Judging by its cover, I doubt it's my speed. I don't mind some slowness in the book if it's deep. For example, I much prefer latter Dune books, which are considered "slower".
Really, I wish Frank could be resurrected so he could finish Dune. And don't even try to tell me about the Frank-wannabe impostors.
I also really liked Fire in the Deep and many other Sci Fi classics. They are classics for a good reason of course. But, it seems like many think Neal is classic, and this is what boggles my mind.
Exactly. Maybe this is what killed me on Neal's books. There was no such problem in Snowcrash. It was fun and exciting all the way through.
Granted, Snowcrash was not a groundbreaking work like Dune, but it was fun and exciting diversion. It was entertainment. Not bad! It's worth 7 bucks or whatever the soft cover costs.
On the other hand, there is too much crap in his other books and way too much mundane trivialities and silly descriptions of irrelevant things.
I read Snowcrash as my first Neal Stephenson book. So I expected all his books to be like that. Wrong! Snowcrash is good but I hate everything else he writes. It is mind bogglingly boring and I don't think he has any insight whatsoever into relationships.
Why do people like stuff like Cryptonomicon? I've read a hundred pages or so and I just couldn't take it. What's so exciting about Shaftoe? Who cares about riding on a ship? War? There is no action, no insight, no perspective, no intrigue, nothing. I mean, it's like pages and pages of nothing and nothing and nothing. Nothing happens. Characters are boring, average, shallow and do not do anything interesting. I mean, why don't I just put a web cam on a bus stop? Because it would be about as insightful and as exciting as any of Stephenson's books. I don't understand.
What is exciting about these books? Is there some depth that I don't see? It's no Dune, that's for sure. Stephenson has no spiritual insight. So what is it?
Even reading highly modded up posts here just blows me away!! Some guy read 300 pages that he thought were mediocre in order to get to the good parts!?!? You guys are crazy? Are you sure you're not reading the book because "Neal is cool" in the nerd culture? How can anyone stomach 300 pages of mundane mediocrity to get to the "good parts" later? I don't understand. I mean, even Neal's fans think he sucks. It's in plain sight here on Slashdot.
It's not really up to me. I think you are asking me for a "should". What I think should be done? Personally, I think prison is too harsh. I don't know all the answers. Perhaps some regulation is in order, or perhaps we just need to do a PR campaign against outsourcing. I don't know.
It's obvious that long term everything will be global, but if we move slowly the pain will be less severe.
If you want poetic justice, I think the manager who decides to outsource work really should start by outsourcing himself or start by cutting his own salary down to Indian levels.
In my opinion laws and regulations are imperfect solutions. Systems and isms cannot create a good society. It is our values and mores that do so. It matters more what propaganda we have been exposed to than what laws and system we have.
By the way, if you don't think my observation is correct, please let me know.
It's not a philosophy. It is an observation of reality.:)
The answer is simple. This "what if" scenario happens all the time every day. And you see what the results are. Mostly, people just grumble and take it and assume "it won't be me" and "it can't happen to me" attitudes. Then it gets worse. Then it gets worse. Then if it doesn't get better, ba da bing, you have a revolution.:) This is a classic scenario from the books.
Think about it. If the rich elite, say, in Russia, worked proactively to help the poor, you think there would be a revolution in 1917 in Russia? Not a chance!!! People are not idealists. No one revolts out of ideals. People just reach a limit and revolt. Revolution is like a war. No one goes to war for fun or for idealistic BS reasons. People go to war when all other means have been exausted and when they have been pushed to the end, where all diplomacy fails. Unless your name is Genghis Khan, this is true.:) But if you are Genghis Khan, then no one will mind if someone cuts your head off, right? It just goes back and forth. As out, so in. As in, so out.
What I am saying is, if kings and elites were benevolent and wise, we, today, would be serfs:). Do you see what I am saying?
Our name does not matter.
Call me a serf. Call me a citizen. It really does not matter. I do not care if there is a king or a "democratic" government on top of me. I simply do not want to be abused and I want to at least think I have a decent chance at life. Heck, I don't even need a real chance. I just need an illusion of one.:) I am being very honest now. We are suckers, and we should admit it and know our limits.
