Irrelevant. You're thinking like an antivirus designer, and that's just prolonging the problem.
Null bytes are just one method of slipping in bad input...one of many. Why try and stop that problem? They'll just switch to a new method, and you'll be in the same situation.
Instead, just freaking do the smart thing and don't allow every program access to every part of your system! Keep the programs libraries and executables locked down, quarantine any addons, and for god's sake, don't allow any script write access!
If you control the access, then these problems become dramatically easier to deal with.
It's amazing then, how unemployment is relatively constant over the last century...The biggest spike was during the depression, even though, by that argument, people were "worth" a lot more back then.
I'm not going to cry for all the crappy jobs that we've replaced with robots when it obviously not causing massive problems for us. According to WP, we have ~220,000,000 more people in this country today than we had in 1900, and yet we've been replacing people with machines for longer even than that.
When people talk about capitalism "devaluing" human beings, what they really mean is, "Capitalism doesn't make it so you'll automatically keep your job if your labor is inefficient and that's not fair." Lot of hardcore communist countries found out the hard way that the market is a hell of a lot smarter than the government. The government sets prices and tries to figure out what people are going to need, and they do a terrible job of it. You get shortages of some things, gluts of others...it's massively inefficient.
I'm not a pure capitalist...I think social programs actually play into strong economics by pulling the burden of supporting the poor/sick/old off of individuals, and spreading the burden through society. If we'd nationalized the pension systems of some of our large industries, american auto makers and steel makers wouldn't be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy trying to pay the pensions of the people who worked for them when you needed 50 times as many employees as you need today.
But when you're talking about manufacturing, business, farming, you don't fuck with the market! Capitalism is everyone who produces and spends trying to do the smart thing for themselves; get the best paying job, buy the best/cheapest product, save money here, spend it there...There is no government in the world that can match that level of micromanagement, and the ones that try take it in the ass.
Example: China, in true communist form, nationalized the farms, dictated production...and was forced to import food. In the late 70's they allowed farmers to sell surplus crops on the open market, and their TFP jumped by FIFTY-FIVE percent in SIX years. Today China has a food surplus.
One of the things that caused the huge famine in Ethiopia in the '70s was the nationalization of agriculture, and while the country isn't exactly an economic powerhouse right now, it's doing a hell of a lot better since the free-market based economic reforms of the early '90s...Not just better in terms of itself, but better in terms of the whole region.
The market is great at punishing stupid production decisions. If you choose to grow nothing but brussel sprouts, you're going to go bankrupt (thank god) because there is only a limited market. Any system that rewards you, or even just fails to punish you for wasting time and scant resources on a worthless product or an inefficient product, is a bad system.
If you treat the customer like a criminal, you will lose the customer.
I used to occasionally buy RAM from BB, and I'm sure most people here have some stories about supposedly compatible RAM, especially if you're buying from an OTC retailer. So I'd buy a stick, and try it. If it didn't work, I'd return it. If it did work, I'd buy more. When they started up with the, "Not our problem if it doesn't work" I stopped shopping there.
I'm not a picky customer, but the minute you start treating me like I'm trying to scam you, I'll take my money elsewhere.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Automation is the sort of thing that makes countries like the US competitive in the world market; we can do more work with fewer workers.
Now, more automation means some people are going to have to train to do new jobs. I'm overseeing the final decline of an old MPE/iX mainframe, and we're trying to finally remove the need for a full time operator...a guy to schedule and maintain jobs. This is something that has to be explained to people who work with hardware made since the early '80s...This guy...His job title could be reduced to one word: Cron. He is a goddamn human crontab, and it's amazing to watch him at work, but my god, it's no accident that that position died out in most places a decade ago (All you bleeding hearts out there who are worried about this guy; don't worry, I got him another job...There is always work for people who are THAT methodical and thorough, and he's almost inhuman.)
New automation always means new jobs. Different jobs, but they don't go away, they just move around. You always need people to maintain the automation, and as resources get freed up, you get new systems which also need to be maintained, and so on, and so forth.
Seriously. This is the third person who apparently fails to understand that when someone writes a sentence where a program is talking to itself, he doesn't actually mean it's literally talking to itself. How do you people talk to non-geeks?
