Simple than the US based software company can either not do business there or pay whatever fines etc might be levied if that is a choice. Or said company can leave the US and be prevented from doing business here... (yeah right like any sane org would give up this market).
If places like China want to make rules like that they simply risk cutting themselves off from the technology the rest of the world is using - to friggen bad.
With access to modern American made military equipment against a mainland China that had we left them in isolation would have still be working with Soviet WWII era cast offs that even in our current timeline they were still flying into the 80's talking B-29 clones here.
Yes I think its entirely probably that they could have been defeated in an armed conflict. Taiwan would have posses the ability to remotely destroy the mainlands industrial centers while the mainland would posses no means whatsoever of counter measures or counter attack. American sourced vastly superior naval hardware would similarly keep China from landing any conventional forces. Literally Taiwan would be able to destroy the means of production and just wait until starvation forces their surrender.
No it does not affect the integrity. The people do not elect the president states do! if a state wants to risk their franchise that is that states business.
Its not even clear, states have to put the presidential election on a ballot. They could conceivably choose a candidate in their legislatures. In fact that might be a better system
and none of that really matters because half the pages you visit will use google services of some kind, and they will still collect all the information on you they want ( well enough anyway that they can still deliver ad impressions based on which is their actual business).
Censored hands down! The same can be said with the US-Sino trade relationship. The PRC is an abusive authoritarian regime. It functions and continues to exist because WE allowed it access to the modern world.
China would be freer today if Nixon had never gone there. The existence of the modern world isn't a secret you can keep. Its not as if people in the USSR did know about the western world. Its not like they were not actively trying to smuggle in goods and information.
What not allow China to access US networks, not allow China to sell into US markets, not allowing Chinese nationals to attend US universities would do is cripple them economically. Which by now would have turned them into a failed state or let the ROC (having access to purchase US build war machines) to come back in reclaim the mainland.
Seriously what our society has done is act as a collaborator with regard to Chinese oppression. We got cheap plastic BS and place to dump garbage in exchange for selling out our own industry creating a every expanding wealth gap in our own society and enabling three more generations oppression of the Chinese people. It SUCKS and ITS EVIL
and 129K is very good society if you live in any part of fly over country - its perhaps enough to cling by your finger tips to the bottom rung of middle class in Palo Alto.
The first thing we need to get past is the BS definitions of middle class the media and government pushes. He is a definition we should work with. Middle class means you enjoy some level of autonomy. You could afford to leave your job or be fired; you have enough personal assets that you could if need be you could move yourself and your family somewhere else; and you can do all this without jeopardizing your standard of living. I don't care if you live in a McMansion and lease to two Cadillacs. If being unemployed for less than a year or so means you'd have to give these things up - you are in fact not middle class you just look like it superficially. if you don't think you could easily find an equivalent job / more work etc in a short time you are not the renaissance free merchant - you are a vulnerable wage slave.
The reality is people living in say Davenport Iowa earning 129K a year are not interested in moving to Palo Alto for a 129K a year. They know they would in fact enjoy lower standard of living and increased vulnerability in doing so. So they won't take that offer. What does that really mean? It means the suppliers (potential workers) won't make labor available in the market place at that price point. In other words 129K is below market rate. The fact that employeers only offer 129k averages for those positions is because their demand is being satisfied by the 'cheap' labor imports. The vast majority of these H1Bs are exactly what I have described them as "cheap alternative labor."
They'd hire local if they could, but the talent doesn't exist in sufficient numbers at any price point.
I just don't believe it. Sure maybe the talent pool in the region is exhausted but they could certainly hire people away from the midwest or the east coast if they offered enough incentives. They don't need to be non-citizens. Finally if there is no domestic talent why is that?
Could it be because by allowing the mass outsourcing and insourcing of international labor we have allowed the capital owner class to effetively become international tourists? Is that why: they don't invest in our own communities. They don't both developing local talent. They are not working on influencing and funding our educators to create people who can fill other than their sweatshop level needs/?