The reason we have a "democratic" govt today is not because it's morally superior, but because we pragmatically think it will be less abusive. If, miraculously, we had a string of kings who were wise and ruled compassionately and with wisdom, we could potentially be so, so much better off than in democracy, it's not even funny!
The problem is, once the power is so concentrated that you have a king, what are the chances human temptations won't kick in? Zero.:) But, fundamentally, we as people just want to avoid abuse. It is not our goal to support capitalism, socialism, feudalism or any other ism. No one really cares about isms.
People make big noise about isms, but you give them roof over their head, food and some entertainment and they will all shut up, no matter what. That's reality.
It takes different amounts of goodies to shut up various people, but the majority quickly shuts up with relatively few things. Most people are relatively humble and unambitious beings. And frankly, I don't think that's wrong or bad either.
I simply observe and bow down to reality. There is no other superior master than truth. No ism is superior to this. Seeing everything in form of relationships is the key part of seeing reality. Reality is reflected in relationships. And so, in order to have good insight into it, it is 100% critically important to observe the whole system with wide and penetrating relationships of all things.
Many people think in small steps. They think about a thing. Then they mentally jump to another thing. That's how most silly opinions form. But truly wise people think in relations that are abstract and deep. Frankly, that's what the purpose of spirituality is. It is to learn to see the relation and not only the things. It is to learn that meaning is a function of relationship. It is to know that no meaning is self-existent and self-supported. Nothing can be understood in isolation from other things. Very few things are black and white, if any. Very few things come "from nature", if any. Most things are an invention of our mind, especially in the realm of politics and law. Those who benefit tremendously from current laws would be wise to remember
4. WRONG. If you were to exile all 'rich' people in American to other countries we'd all be much worse off. People aren't poor because rich people are 'exploiting' them.
So, are you telling me that a rich person has no leverage?
Exploitation is not a black and white issue.
It's a gray area and it comes in degrees. It starts with peer pressure from friends. It starts with a smile. It is innocent and harmless at first. It goes on to a subtle coercion such as USA coaxing this or that desired behavior out of people via tax policies and via monetary policies (interest rates). There are various shades in between. At the polar opposite is slavery and other utterly blatant and overt opression.
So, the question is, where do we draw the line? What is a socially acceptable form of coercion, and what is not?:)
So, you see, by looking at relationships between things as opposed to looking only at things themselves I have taken your blinders off. So, you see, how you no longer have very firm feet to stand upon? Now you must think again. Thinking is good. Propaganda is bad.
Socialists are not the only ones spouting propaganda, you know?
Personally, I think gobal economy will be established one way or another. But I also think that there are many ways to get there. Some are gentle and some are brutal. Some ways include casualties and some do not.
Yes, yes, we are all human brothers. Amen. Let us get together and discuss how we will globalize things. Wait! The only ones invited to the discussion are the rich! Oops.. I guess we can't participate in "globalisation" discussion, because we are not "l33t" enough, we are not global, econom1c@lly sp3@k1ng. Reminds me of another groop of much maligned leet people here on slashdot.;)
Poor people are local.
Rich people are global. Right? Only the rich think globally while the poor are the small minded local hypocrits? True?
1. If outsourcing from California to India is "greedy" or otherwise morally wrong in some way, then what about outsourcing from California to, say, Alabama?
It's much easier for me to move to Alabama than it is for me to move to India. And yes, I have relocated to a different state for my current job. So, yes, I do use that freedom and I'm not "just sayin'."
Secondly, last I checked, Alabamans pay taxes to USA government. They help fund our infrastructure and they buy our goods and services.
2. Do people in India or China have less right to make a living and feed their families than Americans do?
Neither. Your question makes an invalid assumption.
"Rights" are an invention of man. There are no natural rights. The reason we have a concept of rights, is because we found the hard way, that fighting, raping and pillaging is harder and less pleasant and makes for a more brutish life style. Rights are a social concensus that represents this wisdom that we have learned as a society. Rights are not inherent, neither little people's rights, such as right to free speech, nor Corporate rights, such as right to do business as a legal fictitious person without a real human body.
