attempt to minimize casulties?
"Privacy and rights are not mindless. It's standing up for what makes the human race so great - individuality, and the ability to think and speak for oneself."
Glad we agree.
"...(which is currently a rarity, thanks to the loss of freedom of speech)..."
Wow... When did this happen? Must be a lot of doctors and psychologists going to jail because of our stringent speech laws that allow people to critize their own government daily without fear of retribution. Oh, that loss of free speech?
"Don't claim that security through obscurity is going to help anything, because it's not"
I never did, Sparky.
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;) Still, your solution would solve a good many problems.
You have my profuse and unending respect for having suggested that, as I totally and without reservation agree with you. Everybody should be as wise as you, my friend. Except for maybe the Republicrats crack
Don't read between the lines too much, Ace. I'm just sick of people screaming about privacy every time there is an increase in some agencies power. You may have noticed that I mentioned I like privacy, but unlike some people (notably the author of the artical) I realize that with the increase of threat there needs to be an increase in security. Screaming privacy all day long isn't going to stop that terrrorist cell from doing it's work. To clarify, this increase in power should not be a permanent one, but to handcuff them in such an hour is idiocy of the highest order. Where you got the idea that I was advocating a society with no privacy is beyond me.
Agreed. All I see is people here saying "I want privacy. I have no suggestions on how to guard this country against terrorism. I have no ideas on how the government can take a pro-active stance against the threat. I even believe that terrorist have the right to privacy... At least until they run another plane into my house. In short, I have nothing to offer but a call to privacy for it's own sake, even if it's at the cost of thousands of lives."
Real world suggestions, not mindless privacy prattle, people. Idiots can make vague suggestions to policy all day long, but they can't give you answers to questions like: How will you keep a local terrorist cell from detonating a large bomb (nuclear or otherwise) in my city? Oh, yeah... Privacy.