I over-simplified, but the point remains. Arbitrary code execution flaws are common, and they happen because the handling program dropped the ball when it was served some unexpected input. Writing something to the execution stack, overwriting a system library, all kinds of crap. I've been working with this crap since the early '90s, and I've seen some crazy crap. Most of the time, it's just social engineering. "Download this cool widget, install this patch, blah blah blah."
In order for you to have a secure system, you can't have programming errors in simple programs allowing exploits that effect the entire system. You have got to sandbox those programs, and restrict what they're allowed to do.
Yea, welcome to the wonderful world. Every app I write in java these days kicks off from a batch file that calls a the code with a very specific set of libraries. I'm done re-writing my code every time they release a new goddamn version. If there is no new functionality, and the app is secure, don't give me crap when I want to keep using the same library.
The worst is with older macs, because the java installers wrapped up by apple are only available in a narrow range, depending on OS release, and otherwise you have to make it work yourself...Shudder.
Nope. You can get nailed with them too, occasionally...NoScript helps a lot. The problem with IE is ActiveX, and the fact that IE really is part of the operating system. Both Opera and FF are just programs, without really deep hooks into the OS, though they can still run code, and do damage...I seem to remember one of the FF "exploits" is that it will allow remote code to call IE as a handler in certain circumstances...Don't remember the details on that one, so don't quote me.
Seeing a well designed ActiveX application does two things: One, it makes you say, "Wow, that's kinda cool..." and then it makes you say, "Jesus, I've got to turn this off!" It really does connect your browser to your OS...Use the new OWA app with IE with ActiveX allowed, and it'll hook right into your desktop and give you little popups whenever you get new mail.
That kind of access to the system allows you to do some cool stuff, but it's not well secured, and it makes it possible for a click to a webpage to completely compromise your system.
What you're saying there is, "I don't want my web browser to do anything other than run anything that could possibly be interpreted as code without asking me or applying any logic." That's a pretty big deal.
We get all these deals with malformed images, etc, where the browser interprets code embedded in an image...That means it's handler routine went, "Okie dokie, rendering an image...okay this image is really code, what the hell, lets just execute the code." W. T. F? That should never happen. It should absolutely refuse to interpret anything that is called with an inappropriate handler. That's just a no brainer.
There will always be a way to obfuscate code to make it look like something else for long enough to get it in the door. You can stop this by refusing to handle things that aren't what they appear to be, and then allowing fine-grained controls on things that are what they appear to be.
Yep. And ease of development for applications was one of the reasons Windows gained in popularity...and is the virus infested whore we know and loathe.
If they want to stay the malware browser of choice, by all means, let them keep on doing what they're doing, because it's working great.
They've got you brainwashed. The first line of defense is the program that's executing the code; it should "know" better than to just run everything that comes along. The second line of defense is the operating system: it should "know" what resources the original program is allowed to access, and limit it to those resources, and shut it the hell down if it starts trying to break out of it's sandbox.
Malware detection and elimination programs are the last line of defense. At this point you've already taken it as a given that your applications and operating system are too stupid not to completely trash themselves, so a third party has to step in and protect the system. And in this situation, they're too stupid. It's a whole culture of incompetence, topped off by ignorant users.
Better error handling means, when you get an error, it fails intelligently, without destabilizing the application, and passes a more informative error message. It doesn't mean the application should try and read the coders mind.
The code should damn well work, or not run at all.
It's microsofts responsibility. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, "Interpreting broken code is a security weakness." Yes it makes things easier for amateur developers(developers, developers) but it's a huge security problem to have a system in place that malware writers can be sure will interpret a piece of innocuous gibberish into a functioning piece of malware.
Java is a good example of this. Java doesn't interpret crap. It is what it is, and it doesn't give a crap if it works or not. It's strongly typed, it's picky as hell about variable initialization...It's a bitchy language for newbies, because it's unforgiving of the most meek typos.
I don't think java is the end all be all...It's certainly not friendly to develop in, and that's given scripting languages (hello php) a huge advantage in the marketplace...Much the same as with unix and microsoft, so it's not surprising to see them continuing down their path.
But in the end, you've got to embrace some maturity and stop bottlefeeding your developers and make them fix their damn code when it doesn't conform to a normal standard.
Well, first off, most console hardware is cheaper to buy than it actually costs to make. I know the Wii is an exception to this, but on the down side, it'll show its age sooner as well.