Should we all suffer mass amnesia about our past, we would revert back to the brutal life style of the past where it was quite obvious what "rights" we really had (read: none).
When people have no rights, they have nothing to lose and will die fighting. So, rights are actually not backed by some idealistic peaceful altruism. Rights are backed by blood, bro. This is not some Buddha-like picture that I am trying to paint for you.
3. In a business, does management have a duty to artificially maintain relatively high wages in the US for equivalent work? Is that a higher duty than their duty to the shareholders?
Business people have a duty to conduct their business ethically. This is undisputable. It is obvious that we as a society do not stand for money made by ripping people off in various scams.
Now that we have established that ethics are paramount in business, the next question to answer is whether outsourcing is an ethical practice or not.
If you think of USA citizens as bound by a social contract, then you must recognize that no business person exists in the void. We all depend on each other. So, a business person has ethical obligations to those who: a) give it land, b) buy their products, c) create laws that foster and protect these products (such as USA creating struct copyright and patent laws), d) bring bargaining power on their behalf when stricking deals with foreign markets (such as when USA government leans on foreign countries to open up their markets), etc., etc. So, yes, a business person carries a tremendous dept to USA government and to USA citizens who are its consumers. And through the government, each business carries a tremendous indirect dept to every tax payer of said government.
So, I pay taxes that support our government. Our government makes strong patent laws and makes corporate welfare hand outs and provites tax shelters that are literally subsidized by ME, so, yes, I feel that every single USA business owes me something. Indeed! I support them all by paying taxes. Do you see how this works? It all connects!
Keep in mind that nothing exists in the void. Everything has context. Everything is related. Think in terms of relationships. And right away you will understand all the issues with much clarity.
4. What duty do the workers owe management in return?
This is obvious. Ethical conduct, timely work, etc. Why even ask?
5. Would you support relaxed regulations and tax cuts to help bring the cost of US labor down closer to that of foreign labor?
Don't be cute. The parent clearly meant "preventing us from using their tools [with our free software programs]." So even though this bit that I added was not stated explicitely, it is obviously implied.
So, why are you modded up? I don't know.
Do you understand that even if a GPL software developer paid for the license, he/she could not distribute his GPL'ed program with Qt on Windows? He/she could distribute the binary, obviously. What would be the point of a GPL source that you'd need to compile against a non-openly available proprietary binary library in order to develop it?
I know you're not asking me, but I'll answer your number 2 question with my own questions:
2. Is it really "offshore outsourcing" when the company that gets the job is a global company with offices and personnel located in the U.S.? Even jobs that are awarded to U.S. companies often involve the use of offsite workers located in or shipped in from other states. How much difference does it really make to an in-state worker who loses his job to an out-of-state worker compared to an out-of-country worker?
Does this global company pay taxes to a global government? If not, is there a bias in taxes toward some particular country, like say, the country where the company is legally incorporated?
When one USA worker loses a job to another USA worker in another state, does the money leave USA as a result? Is money going from state to state exiting the USA market? Also, if the job moves to another state, are USA workers free to move to another state with relatively few difficulties? Does a worker going from one state to another maintain all his rights and priviledges as a USA citizen?
On the other hand, how much harder is it to move across the ocean to a different country than it is to move to a different state? Does moving to another country guarantee the same rights and priviledges that we expect as USA citizens? Further, if we move to another country, if this other country is on the record for numerous human rights violations, does that mean we vote with our dollar for condoning human rights violations?
The following is a question best asked of economists and other researchers who are qualified to answer it with facts.
In an earlier post someone said that "penny saved is a penny earned". Fair enough. Then someone else in another post said, paraphrasing, "off we go to Wal-Mart to buy all those goods produced by offshore labor..."
It is obvious that some money that is saved due to outsourcing is going to be spent in USA, buying goods made outside of USA.
How much of each saved dollar really goes back to the USA economy and how much of that dollar only makes a short-term appearance in the USA only to quickly leave the USA borders?