Right there is no reason to move all but the smallest subset of professional jobs over seas other than seeking lower labor costs.
Sure there are handful of PHD level specialist positions for which there may only exists 100's or few qualified candidates the world over - but that does not describe the vast vast majority of positions available at Microsoft, which they seek to fill with foreign workers.
Global trade imbalances, immigration (legal and not), are the cause of the increasing wealth gap! Liberals and non-populist Conservatives alike need to square that. They are not being honest with the public about their polices and their effects.
Sure right up until Microsoft decides I have to install updates right before meeting. Sorry Windows 10 is a toy. Its simply not appropriate for real work.
must be able to make real-time decisions about the classification level of the information and an individual's ability to access, change, delete, receive, or forward the information based on the credentials of the sending and/or receiving individual, facility, and system."
In other words, the DOD is looking for a classification Clippy.
Only an idiot would reach that conclusion. I would assume they are looking for something along the lines of Symantec / Sophos / others - DLP solutions.
Trust Level - VERY LOW - I don't trust those guys at all as an individual. Now maybe some of their customers do, lenders employers who do credit checks etc but that is because they don't really care about false negatives. As an individual I have had my data leaked endangering my other accounts by two of the big three. I have had wrong information about someone else on my report that was VERY painful to get fixed on at least one.
medical establishments
BAHAHAHA Sorry I have done pen tests for a few big labs - terrible, leaking SSNs and personal data all over the place. Horrid security because they are doing everything as cheaply as possible to maximize profits. As far as the front end providers go - Well I have slightly more personal relationships with my dentist and GP. That helps build a little "trust" As far as hospitals and such goes natural monopolies don't really think about it much because if I am having an emergency - i am going to whatever is near by. Other things I'd take recommendations for the GP or Dentist so I guess those facilities would enjoy some probably misplaced transitive trust.
Banking
- Yes sure I have tons of trust in them which is why me a 1/4 of the country hold on to all our receipts and reconcile / balance our accounts independently; we do that because of all the "Trust". When things get weird like in 2k8/9 we keep significant sums of cash around just in case of bank holidays and spontaneous closing etc - again because of all the trust.
As usual the detective method you want to employ is determined by the type of error you can most tolerate.
IPhone Owner - Higher false positive rate. Lots people who are not rich manage to get their hands on one. So you mistake them for money because they have a phone. Clearly there are still false negatives, even though Apple is considered the luxury brand in the space Samsung for one makes some very nice high end phones as well and some rich people no doubt prefer them.
Ferrari ownership - Higher false negative rate. Lots of very wealthy people don't buy one. They may choose one of many other luxuary auto brands, they may prefer a larger vehicle well appointed by a couch builder and having someone else do the driving. Now I am sure there are some false positives. There are lots Italian car enthusiasts out there and there are some "affordable" 70/80's vintage Ferraris the owners most likely have some means but maybe are not in the top 25%. My Alfa Spider shares some power mirror stuff with them, I just paid $160 for a new power mirror switch. Owning these things isn't cheap, I can only imagine what engine parts must run for them given the limited production; I have not really looked. The cars themselves though show up on bring-a-trailer from time to time in with integer 5 digit price tags.
I am with you on tarrifs generally. When it comes to trading with the EU, Canada, South Korea, Japan etc.
I just think we should adopt a cold war trade hostile stance toward China for all the same reasons we maintain sanctions on Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Russia etc.
The Chinese government is not a just one, they are not our friends, they are not really "neutral" actors either they are hostiles; and we are foolish to pretend they are not.
Sears - wont do anything unless someone with a massive amount of capital - enough to probably just start a new chain - steps in Sears is done. They literally could not put product on the shelf they knew they'd be able to sell last Christmas season because they have no-cash and nobody will extend them significant credit at this point.
Sears can't jump on anything - I don't even see how they can escape the debt/death spiral they are in. If I still owned any SHLD - I'd be selling! I already took my losses their years ago and I am glad I did, because they'd only have got bigger.