Second, a good graphics card isn't all that expensive, once you've set down for a good computer. I mean, buying a 400 dollar card when you've dropped three grand already just isn't that big a deal. Having a good computer has a whole world of utility you're not getting from a console, and I can, in my daily life, make most any consumer grade computer weep for mercy, so it pays to get a good one. If all you need is a console, then that's all you need. If however, you need a fast computer, shell a little extra and you can get one that plays games well, on top of it's other uses.
Now, I don't buy bleeding edge much anymore...Processor maybe, but probably not RAM, and certainly not a video card. My needs are suited by second tier gear (two last gen processors > one next gen processor), and the dramatic price difference means I can run a tighter upgrade cycle.
It's the way of the world with tech. Todays treasure is tomorrows trash...and sometimes tomorrow really is tomorrow, for unfortunates who buy on the eve of a price drop (silly iPhone whiners).
You win some, you lose some, especially when you're buying the top of the line.
It's not quite like that...It's more like stacking your deck so you're more likely to get a flush, and less likely to get 3 of a kind.
Ideally card games should be balanced to the point where there is no single card that's so powerful that possessing it is a game winner. WOTC has made a fortune, however, by making sure that people buy tons of cards, on the off chance one of those game winners shows up, and a lot of other card makers have followed suit.
I think the only good thing about this as far as EoJ is concerned is that it becomes all about strategy and none about collecting the damn cards.
Oh I agree, to a degree. I think governments should invest in educating their people, because better educated people are more valuable to the country; they do more complex, more valuable work, that is harder to offshore.
On the other hand, I think they shouldn't push too hard on the math/science quotas. People will work out what works best for them better than the government will. Self interest is a powerful motivator.
Self-sufficiency? Right there you've shown you know nothing about the current world economy. You could make a pencil from materials only gathered from within this country, and only assembled in this country, but it'd cost a dollar, and it'd be no better than one made for 6 cents by a country that allowed open trade. Try to do it all yourself, and you'll end up poor, and economically crippled. That's reality.
Clearly you believe that if we only locked up our borders and never imported anything, then we'd all be rich. God forbid we let someone else do it for less, no way, we have to jack tariffs to the roof to keep people from buying cheap foreign goods, so we can sell our expensive locally produced goods, which will cost an effing fortune because everyone will be jacking up their tariffs to get back at us, making all the things we use to make our products more expensive, and basically killing any chance we have of selling anything overseas.
Lot of people in this country have some serious entitlement issues. Nobody owes you a job, or me, for that matter. And I'm saying this, not as the west coaster you seem to think I am, but as an east coaster who's lived in New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia, South Carolina. I've seen dead industrial towns; textiles, steel, manufacturing. Lived in places steeped in their own decay, in apartments made from the partitioned internals of 100 year old mansions.
We are forced out of those businesses because it's low skill work, for the most part, and instead of adapting to do the things we CAN do better, we wallow in how unfair it is. US Steel and US auto companies are being driven under by the same damn thing: their over-inflated pension funds, dating from a period when you needed many times the number of workers you need today, so you have half (or 1/10th for steel) as many workers paying pensions on all the previous generations retirees, when, to really be profitable, you need to get rid of half the workers you've got, who you're only keeping on the payroll because you need to skim their paychecks to pay the pensions! That's like the government employing people, so their salaries will help shore up Social Security.
The smart thing to do is get the government to pick up the tab, but no, that'd be welfare! But if a business does it, it's only fair. Nevermind that you're killing the business. Like the damn autoworkers strike; I couldn't believe they dared, as bad as the industry is doing, but everybody feels like they're owed something.
So in conclusion, I don't wish ill on anyone. But you can't force businesses to run at a loss, because other countries make the same goods for less. And you can't put tariffs high enough without pushing things back to a time when dishwashers, clothes driers, and second televisions were things that only the super rich could afford. That's just the way economics works. You can try to cheat it for a while, but the backlash is a bitch. Ask Japan about that one. 20 years ago they were going to rule the world in a matter of years. Now their economy has been struggling for years. Why? They did what China's doing; artificially depressed their currency and focused on their exports without taking care of business at home. You can do it for a while, but then it will eat you for lunch.
I repeat: "Using government funding to force produce a glut of science-types is silly. Better to use the money to kick off industries that require them, and let the rest take care of itself."
It's not better at it, it's just more inclined to do it. Academia is pretty much geared toward increasing knowledge, and not toward developing profitable technology. It also tends to be cheaper, as most of it's "staff" aren't being paid on the same scale as their commercial counterparts.