Is it possible that if the outsourcing trends continue, we will create a situation where there is an appearance of lively trade and consumer activity within the USA borders where almost every empowered participant is not a USA citizen?
If possible, in effect this would mean that the land of the USA is leased out to function as the bazaar for other countries.
If it is not possible, then what makes it impossible? If possible, what can we, as regular people, do in order to avert this?
Is USA going to become a country of real estate brokers, lawyers, plumbers, fast food and other service industry workers? Wait, because people are already going to Mexico and Canada for medical treatment, so I am not going to include doctors on that list.
Some years ago I've read stories about how former business owners and other prominent Japanese people have been entering into a newly booming house cleaning business. That story was just a curiousity for me when I first heard it, but it is beginning to click for me.
The following question is directed to all the various parties, such as economists, CEOs, CIO/CTOs, workers both USA and foreign, President G. W. Bush, and whoever else you can reach.
Please name, from your point of view, who are the top five short term beneficiaries of outsourcing practice?
Please, in your answer do not speak of long term, because I think we have all heard the rosy long term outlook already (and I think it is safe to say that few of us are buying it). Yes, I am biased, but so are we all.
Nothing exists in a void. Everything is understood only in relation to everything else. Nothing stands on its own.
When people see this, they instantly understand that logic is just a tool. Logic is like a pipe. What comes out depends on what you put in. Everything depends on assumptions, axioms and premises. Without some axioms and assumptions, the world, or more accurately, our entire experience, is completely baseless -- there is nothing to grasp and nowhere to put your foot down.
Life is [necessarily] a charade. Those in power are enjoying it until the moment people wake up and realize, "hey, I don't have to take this..." There are massive amounts of sand being tossed into our eyes.
If the powerful abuse the powerless long enough they have a bloody revolution on their hands. On the other hand, if powerful people had any brains at all, they would take care of everyone in the most altruistic way possible -- NOT because of some high ideals, but simply because it is the most shrewd and the most profitable long term thing to do.
Sadly, before most people start to seriously question "the way things are" and start to regard the popular catch phrases as mere propoganda, they will tolerate an incredible amount of punishment and abuse (see: slavery).
So, can you reject unencrypted email addressed to you at gmail? Such email can easily contain private information and there is no guarantee that people will cooperate and download your public key and encrypt their email to you.
I think the problem is not the funny names, but the intolerant and ignorant morons who abuse people.
If I was sure my kid was going to be a strong person, I might name him funny just to see the idiots get their skulls bashed in every time they try to make fun of him!:) Well, not really.
But seriously, in some other cultures it is popular to give ugly names to kids on purpose, so that evil spirits will not become jealous, etc. There is definitely way too much vanity and ego in the U.S. of A. especially, and in the Western world in general.
I agree. When I saw this news, it totally blew me away! I can't believe there are not already most posts on this topic. IBM is basically reinventing the hardware industry with this move. This might have the same far reaching long term impact as when RMS started coding his first GNU program. I'm sure back at the time, when GNU was only a few programs, it was probably nothing and not even newsworthy, but look at what happened later. I think this is a key decision of the quivalent magnitude.
Why is parent modded up? The original post was talking about a virtual open source based office.
Silly me, I actually spend about a minute looking for the source code on the author's site! The least that the parent could have done is to mention explicitely that it's not open source, so as to avoid deceiving people.
If Microsoft has its way, once the business world implements encryption and secure distribution policies for word documents, we can say goodbye to whistleblowing.
I disagree with most people here. I think AWT is better than SWT. Why? Because AWT is equally fast on all platforms. SWT-GTK is dog slow on Linux (and probably any other *nix platform, like FreeBSD).
I repeat.
SWT GTK is unusable under Linux and Eclipse devs do not know what is wrong and cannot fix the bug, even after much screaming on bugzilla!
This shows a clear inferiority of SWT to me. It's not crossplatform in a workable way.
AWT may be ugly, but it works! It may not be the fastest, but it is fast enough on all platforms. IDEA uses Swing and it's fast enough. JEdit using Swing and it is fast enough. Shame on Eclipse's SWT.