I know everyone is blaming Bain in this thread but those who are should consider something else. The Cynical Critic is correct the market was shrinking and they had not been able to dominate the online space. Sometimes the only way a business can survive in a shrinking market is to shrink itself. Provide the size of the market has a floor and for the foreseeable future brink and mortar toys probably do/did; there is nothing "wrong" with downsizing to match the new market. The trouble is as a public company that is really hard to do. Shareholders just don't want to hear - "well margins and revenues will never be what they were in the '90s and early 2000's but we can still turn a profit" - the demand growth or they take their money elsewhere.
Going private is one way to solve that problem. You can argue about they way Bain went about it but I thin Cynical Critic is correct they would have just turned into the walking zombie that is Sears a few years down the line from here if they'd simply continued as they were. Sears by the way is probably doomed.
Regarding what you wrote about spaces. I am not sure any of us have enough facts to know how the money choices were made. At the end of the day Toys 'R Us forgot their business model.
Get kids in the door let them "experience" the toys and than beg mommy to buy them. There is no ad you will ever place that will motivate a parent to part with their money as effective as their kid staring up at them with big eyes clutching something they want desperately can do.
That was key, no eCommerce site can match that and even Amazon's largely cost prohibitive prime-now does not offer the level if instant gratification kids want and parents want to afford their children on occasion.
Or you know ensure the poor folks can actually find a job of some kind making something that does not require an advanced degree -- that.
Or you know slowing the out flow of US capital to the Chinese who by the way are run by a party that -
Has an overtly racist platform
Has an overtly nationalist platform
Is Anti-immigrant
Is anti-free expression
Is anti-freedom of religion
engages in human rights violations and not the BS ones the UN invents the kind virtually every agrees are unacceptable
Seeks to dominate world affairs often to our nation's detriment
Yet for whatever reason Liberals and many Conservatives are willing to just excuse all of that! Seriously folks there is no argument that a US-Sino trade war will have negative economic effects in the short term. In the long term however the soon we terminate US-Sino trade relations the better off we will be. Its down right silly to argue US-Sino trade has been good for our nation as a whole. By dealing with them we have ceded the moral high ground even if few will admit it. We have hollowed out strategically important domestic industries. We have cause massive economic domestic dislocations that should have taken place over the course of a hundred years or more but got compressed into a few decades, much faster than workers could adapt. We have probably set back the cause of real freedom in China in favor an ever so slightly gentler communist party - kleptocracy hybrid; when we could have been supporting the ROC and not handing a massive and insurmountable economic advantage to the PRC. We have increased the wealth gap by allowing capital to be invested in Chinese product rather than spent employing US labor.
What did we get for all that? Cheap disposable plastic BS at rock bottom prices and cheap electronics. Hope that 60" TV is $20 smart phone is worth all that!
Seriously if some of you people whichever side of the political isle you happen to be on could put down your kool-aide for a short while and really take a hard look around; I think you'd realize US-Sino relations really run counter to ANY values that have ever been described as "American". Tump is right about this one!
Because the technology is Good. That is step 0. Sure it might not be ready to be the solution for everyone. Once the lock issues of servless are ironed out and they will be - just look at what happened with virtualization it will be a good move.
And that fine. I think most of the 'we need to host it all ourselves' arguments usually boil down to some server monkey who has not evolved in the past 15 years trying to hang onto his job. Hint to those guys - smarten up rather than pushing multi-million dollar cap-exs on your organization so seem important consider that is money they could be investing in salary for you.
The thing medium and larger cloud infrastructure really does not require less people to manage than that 16 x 16 server room filled wall to wall with four posters did! If you are doing it right you have agreements with vendors that need to be kept current. You have backups and failover that still need to be tested. You have process to replicate data and virtual machines / containers between vendors? Got multiple vendors right?