And no, not all grants are from the government. The government has, however, been traditionally the best source for money for research into "pure" science. Corporate funding is almost always going to be geared toward a practical application.
It's a supply issue. With drawing, there were just too many people, and the technology was already making the work need a lot less people, so it was easy to outstrip demand.
Contrast with engineering...The supply is limited, and the demand for work is reasonably high. We're absolutely talking about offshoring...Offshoring has made us as a country rich, because everyone offshores stuff to US, because we have the people who can best do the work. By skimming off the best from other countries, we keep that advantage, even without producing them ourselves, so other countries have to come to us.
Make it too hard for the talented people to come here, and they'll stay where they are, and that's not a good thing from our perspective unless we can absolutely crush them in quality, and that's not a given.
It's chicken feed. They could put a lot more into it, and really kick off some interesting stuff in this country. Additionally, a lot of it goes to big established companies, and that stuff always makes me leery, both in terms of efficiency, and in terms of possible kickbacks. Use it to fund research centers at schools; they're relatively cheap, and the research then spreads from there, rather than being locked up in patents.
We need to kick off some sexy new stuff; especially the DoE ought to have a bunch of cash to throw around right now, because we could use some nice advances in that area.
Yea, we all know how research universities are so overflowing with money that they can't even spend it all. Ha.
I went to a research university. Half (or more) the research was corporate funded, with a specific profit motive in mind. Pure science takes the back burner, because the government sees no reason to "waste" a lot of money on science that doesn't have an obvious practical application, and neither does industry.
Commercial research is always geared toward profit...That's their whole reason for doing it. They will ignore things that the PHBs don't think can be effectively marketed.
Pure science research needs to be funded by an entity that doesn't care about the end profitability, but only about the knowledge itself.
See, I agree with that. It goes in line with the last line of my post...Let the government pour money into pure science, and release the results to us under an open license. I've got no problem with that; it's exactly the sort of thing the free market isn't good at funding, but which often turns out to have profit potential anyway. And it creates high end jobs, which is a win-win. Better to use tax money for something like that than fricking corn subsidies.
Slashdot Mirror
Irrelevant. You're thinking like an antivirus designer, and that's just prolonging the problem.
Null bytes are just one method of slipping in bad input...one of many. Why try and stop that problem? They'll just switch to a new method, and you'll be in the same situation.
Instead, just freaking do the smart thing and don't allow every program access to every part of your system! Keep the programs libraries and executables locked down, quarantine any addons, and for god's sake, don't allow any script write access!
If you control the access, then these problems become dramatically easier to deal with.
It's amazing then, how unemployment is relatively constant over the last century...The biggest spike was during the depression, even though, by that argument, people were "worth" a lot more back then.
I'm not going to cry for all the crappy jobs that we've replaced with robots when it obviously not causing massive problems for us. According to WP, we have ~220,000,000 more people in this country today than we had in 1900, and yet we've been replacing people with machines for longer even than that.
When people talk about capitalism "devaluing" human beings, what they really mean is, "Capitalism doesn't make it so you'll automatically keep your job if your labor is inefficient and that's not fair." Lot of hardcore communist countries found out the hard way that the market is a hell of a lot smarter than the government. The government sets prices and tries to figure out what people are going to need, and they do a terrible job of it. You get shortages of some things, gluts of others...it's massively inefficient.
I'm not a pure capitalist...I think social programs actually play into strong economics by pulling the burden of supporting the poor/sick/old off of individuals, and spreading the burden through society. If we'd nationalized the pension systems of some of our large industries, american auto makers and steel makers wouldn't be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy trying to pay the pensions of the people who worked for them when you needed 50 times as many employees as you need today.
But when you're talking about manufacturing, business, farming, you don't fuck with the market! Capitalism is everyone who produces and spends trying to do the smart thing for themselves; get the best paying job, buy the best/cheapest product, save money here, spend it there...There is no government in the world that can match that level of micromanagement, and the ones that try take it in the ass.
Example: China, in true communist form, nationalized the farms, dictated production...and was forced to import food. In the late 70's they allowed farmers to sell surplus crops on the open market, and their TFP jumped by FIFTY-FIVE percent in SIX years. Today China has a food surplus.