Actually, here is a subtle point: the burden of proof is on manufacturer if you're interested in status quo. If you're interested in the possibility of lucid dreaming, the burden of proof is on you, i.e. you are motivated to try it out before you speak.
I'm not saying you should fork over your money. There are plenty of free methods that work just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Judging by its cover, I doubt it's my speed. I don't mind some slowness in the book if it's deep. For example, I much prefer latter Dune books, which are considered "slower".
Really, I wish Frank could be resurrected so he could finish Dune. And don't even try to tell me about the Frank-wannabe impostors.
I also really liked Fire in the Deep and many other Sci Fi classics. They are classics for a good reason of course. But, it seems like many think Neal is classic, and this is what boggles my mind.
Exactly. Maybe this is what killed me on Neal's books. There was no such problem in Snowcrash. It was fun and exciting all the way through.
Granted, Snowcrash was not a groundbreaking work like Dune, but it was fun and exciting diversion. It was entertainment. Not bad! It's worth 7 bucks or whatever the soft cover costs.
On the other hand, there is too much crap in his other books and way too much mundane trivialities and silly descriptions of irrelevant things.
I read Snowcrash as my first Neal Stephenson book. So I expected all his books to be like that. Wrong! Snowcrash is good but I hate everything else he writes. It is mind bogglingly boring and I don't think he has any insight whatsoever into relationships.
:)
Why do people like stuff like Cryptonomicon? I've read a hundred pages or so and I just couldn't take it. What's so exciting about Shaftoe? Who cares about riding on a ship? War? There is no action, no insight, no perspective, no intrigue, nothing. I mean, it's like pages and pages of nothing and nothing and nothing. Nothing happens. Characters are boring, average, shallow and do not do anything interesting. I mean, why don't I just put a web cam on a bus stop? Because it would be about as insightful and as exciting as any of Stephenson's books. I don't understand.
What is exciting about these books? Is there some depth that I don't see? It's no Dune, that's for sure. Stephenson has no spiritual insight. So what is it?
Even reading highly modded up posts here just blows me away!! Some guy read 300 pages that he thought were mediocre in order to get to the good parts!?!? You guys are crazy? Are you sure you're not reading the book because "Neal is cool" in the nerd culture? How can anyone stomach 300 pages of mundane mediocrity to get to the "good parts" later? I don't understand. I mean, even Neal's fans think he sucks. It's in plain sight here on Slashdot.
I don't get it.
It's not really up to me. I think you are asking me for a "should". What I think should be done? Personally, I think prison is too harsh. I don't know all the answers. Perhaps some regulation is in order, or perhaps we just need to do a PR campaign against outsourcing. I don't know.
It's obvious that long term everything will be global, but if we move slowly the pain will be less severe.
If you want poetic justice, I think the manager who decides to outsource work really should start by outsourcing himself or start by cutting his own salary down to Indian levels.
In my opinion laws and regulations are imperfect solutions. Systems and isms cannot create a good society. It is our values and mores that do so. It matters more what propaganda we have been exposed to than what laws and system we have.
By the way, if you don't think my observation is correct, please let me know.
You are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It's not a philosophy. It is an observation of reality. :)
:) This is a classic scenario from the books.
:) But if you are Genghis Khan, then no one will mind if someone cuts your head off, right? It just goes back and forth. As out, so in. As in, so out.
:). Do you see what I am saying?
:) I am being very honest now. We are suckers, and we should admit it and know our limits.
:) But, fundamentally, we as people just want to avoid abuse. It is not our goal to support capitalism, socialism, feudalism or any other ism. No one really cares about isms.
The answer is simple. This "what if" scenario happens all the time every day. And you see what the results are. Mostly, people just grumble and take it and assume "it won't be me" and "it can't happen to me" attitudes. Then it gets worse. Then it gets worse. Then if it doesn't get better, ba da bing, you have a revolution.
Think about it. If the rich elite, say, in Russia, worked proactively to help the poor, you think there would be a revolution in 1917 in Russia? Not a chance!!! People are not idealists. No one revolts out of ideals. People just reach a limit and revolt. Revolution is like a war. No one goes to war for fun or for idealistic BS reasons. People go to war when all other means have been exausted and when they have been pushed to the end, where all diplomacy fails. Unless your name is Genghis Khan, this is true.