The realize challenge is actually the next gen technologies. Lambda/EC3 serverless type stuff. That is super super cool way to build out your infrastructure. It takes a lot of the effort of maintaining systems out of your hands. No updating a pushing containers. Hopefully not more trying to keep up with the DevOps du jour hotness. - On the other hand its the wild west as far as building any redundancy across the major providers let alone anyone else. Even if Google or Microsoft can also run your python lambda set etc - what do without Amazon's IAM? How do replace DynamoDB with something else. Of course there will eventually be standards but right now Amazon, Google, and MS are all shooting for vendor lockin so it will take time.
Airspace has been defined as a public good. Many of us can't fully enjoy the use of our property because of air space considerations and have to put up will all kinds of noise pollution from over flights. To frigging bad if the airlines suffer because someone else wants to enjoy the use of the public good.
Frankly the World would be much much better off without the airline industry. The risk of invasive species and pathogens spreading would be greatly reduced. A significant amount of pollution would be cut.
You have to consider the scope though - Both Random Slashdotter's lack of concern and Theo's worry are justified in my opinion.
Theo: is developing an operating system that is supposed to be essentially the most secure choice. He has a user base that will be deploying it on high value targets. High enough value that a state actor or other well funded well connected group might take interest. Such groups would be capable and willing to develop situationally specific malware + exploit code. If I was using BSD/Intel to run my uranium enrichment process - I'd worry.
On the other hand as far as Random Slashdotter goes - He is probably correct that we won't see this as a metasploit module or meterpreter plug-in anytime soon. Its debatable as to if these exploits could be used in the 'wild' without being highly customized for the target by people who have advanced math/comp sci degrees. In other words even if your bitcoin wallet stored on that VPS is worth few hundred thousand its likely impractical to go after you in this way. So being somewhat dismissive about these attacks as an individual is justified as well.
Not in the EU and GDPR asside I think as a general mater yes you should loose are your rights at time of death. You body should be considered the property of either your next of kin or whoever you will it to.
Do you understand that the environment does not respect borders?
And yet you can look at a lot of international boarders and littler see the environmental impacts of their polices from SPACE. So actually to a large degree it does.
A wall doesn't keep out greenhouse gases
That much is true but Mountain ranges other barriers do provide a significant obstruction of smog and other pollutants. By a large an increase in greenhouse gas content won't have severely negative impacts for the United States. There will be some effects but nothing that can't be adapted to and it may even prove to be of some benefit.
lead found off the South bank of a river is also found off the North bank of a river
Yet contaminates of that nature rarely flow UP stream. So other than some places on the Mexico boarder; also of minimal concern.
Sorry your arguments are simply not convincing. A fortress America policy really does likely promise our people the best future.
f you're so stupid that you think protecting the environment will sacrifice the well-being of your children, then your children would be better off if you slit your own throat.
No see the difference between you me and you apparently is that I actually understand ecology, economics, and don't make purely emotional decisions. Protecting the environment really comes down to a function of people per area. There really isn't any bigger driver of environmental impact. Yes I want a country where there are large wildreness areas where my kids can enjoy. Where we maintain a little bio-diversity. Where we they can go hiking and fishing etc. Guess what carbon foot print has very little to do with that.
Population has EVERYTHING to do with it. The biggest threat to our environment today in the United States is IMMIGRATION! Don't care if your Republican, Democrat, other. If you not in favor of curbing immigration you are on the wrong side of the environmental issue whatever other policy you might support.
I'm also haunted by the thought that after I'm gone my grandchildren or great-grandchildren will be cursing me for being such a selfish prick.
Ah but will they? For example lets say I don't forgo all kinds of economic opportunities in the name of reducing my carbon foot print - Might my grandchildren be glad I did not squander the family wealth on feel good BS that was likely to have little impact and was able to leave them something as a result?
The idea for 'us' at least the climate change is really a problem assumes we are going to go down the path of other self destructive policy like allow immigration in unlimited numbers and continue to play super cops all around the world. We have the capability and opportunity to isolate ourselves and our children form most of the negative effects. I for one think its pretty scummy a lot our political class A) refuses to do it and B) tries the paint folks who want to look out for our own children rather than some else's as villains.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple than the US based software company can either not do business there or pay whatever fines etc might be levied if that is a choice. Or said company can leave the US and be prevented from doing business here... (yeah right like any sane org would give up this market).