One of the things that caused the huge famine in Ethiopia in the '70s was the nationalization of agriculture, and while the country isn't exactly an economic powerhouse right now, it's doing a hell of a lot better since the free-market based economic reforms of the early '90s...Not just better in terms of itself, but better in terms of the whole region.
The market is great at punishing stupid production decisions. If you choose to grow nothing but brussel sprouts, you're going to go bankrupt (thank god) because there is only a limited market. Any system that rewards you, or even just fails to punish you for wasting time and scant resources on a worthless product or an inefficient product, is a bad system.
If you treat the customer like a criminal, you will lose the customer.
I used to occasionally buy RAM from BB, and I'm sure most people here have some stories about supposedly compatible RAM, especially if you're buying from an OTC retailer. So I'd buy a stick, and try it. If it didn't work, I'd return it. If it did work, I'd buy more. When they started up with the, "Not our problem if it doesn't work" I stopped shopping there.
I'm not a picky customer, but the minute you start treating me like I'm trying to scam you, I'll take my money elsewhere.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Automation is the sort of thing that makes countries like the US competitive in the world market; we can do more work with fewer workers.
Now, more automation means some people are going to have to train to do new jobs. I'm overseeing the final decline of an old MPE/iX mainframe, and we're trying to finally remove the need for a full time operator...a guy to schedule and maintain jobs. This is something that has to be explained to people who work with hardware made since the early '80s...This guy...His job title could be reduced to one word: Cron. He is a goddamn human crontab, and it's amazing to watch him at work, but my god, it's no accident that that position died out in most places a decade ago (All you bleeding hearts out there who are worried about this guy; don't worry, I got him another job...There is always work for people who are THAT methodical and thorough, and he's almost inhuman.)
New automation always means new jobs. Different jobs, but they don't go away, they just move around. You always need people to maintain the automation, and as resources get freed up, you get new systems which also need to be maintained, and so on, and so forth.
At least I know what a metaphor is.
Seriously. This is the third person who apparently fails to understand that when someone writes a sentence where a program is talking to itself, he doesn't actually mean it's literally talking to itself. How do you people talk to non-geeks?
I over-simplified, but the point remains. Arbitrary code execution flaws are common, and they happen because the handling program dropped the ball when it was served some unexpected input. Writing something to the execution stack, overwriting a system library, all kinds of crap. I've been working with this crap since the early '90s, and I've seen some crazy crap. Most of the time, it's just social engineering. "Download this cool widget, install this patch, blah blah blah."
In order for you to have a secure system, you can't have programming errors in simple programs allowing exploits that effect the entire system. You have got to sandbox those programs, and restrict what they're allowed to do.
Yea, welcome to the wonderful world. Every app I write in java these days kicks off from a batch file that calls a the code with a very specific set of libraries. I'm done re-writing my code every time they release a new goddamn version. If there is no new functionality, and the app is secure, don't give me crap when I want to keep using the same library.
The worst is with older macs, because the java installers wrapped up by apple are only available in a narrow range, depending on OS release, and otherwise you have to make it work yourself...Shudder.
Nope. You can get nailed with them too, occasionally...NoScript helps a lot. The problem with IE is ActiveX, and the fact that IE really is part of the operating system. Both Opera and FF are just programs, without really deep hooks into the OS, though they can still run code, and do damage...I seem to remember one of the FF "exploits" is that it will allow remote code to call IE as a handler in certain circumstances...Don't remember the details on that one, so don't quote me.
Seeing a well designed ActiveX application does two things: One, it makes you say, "Wow, that's kinda cool..." and then it makes you say, "Jesus, I've got to turn this off!" It really does connect your browser to your OS...Use the new OWA app with IE with ActiveX allowed, and it'll hook right into your desktop and give you little popups whenever you get new mail.
That kind of access to the system allows you to do some cool stuff, but it's not well secured, and it makes it possible for a click to a webpage to completely compromise your system.
What you're saying there is, "I don't want my web browser to do anything other than run anything that could possibly be interpreted as code without asking me or applying any logic." That's a pretty big deal.
We get all these deals with malformed images, etc, where the browser interprets code embedded in an image...That means it's handler routine went, "Okie dokie, rendering an image...okay this image is really code, what the hell, lets just execute the code." W. T. F? That should never happen. It should absolutely refuse to interpret anything that is called with an inappropriate handler. That's just a no brainer.
There will always be a way to obfuscate code to make it look like something else for long enough to get it in the door. You can stop this by refusing to handle things that aren't what they appear to be, and then allowing fine-grained controls on things that are what they appear to be.