What I am saying is, if kings and elites were benevolent and wise, we, today, would be serfs
Our name does not matter.
Call me a serf. Call me a citizen. It really does not matter. I do not care if there is a king or a "democratic" government on top of me. I simply do not want to be abused and I want to at least think I have a decent chance at life. Heck, I don't even need a real chance. I just need an illusion of one.
The reason we have a "democratic" govt today is not because it's morally superior, but because we pragmatically think it will be less abusive. If, miraculously, we had a string of kings who were wise and ruled compassionately and with wisdom, we could potentially be so, so much better off than in democracy, it's not even funny!
The problem is, once the power is so concentrated that you have a king, what are the chances human temptations won't kick in? Zero.
People make big noise about isms, but you give them roof over their head, food and some entertainment and they will all shut up, no matter what. That's reality.
It takes different amounts of goodies to shut up various people, but the majority quickly shuts up with relatively few things. Most people are relatively humble and unambitious beings. And frankly, I don't think that's wrong or bad either.
I simply observe and bow down to reality. There is no other superior master than truth. No ism is superior to this. Seeing everything in form of relationships is the key part of seeing reality. Reality is reflected in relationships. And so, in order to have good insight into it, it is 100% critically important to observe the whole system with wide and penetrating relationships of all things.
Many people think in small steps. They think about a thing. Then they mentally jump to another thing. That's how most silly opinions form. But truly wise people think in relations that are abstract and deep. Frankly, that's what the purpose of spirituality is. It is to learn to see the relation and not only the things. It is to learn that meaning is a function of relationship. It is to know that no meaning is self-existent and self-supported. Nothing can be understood in isolation from other things. Very few things are black and white, if any. Very few things come "from nature", if any. Most things are an invention of our mind, especially in the realm of politics and law. Those who benefit tremendously from current laws would be wise to remember
So, are you telling me that a rich person has no leverage?
Exploitation is not a black and white issue.
It's a gray area and it comes in degrees. It starts with peer pressure from friends. It starts with a smile. It is innocent and harmless at first. It goes on to a subtle coercion such as USA coaxing this or that desired behavior out of people via tax policies and via monetary policies (interest rates). There are various shades in between. At the polar opposite is slavery and other utterly blatant and overt opression.
So, the question is, where do we draw the line? What is a socially acceptable form of coercion, and what is not?
So, you see, by looking at relationships between things as opposed to looking only at things themselves I have taken your blinders off. So, you see, how you no longer have very firm feet to stand upon? Now you must think again. Thinking is good. Propaganda is bad.
Socialists are not the only ones spouting propaganda, you know?
Personally, I think gobal economy will be established one way or another. But I also think that there are many ways to get there. Some are gentle and some are brutal. Some ways include casualties and some do not.
Yes, yes, we are all human brothers. Amen. Let us get together and discuss how we will globalize things. Wait! The only ones invited to the discussion are the rich! Oops.. I guess we can't participate in "globalisation" discussion, because we are not "l33t" enough, we are not global, econom1c@lly sp3@k1ng. Reminds me of another groop of much maligned leet people here on slashdot.
Poor people are local.
Rich people are global. Right? Only the rich think globally while the poor are the small minded local hypocrits? True?
It's much easier for me to move to Alabama than it is for me to move to India. And yes, I have relocated to a different state for my current job. So, yes, I do use that freedom and I'm not "just sayin'."
Secondly, last I checked, Alabamans pay taxes to USA government. They help fund our infrastructure and they buy our goods and services.
Neither. Your question makes an invalid assumption.
"Rights" are an invention of man. There are no natural rights. The reason we have a concept of rights, is because we found the hard way, that fighting, raping and pillaging is harder and less pleasant and makes for a more brutish life style. Rights are a social concensus that represents this wisdom that we have learned as a society. Rights are not inherent, neither little people's rights, such as right to free speech, nor Corporate rights, such as right to do business as a legal fictitious person without a real human body.