If places like China want to make rules like that they simply risk cutting themselves off from the technology the rest of the world is using - to friggen bad.
With access to modern American made military equipment against a mainland China that had we left them in isolation would have still be working with Soviet WWII era cast offs that even in our current timeline they were still flying into the 80's talking B-29 clones here.
Yes I think its entirely probably that they could have been defeated in an armed conflict. Taiwan would have posses the ability to remotely destroy the mainlands industrial centers while the mainland would posses no means whatsoever of counter measures or counter attack. American sourced vastly superior naval hardware would similarly keep China from landing any conventional forces. Literally Taiwan would be able to destroy the means of production and just wait until starvation forces their surrender.
No it does not affect the integrity. The people do not elect the president states do! if a state wants to risk their franchise that is that states business.
Its not even clear, states have to put the presidential election on a ballot. They could conceivably choose a candidate in their legislatures. In fact that might be a better system
and none of that really matters because half the pages you visit will use google services of some kind, and they will still collect all the information on you they want ( well enough anyway that they can still deliver ad impressions based on which is their actual business).
Censored hands down! The same can be said with the US-Sino trade relationship. The PRC is an abusive authoritarian regime. It functions and continues to exist because WE allowed it access to the modern world.
China would be freer today if Nixon had never gone there. The existence of the modern world isn't a secret you can keep. Its not as if people in the USSR did know about the western world. Its not like they were not actively trying to smuggle in goods and information.
What not allow China to access US networks, not allow China to sell into US markets, not allowing Chinese nationals to attend US universities would do is cripple them economically. Which by now would have turned them into a failed state or let the ROC (having access to purchase US build war machines) to come back in reclaim the mainland.
Seriously what our society has done is act as a collaborator with regard to Chinese oppression. We got cheap plastic BS and place to dump garbage in exchange for selling out our own industry creating a every expanding wealth gap in our own society and enabling three more generations oppression of the Chinese people. It SUCKS and ITS EVIL
and 129K is very good society if you live in any part of fly over country - its perhaps enough to cling by your finger tips to the bottom rung of middle class in Palo Alto.
The first thing we need to get past is the BS definitions of middle class the media and government pushes. He is a definition we should work with. Middle class means you enjoy some level of autonomy. You could afford to leave your job or be fired; you have enough personal assets that you could if need be you could move yourself and your family somewhere else; and you can do all this without jeopardizing your standard of living. I don't care if you live in a McMansion and lease to two Cadillacs. If being unemployed for less than a year or so means you'd have to give these things up - you are in fact not middle class you just look like it superficially. if you don't think you could easily find an equivalent job / more work etc in a short time you are not the renaissance free merchant - you are a vulnerable wage slave.
The reality is people living in say Davenport Iowa earning 129K a year are not interested in moving to Palo Alto for a 129K a year. They know they would in fact enjoy lower standard of living and increased vulnerability in doing so. So they won't take that offer. What does that really mean? It means the suppliers (potential workers) won't make labor available in the market place at that price point. In other words 129K is below market rate. The fact that employeers only offer 129k averages for those positions is because their demand is being satisfied by the 'cheap' labor imports. The vast majority of these H1Bs are exactly what I have described them as "cheap alternative labor."
They'd hire local if they could, but the talent doesn't exist in sufficient numbers at any price point.
I just don't believe it. Sure maybe the talent pool in the region is exhausted but they could certainly hire people away from the midwest or the east coast if they offered enough incentives. They don't need to be non-citizens. Finally if there is no domestic talent why is that?
Could it be because by allowing the mass outsourcing and insourcing of international labor we have allowed the capital owner class to effetively become international tourists? Is that why: they don't invest in our own communities. They don't both developing local talent. They are not working on influencing and funding our educators to create people who can fill other than their sweatshop level needs /?
Right there is no reason to move all but the smallest subset of professional jobs over seas other than seeking lower labor costs.