Yep. And ease of development for applications was one of the reasons Windows gained in popularity...and is the virus infested whore we know and loathe.
If they want to stay the malware browser of choice, by all means, let them keep on doing what they're doing, because it's working great.
They've got you brainwashed. The first line of defense is the program that's executing the code; it should "know" better than to just run everything that comes along. The second line of defense is the operating system: it should "know" what resources the original program is allowed to access, and limit it to those resources, and shut it the hell down if it starts trying to break out of it's sandbox.
Malware detection and elimination programs are the last line of defense. At this point you've already taken it as a given that your applications and operating system are too stupid not to completely trash themselves, so a third party has to step in and protect the system. And in this situation, they're too stupid. It's a whole culture of incompetence, topped off by ignorant users.
Better error handling means, when you get an error, it fails intelligently, without destabilizing the application, and passes a more informative error message. It doesn't mean the application should try and read the coders mind.
The code should damn well work, or not run at all.
It's microsofts responsibility. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, "Interpreting broken code is a security weakness." Yes it makes things easier for amateur developers(developers, developers) but it's a huge security problem to have a system in place that malware writers can be sure will interpret a piece of innocuous gibberish into a functioning piece of malware.
Java is a good example of this. Java doesn't interpret crap. It is what it is, and it doesn't give a crap if it works or not. It's strongly typed, it's picky as hell about variable initialization...It's a bitchy language for newbies, because it's unforgiving of the most meek typos.
I don't think java is the end all be all...It's certainly not friendly to develop in, and that's given scripting languages (hello php) a huge advantage in the marketplace...Much the same as with unix and microsoft, so it's not surprising to see them continuing down their path.
But in the end, you've got to embrace some maturity and stop bottlefeeding your developers and make them fix their damn code when it doesn't conform to a normal standard.
Well, first off, most console hardware is cheaper to buy than it actually costs to make. I know the Wii is an exception to this, but on the down side, it'll show its age sooner as well.
Second, a good graphics card isn't all that expensive, once you've set down for a good computer. I mean, buying a 400 dollar card when you've dropped three grand already just isn't that big a deal. Having a good computer has a whole world of utility you're not getting from a console, and I can, in my daily life, make most any consumer grade computer weep for mercy, so it pays to get a good one. If all you need is a console, then that's all you need. If however, you need a fast computer, shell a little extra and you can get one that plays games well, on top of it's other uses.
Now, I don't buy bleeding edge much anymore...Processor maybe, but probably not RAM, and certainly not a video card. My needs are suited by second tier gear (two last gen processors > one next gen processor), and the dramatic price difference means I can run a tighter upgrade cycle.
It's the way of the world with tech. Todays treasure is tomorrows trash...and sometimes tomorrow really is tomorrow, for unfortunates who buy on the eve of a price drop (silly iPhone whiners).
You win some, you lose some, especially when you're buying the top of the line.
It's not quite like that...It's more like stacking your deck so you're more likely to get a flush, and less likely to get 3 of a kind.
Ideally card games should be balanced to the point where there is no single card that's so powerful that possessing it is a game winner. WOTC has made a fortune, however, by making sure that people buy tons of cards, on the off chance one of those game winners shows up, and a lot of other card makers have followed suit.
I think the only good thing about this as far as EoJ is concerned is that it becomes all about strategy and none about collecting the damn cards.
Oh I agree, to a degree. I think governments should invest in educating their people, because better educated people are more valuable to the country; they do more complex, more valuable work, that is harder to offshore.
On the other hand, I think they shouldn't push too hard on the math/science quotas. People will work out what works best for them better than the government will. Self interest is a powerful motivator.
Self-sufficiency? Right there you've shown you know nothing about the current world economy. You could make a pencil from materials only gathered from within this country, and only assembled in this country, but it'd cost a dollar, and it'd be no better than one made for 6 cents by a country that allowed open trade. Try to do it all yourself, and you'll end up poor, and economically crippled. That's reality.
Clearly you believe that if we only locked up our borders and never imported anything, then we'd all be rich. God forbid we let someone else do it for less, no way, we have to jack tariffs to the roof to keep people from buying cheap foreign goods, so we can sell our expensive locally produced goods, which will cost an effing fortune because everyone will be jacking up their tariffs to get back at us, making all the things we use to make our products more expensive, and basically killing any chance we have of selling anything overseas.