Should we all suffer mass amnesia about our past, we would revert back to the brutal life style of the past where it was quite obvious what "rights" we really had (read: none).
When people have no rights, they have nothing to lose and will die fighting. So, rights are actually not backed by some idealistic peaceful altruism. Rights are backed by blood, bro. This is not some Buddha-like picture that I am trying to paint for you.
Business people have a duty to conduct their business ethically. This is undisputable. It is obvious that we as a society do not stand for money made by ripping people off in various scams.
Now that we have established that ethics are paramount in business, the next question to answer is whether outsourcing is an ethical practice or not.
If you think of USA citizens as bound by a social contract, then you must recognize that no business person exists in the void. We all depend on each other. So, a business person has ethical obligations to those who: a) give it land, b) buy their products, c) create laws that foster and protect these products (such as USA creating struct copyright and patent laws), d) bring bargaining power on their behalf when stricking deals with foreign markets (such as when USA government leans on foreign countries to open up their markets), etc., etc. So, yes, a business person carries a tremendous dept to USA government and to USA citizens who are its consumers. And through the government, each business carries a tremendous indirect dept to every tax payer of said government.
So, I pay taxes that support our government. Our government makes strong patent laws and makes corporate welfare hand outs and provites tax shelters that are literally subsidized by ME, so, yes, I feel that every single USA business owes me something. Indeed! I support them all by paying taxes. Do you see how this works? It all connects!
Keep in mind that nothing exists in the void. Everything has context. Everything is related. Think in terms of relationships. And right away you will understand all the issues with much clarity.
This is obvious. Ethical conduct, timely work, etc. Why even ask?
Don't be cute. The parent clearly meant "preventing us from using their tools [with our free software programs]." So even though this bit that I added was not stated explicitely, it is obviously implied.
So, why are you modded up? I don't know.
Do you understand that even if a GPL software developer paid for the license, he/she could not distribute his GPL'ed program with Qt on Windows? He/she could distribute the binary, obviously. What would be the point of a GPL source that you'd need to compile against a non-openly available proprietary binary library in order to develop it?
Does this global company pay taxes to a global government? If not, is there a bias in taxes toward some particular country, like say, the country where the company is legally incorporated?
When one USA worker loses a job to another USA worker in another state, does the money leave USA as a result? Is money going from state to state exiting the USA market? Also, if the job moves to another state, are USA workers free to move to another state with relatively few difficulties? Does a worker going from one state to another maintain all his rights and priviledges as a USA citizen?
On the other hand, how much harder is it to move across the ocean to a different country than it is to move to a different state? Does moving to another country guarantee the same rights and priviledges that we expect as USA citizens? Further, if we move to another country, if this other country is on the record for numerous human rights violations, does that mean we vote with our dollar for condoning human rights violations?
The following is a question best asked of economists and other researchers who are qualified to answer it with facts.
In an earlier post someone said that "penny saved is a penny earned". Fair enough. Then someone else in another post said, paraphrasing, "off we go to Wal-Mart to buy all those goods produced by offshore labor..."
It is obvious that some money that is saved due to outsourcing is going to be spent in USA, buying goods made outside of USA.
How much of each saved dollar really goes back to the USA economy and how much of that dollar only makes a short-term appearance in the USA only to quickly leave the USA borders?
Is it possible that if the outsourcing trends continue, we will create a situation where there is an appearance of lively trade and consumer activity within the USA borders where almost every empowered participant is not a USA citizen?
If possible, in effect this would mean that the land of the USA is leased out to function as the bazaar for other countries.
If it is not possible, then what makes it impossible? If possible, what can we, as regular people, do in order to avert this?
Is USA going to become a country of real estate brokers, lawyers, plumbers, fast food and other service industry workers? Wait, because people are already going to Mexico and Canada for medical treatment, so I am not going to include doctors on that list.
Some years ago I've read stories about how former business owners and other prominent Japanese people have been entering into a newly booming house cleaning business. That story was just a curiousity for me when I first heard it, but it is beginning to click for me.
The following question is directed to all the various parties, such as economists, CEOs, CIO/CTOs, workers both USA and foreign, President G. W. Bush, and whoever else you can reach.