Sure there are handful of PHD level specialist positions for which there may only exists 100's or few qualified candidates the world over - but that does not describe the vast vast majority of positions available at Microsoft, which they seek to fill with foreign workers.
Global trade imbalances, immigration (legal and not), are the cause of the increasing wealth gap! Liberals and non-populist Conservatives alike need to square that. They are not being honest with the public about their polices and their effects.
Get a new Surface, and your problems will vanish.
Sure right up until Microsoft decides I have to install updates right before meeting. Sorry Windows 10 is a toy. Its simply not appropriate for real work.
must be able to make real-time decisions about the classification level of the information and an individual's ability to access, change, delete, receive, or forward the information based on the credentials of the sending and/or receiving individual, facility, and system."
In other words, the DOD is looking for a classification Clippy.
Only an idiot would reach that conclusion. I would assume they are looking for something along the lines of Symantec / Sophos / others - DLP solutions.
Credit agencies
Trust Level - VERY LOW - I don't trust those guys at all as an individual. Now maybe some of their customers do, lenders employers who do credit checks etc but that is because they don't really care about false negatives. As an individual I have had my data leaked endangering my other accounts by two of the big three. I have had wrong information about someone else on my report that was VERY painful to get fixed on at least one.
medical establishments
BAHAHAHA Sorry I have done pen tests for a few big labs - terrible, leaking SSNs and personal data all over the place. Horrid security because they are doing everything as cheaply as possible to maximize profits. As far as the front end providers go - Well I have slightly more personal relationships with my dentist and GP. That helps build a little "trust" As far as hospitals and such goes natural monopolies don't really think about it much because if I am having an emergency - i am going to whatever is near by. Other things I'd take recommendations for the GP or Dentist so I guess those facilities would enjoy some probably misplaced transitive trust.
Banking
- Yes sure I have tons of trust in them which is why me a 1/4 of the country hold on to all our receipts and reconcile / balance our accounts independently; we do that because of all the "Trust". When things get weird like in 2k8/9 we keep significant sums of cash around just in case of bank holidays and spontaneous closing etc - again because of all the trust.
As usual the detective method you want to employ is determined by the type of error you can most tolerate.
IPhone Owner - Higher false positive rate. Lots people who are not rich manage to get their hands on one. So you mistake them for money because they have a phone. Clearly there are still false negatives, even though Apple is considered the luxury brand in the space Samsung for one makes some very nice high end phones as well and some rich people no doubt prefer them.
Ferrari ownership - Higher false negative rate. Lots of very wealthy people don't buy one. They may choose one of many other luxuary auto brands, they may prefer a larger vehicle well appointed by a couch builder and having someone else do the driving. Now I am sure there are some false positives. There are lots Italian car enthusiasts out there and there are some "affordable" 70/80's vintage Ferraris the owners most likely have some means but maybe are not in the top 25%. My Alfa Spider shares some power mirror stuff with them, I just paid $160 for a new power mirror switch. Owning these things isn't cheap, I can only imagine what engine parts must run for them given the limited production; I have not really looked. The cars themselves though show up on bring-a-trailer from time to time in with integer 5 digit price tags.
I am with you on tarrifs generally. When it comes to trading with the EU, Canada, South Korea, Japan etc.
I just think we should adopt a cold war trade hostile stance toward China for all the same reasons we maintain sanctions on Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Russia etc.
The Chinese government is not a just one, they are not our friends, they are not really "neutral" actors either they are hostiles; and we are foolish to pretend they are not.
Sears - wont do anything unless someone with a massive amount of capital - enough to probably just start a new chain - steps in Sears is done. They literally could not put product on the shelf they knew they'd be able to sell last Christmas season because they have no-cash and nobody will extend them significant credit at this point.
Sears can't jump on anything - I don't even see how they can escape the debt/death spiral they are in. If I still owned any SHLD - I'd be selling! I already took my losses their years ago and I am glad I did, because they'd only have got bigger.