Lot of people in this country have some serious entitlement issues. Nobody owes you a job, or me, for that matter. And I'm saying this, not as the west coaster you seem to think I am, but as an east coaster who's lived in New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia, South Carolina. I've seen dead industrial towns; textiles, steel, manufacturing. Lived in places steeped in their own decay, in apartments made from the partitioned internals of 100 year old mansions.
We are forced out of those businesses because it's low skill work, for the most part, and instead of adapting to do the things we CAN do better, we wallow in how unfair it is. US Steel and US auto companies are being driven under by the same damn thing: their over-inflated pension funds, dating from a period when you needed many times the number of workers you need today, so you have half (or 1/10th for steel) as many workers paying pensions on all the previous generations retirees, when, to really be profitable, you need to get rid of half the workers you've got, who you're only keeping on the payroll because you need to skim their paychecks to pay the pensions! That's like the government employing people, so their salaries will help shore up Social Security.
The smart thing to do is get the government to pick up the tab, but no, that'd be welfare! But if a business does it, it's only fair. Nevermind that you're killing the business. Like the damn autoworkers strike; I couldn't believe they dared, as bad as the industry is doing, but everybody feels like they're owed something.
So in conclusion, I don't wish ill on anyone. But you can't force businesses to run at a loss, because other countries make the same goods for less. And you can't put tariffs high enough without pushing things back to a time when dishwashers, clothes driers, and second televisions were things that only the super rich could afford. That's just the way economics works. You can try to cheat it for a while, but the backlash is a bitch. Ask Japan about that one. 20 years ago they were going to rule the world in a matter of years. Now their economy has been struggling for years. Why? They did what China's doing; artificially depressed their currency and focused on their exports without taking care of business at home. You can do it for a while, but then it will eat you for lunch.
I repeat: "Using government funding to force produce a glut of science-types is silly. Better to use the money to kick off industries that require them, and let the rest take care of itself."
I love when people just stop reading.
Why don't you read the rest of that sentence, hmmm?
It's not better at it, it's just more inclined to do it. Academia is pretty much geared toward increasing knowledge, and not toward developing profitable technology. It also tends to be cheaper, as most of it's "staff" aren't being paid on the same scale as their commercial counterparts.
And no, not all grants are from the government. The government has, however, been traditionally the best source for money for research into "pure" science. Corporate funding is almost always going to be geared toward a practical application.
It's a supply issue. With drawing, there were just too many people, and the technology was already making the work need a lot less people, so it was easy to outstrip demand.
Contrast with engineering...The supply is limited, and the demand for work is reasonably high. We're absolutely talking about offshoring...Offshoring has made us as a country rich, because everyone offshores stuff to US, because we have the people who can best do the work. By skimming off the best from other countries, we keep that advantage, even without producing them ourselves, so other countries have to come to us.
Make it too hard for the talented people to come here, and they'll stay where they are, and that's not a good thing from our perspective unless we can absolutely crush them in quality, and that's not a given.
It's chicken feed. They could put a lot more into it, and really kick off some interesting stuff in this country. Additionally, a lot of it goes to big established companies, and that stuff always makes me leery, both in terms of efficiency, and in terms of possible kickbacks. Use it to fund research centers at schools; they're relatively cheap, and the research then spreads from there, rather than being locked up in patents.
We need to kick off some sexy new stuff; especially the DoE ought to have a bunch of cash to throw around right now, because we could use some nice advances in that area.
Yea, we all know how research universities are so overflowing with money that they can't even spend it all. Ha.
I went to a research university. Half (or more) the research was corporate funded, with a specific profit motive in mind. Pure science takes the back burner, because the government sees no reason to "waste" a lot of money on science that doesn't have an obvious practical application, and neither does industry.
Commercial research is always geared toward profit...That's their whole reason for doing it. They will ignore things that the PHBs don't think can be effectively marketed.
Pure science research needs to be funded by an entity that doesn't care about the end profitability, but only about the knowledge itself.
See, I agree with that. It goes in line with the last line of my post...Let the government pour money into pure science, and release the results to us under an open license. I've got no problem with that; it's exactly the sort of thing the free market isn't good at funding, but which often turns out to have profit potential anyway. And it creates high end jobs, which is a win-win. Better to use tax money for something like that than fricking corn subsidies.