Please name, from your point of view, who are the top five short term beneficiaries of outsourcing practice?
Please, in your answer do not speak of long term, because I think we have all heard the rosy long term outlook already (and I think it is safe to say that few of us are buying it). Yes, I am biased, but so are we all.
To parent: Brilliant writing!
Nothing exists in a void. Everything is understood only in relation to everything else. Nothing stands on its own.
When people see this, they instantly understand that logic is just a tool. Logic is like a pipe. What comes out depends on what you put in. Everything depends on assumptions, axioms and premises. Without some axioms and assumptions, the world, or more accurately, our entire experience, is completely baseless -- there is nothing to grasp and nowhere to put your foot down.
Life is [necessarily] a charade. Those in power are enjoying it until the moment people wake up and realize, "hey, I don't have to take this..." There are massive amounts of sand being tossed into our eyes.
If the powerful abuse the powerless long enough they have a bloody revolution on their hands. On the other hand, if powerful people had any brains at all, they would take care of everyone in the most altruistic way possible -- NOT because of some high ideals, but simply because it is the most shrewd and the most profitable long term thing to do.
Sadly, before most people start to seriously question "the way things are" and start to regard the popular catch phrases as mere propoganda, they will tolerate an incredible amount of punishment and abuse (see: slavery).
So, can you reject unencrypted email addressed to you at gmail? Such email can easily contain private information and there is no guarantee that people will cooperate and download your public key and encrypt their email to you.
Say hello to spam.
Nice post. Wish I had the mod points.
Agreed.
:) Well, not really.
I think the problem is not the funny names, but the intolerant and ignorant morons who abuse people.
If I was sure my kid was going to be a strong person, I might name him funny just to see the idiots get their skulls bashed in every time they try to make fun of him!
But seriously, in some other cultures it is popular to give ugly names to kids on purpose, so that evil spirits will not become jealous, etc. There is definitely way too much vanity and ego in the U.S. of A. especially, and in the Western world in general.
I agree. When I saw this news, it totally blew me away! I can't believe there are not already most posts on this topic. IBM is basically reinventing the hardware industry with this move. This might have the same far reaching long term impact as when RMS started coding his first GNU program. I'm sure back at the time, when GNU was only a few programs, it was probably nothing and not even newsworthy, but look at what happened later. I think this is a key decision of the quivalent magnitude.
Nice. You just validated the parent post for me. So, GTK+ does indeed have better open source/free software apps using it. Thank you!
You mean "UnitedLinux" started by Caldera?
Is UnitedLinux still alive in a more than a symbolic way?
Why is parent modded up? The original post was talking about a virtual open source based office.
Silly me, I actually spend about a minute looking for the source code on the author's site! The least that the parent could have done is to mention explicitely that it's not open source, so as to avoid deceiving people.
If Microsoft has its way, once the business world implements encryption and secure distribution policies for word documents, we can say goodbye to whistleblowing.
This, to me, is a chilling prospect.
I disagree with most people here. I think AWT is better than SWT. Why? Because AWT is equally fast on all platforms. SWT-GTK is dog slow on Linux (and probably any other *nix platform, like FreeBSD).
I repeat.
SWT GTK is unusable under Linux and Eclipse devs do not know what is wrong and cannot fix the bug, even after much screaming on bugzilla!
This shows a clear inferiority of SWT to me. It's not crossplatform in a workable way.
AWT may be ugly, but it works! It may not be the fastest, but it is fast enough on all platforms. IDEA uses Swing and it's fast enough. JEdit using Swing and it is fast enough. Shame on Eclipse's SWT.
Actually, here is a subtle point: the burden of proof is on manufacturer if you're interested in status quo. If you're interested in the possibility of lucid dreaming, the burden of proof is on you, i.e. you are motivated to try it out before you speak.
I'm not saying you should fork over your money. There are plenty of free methods that work just fine.
I don't think this is true. If space was curved, we would be able to observe another Earth if we looked along the orbit, which is not the case.
From what I understand you need a black hole to curve the space that much.