I know everyone is blaming Bain in this thread but those who are should consider something else. The Cynical Critic is correct the market was shrinking and they had not been able to dominate the online space. Sometimes the only way a business can survive in a shrinking market is to shrink itself. Provide the size of the market has a floor and for the foreseeable future brink and mortar toys probably do/did; there is nothing "wrong" with downsizing to match the new market. The trouble is as a public company that is really hard to do. Shareholders just don't want to hear - "well margins and revenues will never be what they were in the '90s and early 2000's but we can still turn a profit" - the demand growth or they take their money elsewhere.
Going private is one way to solve that problem. You can argue about they way Bain went about it but I thin Cynical Critic is correct they would have just turned into the walking zombie that is Sears a few years down the line from here if they'd simply continued as they were. Sears by the way is probably doomed.
BINGO
Regarding what you wrote about spaces. I am not sure any of us have enough facts to know how the money choices were made. At the end of the day Toys 'R Us forgot their business model.
Get kids in the door let them "experience" the toys and than beg mommy to buy them. There is no ad you will ever place that will motivate a parent to part with their money as effective as their kid staring up at them with big eyes clutching something they want desperately can do.
That was key, no eCommerce site can match that and even Amazon's largely cost prohibitive prime-now does not offer the level if instant gratification kids want and parents want to afford their children on occasion.
Or you know ensure the poor folks can actually find a job of some kind making something that does not require an advanced degree -- that.
Or you know slowing the out flow of US capital to the Chinese who by the way are run by a party that -
Has an overtly racist platform
Has an overtly nationalist platform
Is Anti-immigrant
Is anti-free expression
Is anti-freedom of religion
engages in human rights violations and not the BS ones the UN invents the kind virtually every agrees are unacceptable
Seeks to dominate world affairs often to our nation's detriment
Yet for whatever reason Liberals and many Conservatives are willing to just excuse all of that! Seriously folks there is no argument that a US-Sino trade war will have negative economic effects in the short term. In the long term however the soon we terminate US-Sino trade relations the better off we will be. Its down right silly to argue US-Sino trade has been good for our nation as a whole. By dealing with them we have ceded the moral high ground even if few will admit it. We have hollowed out strategically important domestic industries. We have cause massive economic domestic dislocations that should have taken place over the course of a hundred years or more but got compressed into a few decades, much faster than workers could adapt. We have probably set back the cause of real freedom in China in favor an ever so slightly gentler communist party - kleptocracy hybrid; when we could have been supporting the ROC and not handing a massive and insurmountable economic advantage to the PRC. We have increased the wealth gap by allowing capital to be invested in Chinese product rather than spent employing US labor.
What did we get for all that? Cheap disposable plastic BS at rock bottom prices and cheap electronics. Hope that 60" TV is $20 smart phone is worth all that!
Seriously if some of you people whichever side of the political isle you happen to be on could put down your kool-aide for a short while and really take a hard look around; I think you'd realize US-Sino relations really run counter to ANY values that have ever been described as "American". Tump is right about this one!
Because the technology is Good. That is step 0. Sure it might not be ready to be the solution for everyone. Once the lock issues of servless are ironed out and they will be - just look at what happened with virtualization it will be a good move.
And that fine. I think most of the 'we need to host it all ourselves' arguments usually boil down to some server monkey who has not evolved in the past 15 years trying to hang onto his job. Hint to those guys - smarten up rather than pushing multi-million dollar cap-exs on your organization so seem important consider that is money they could be investing in salary for you.
The thing medium and larger cloud infrastructure really does not require less people to manage than that 16 x 16 server room filled wall to wall with four posters did! If you are doing it right you have agreements with vendors that need to be kept current. You have backups and failover that still need to be tested. You have process to replicate data and virtual machines / containers between vendors? Got multiple vendors right?
The realize challenge is actually the next gen technologies. Lambda/EC3 serverless type stuff. That is super super cool way to build out your infrastructure. It takes a lot of the effort of maintaining systems out of your hands. No updating a pushing containers. Hopefully not more trying to keep up with the DevOps du jour hotness. - On the other hand its the wild west as far as building any redundancy across the major providers let alone anyone else. Even if Google or Microsoft can also run your python lambda set etc - what do without Amazon's IAM? How do replace DynamoDB with something else. Of course there will eventually be standards but right now Amazon, Google, and MS are all shooting for vendor lockin so it will take time.
Airspace has been defined as a public good. Many of us can't fully enjoy the use of our property because of air space considerations and have to put up will all kinds of noise pollution from over flights. To frigging bad if the airlines suffer because someone else wants to enjoy the use of the public good.
Frankly the World would be much much better off without the airline industry. The risk of invasive species and pathogens spreading would be greatly reduced. A significant amount of pollution would be cut.
You have to consider the scope though - Both Random Slashdotter's lack of concern and Theo's worry are justified in my opinion.
Theo: is developing an operating system that is supposed to be essentially the most secure choice. He has a user base that will be deploying it on high value targets. High enough value that a state actor or other well funded well connected group might take interest. Such groups would be capable and willing to develop situationally specific malware + exploit code. If I was using BSD/Intel to run my uranium enrichment process - I'd worry.
On the other hand as far as Random Slashdotter goes - He is probably correct that we won't see this as a metasploit module or meterpreter plug-in anytime soon. Its debatable as to if these exploits could be used in the 'wild' without being highly customized for the target by people who have advanced math/comp sci degrees. In other words even if your bitcoin wallet stored on that VPS is worth few hundred thousand its likely impractical to go after you in this way. So being somewhat dismissive about these attacks as an individual is justified as well.
Not in the EU and GDPR asside I think as a general mater yes you should loose are your rights at time of death. You body should be considered the property of either your next of kin or whoever you will it to.
Do you understand that the environment does not respect borders?
And yet you can look at a lot of international boarders and littler see the environmental impacts of their polices from SPACE. So actually to a large degree it does.
A wall doesn't keep out greenhouse gases
That much is true but Mountain ranges other barriers do provide a significant obstruction of smog and other pollutants. By a large an increase in greenhouse gas content won't have severely negative impacts for the United States. There will be some effects but nothing that can't be adapted to and it may even prove to be of some benefit.
lead found off the South bank of a river is also found off the North bank of a river
Yet contaminates of that nature rarely flow UP stream. So other than some places on the Mexico boarder; also of minimal concern.
Sorry your arguments are simply not convincing. A fortress America policy really does likely promise our people the best future.
f you're so stupid that you think protecting the environment will sacrifice the well-being of your children, then your children would be better off if you slit your own throat.
No see the difference between you me and you apparently is that I actually understand ecology, economics, and don't make purely emotional decisions. Protecting the environment really comes down to a function of people per area. There really isn't any bigger driver of environmental impact. Yes I want a country where there are large wildreness areas where my kids can enjoy. Where we maintain a little bio-diversity. Where we they can go hiking and fishing etc. Guess what carbon foot print has very little to do with that.
Population has EVERYTHING to do with it. The biggest threat to our environment today in the United States is IMMIGRATION! Don't care if your Republican, Democrat, other. If you not in favor of curbing immigration you are on the wrong side of the environmental issue whatever other policy you might support.
I'm also haunted by the thought that after I'm gone my grandchildren or great-grandchildren will be cursing me for being such a selfish prick.
Ah but will they? For example lets say I don't forgo all kinds of economic opportunities in the name of reducing my carbon foot print - Might my grandchildren be glad I did not squander the family wealth on feel good BS that was likely to have little impact and was able to leave them something as a result?
The idea for 'us' at least the climate change is really a problem assumes we are going to go down the path of other self destructive policy like allow immigration in unlimited numbers and continue to play super cops all around the world. We have the capability and opportunity to isolate ourselves and our children form most of the negative effects. I for one think its pretty scummy a lot our political class A) refuses to do it and B) tries the paint folks who want to look out for our own children rather than some else's as villains.