America did it.
Really? Please provide proof of this. I seriously doubt you can. For starters, much of American laws were based on original UK law and Copyright and Patent had originated with UK. In fact, President Washington, who pushed for LIMITED TIME IP rights, has patent #1. Also, I believe that we provided protection to anyone that put an IP in our country regardless of citizenship. Of course, we did not use other nations IP system. Of course, NO NATION did, even after signing the berne treaty, none had really done a thing about it until the 80's (UK in 1988, and USA in 1989).
Hopefully, the 25 will re-consider this idea and grab a number of the others to be laid off and approach another VC to start a new company. Heck, if smart, try to create 2 new companies out of it.
First, I would look carefully at this. Google is sticking with western companies, specifically those that are based on English law (UK, Australia, Canada, and USA). They recently quit doing French and German. Now, the Chinese are claiming that their copyrights are infringed. Can Google simply drop the books? Seems to be fair, if none have been sold yet. In addition, if it has sold some, AND if they are to pay, then they should pay each book based on what one Chinese company would pay another (which is next to nothing if anything), and in Renminbi. China's fixing of their money, as well as their ignoring the IP theft of western goods, can and should work against them.
Ronald reagan; He is the jackass that W emulated; Lots of debt for no reason and invasion/occupation of other nations for no real reason. Basically, reagan is the start of the destruction of the Republican party, as well as America, Combined with the perversion of decent conservative principles.
And yet, this technology was STARTED in 1960s; Under Kennedy. So, I would thank all the presidents since and including Kennedy who has kept this going. The only thing that reagan will really be known for, will be the beginning of monster deficits for no reason.
Yes, but the question will be, can a UAV equipped with a laser take out other aircrafts and missiles. I mean, you may have an aircraft that is moving at less than 2000 mph with a missile that MAY move at say 4000 mph (Russia's new missiles), vs a UAV that is moving at say 600 mph, but has weapons and intelligence that move at over 100,000 TIMES FASTER AND will have an easier time targeting? I will bet on the slow moving aircraft once the intelligence is improved.
It is time to equip UAVs with this and be able to take out individuals. That would be useful in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. For example, we spot a top AQ leaders, then we take him right away. I like the speed of this as well as the ability to hit small targets. Also useful would be the ability to protect some of our structures. Recently, AQ hit one of our forward bases in Afghanistan that had less than 50 ppl at it. They sent several hundred to attack. A UAV that is in the air that can easily spot and take out enemies in the area would be useful.
MS is hit hard because they have had similar bad ideas, combined with having hired bad developers (and getting worse). But MS is now focused on Security, and is slowly making progress. I fear that if and when they surpass *nix (Linux, BSD, OSX, and some of the smaller ones like Solaris:) ) in security, that *nix will suddenly be slammed with virus and worms. And it will appear to happen overnight, even though it will be possible openings like this that slowly turn the heads of the writers.
Exactly. MS PAID LOTS of companies to switch to IIS. Problem is, that problems continue so a number of companies have quietly switched back to Apache and other servers, since MS only paid for the switch, not for the continued staying on IIS.
Bing will follow a similiar bell curve as more ppl realize that Bing is simply manipulated results. HOWEVER, it will never go back to flatline. The reason is that it is the default for Windows install. Considering that MSN is pretty much the default for Windows and will likely indicate what is likely, then Bing will probably get to about 25, maybe 30 % (due to MS payments) and then will trend back to under 20%. It will continue that way until Google's leadership is turned over to business ppl who will then kill innovation (think IBM, GE, Disney, Intuit, Yahoo, etc).
Actually, both Russia and Canada pollute a lot more than you realize. Keep in mind that they have lots of coal plants and are up north. Though with that said, they are about 1/2 of America, but they are more than Australia (much smaller population in a nearly as large area as Canada). However, I suspect that both Russia and Canada can absorb a lot of jobs and not show the effect since they both have undeveloped hydro capabilities.
You are correct about moving the jobs elsewhere to clean up. That has happened far too much too the west. But, what is needed is to put pressure on all countries that have large emissions. It will either cause the jobs to move (which will drop the emissions), or it will cause that location to change their approach. For example, China might suddenly work hard to put Solar Thermal on their coal plants. For most of the west, we have much cleaner coal than china (apparently, they have some of the worst coal in the world), but our plants are older and less efficient. This would encourage change up to newer more efficient plants along with solar thermal/geo-thermal.
Actually, W left it at.55% of the GDP, while most of NASA life has been around 1% for dems and.9% for republicans. As such, if we really want NASA to get back to where it was prior to W/neo-cons, then we should increase its budget to about 30-32 BILLION.
In fact, china has already said that they going for space. It makes sense. They are putting up MULTIPLE military only space stations (which have NO use except as a weapons platform), as well recently a Chinese general said that they were going into space weapons.
Yes, but the test really were not needed. Look, if you had plans (both bought and stolen) for a car, a bomb, or a rocket, could you not put it together if you had money? Absolutely. China's 3 year is time to refine and test approaches and fill in the gaps of knowledge that are missing and simply piece these things together. The hard part is that by obtaining tech from both countries and trying to mix them, they do not know what will work together well. What so many miss is that China has gotten in just 3 missions what it took USSR and USA a decade of many launches EACH YEAR. They simply substituted 'By hook, or by crock' for expensive research.
Hmmm. Just several years ago, these units did not have the power to run for multiple shots and would not be ready until after 2015. Now, it appears that we have solved the power issue. Chemical storage (batteries) can not do it (high energy, but not enough power). Likewise a chemical approach would not allow for lots of shots (it would be more like 10-20 shots; no more).
What changed? Is there a new supercap coming that has VERY HIGH power storage? Perhaps with high power AND high energy (charge it on the ground and then take the energy up)?
And India is actually quite clean compared to most of developed China. China has the majority of the worse polluted sites in the world and it is increasing exponentially.
Per-Capita has to be one of the WORST ways that I can think to rank it. Just look at Kyoto. It is a TOTAL JOKE. Even now, every nation involved in it is working hard to cheat at it, rather than just do the right thing. Also, just because a nation decides to not control their population should not mean that others should pay for it. Instead, it should be seen as efficiency of GDP AND the size of their state (i.e. tonnes per sq. km). With this approach, the CO2 AND GDP can be easily measured.
Also, in terms of efficiency of CO2 per say $1000 GDP, China is at the absolute bottom. That is related to the fact that they are cutting corners on everything that they can. And if we look at the idea of just CO2 per-capita, then we are all screwed. Nations will cheat on the ppl count, and more importantly, you will find that if everybody on the planet emitted at the level that China CURRENTLY emits it, it will be MORE emissions than we currently do. Worse, China is working to NOT control their emissions. They keep saying that they will lower it, but they do not want to commit to it. Of course, many nations, including CHina, simply break their treaties.
You might want to start to do some buying of that anti pollution tech yourself. Last time I checked USA refused any commitment to lower its pollution at all and was the biggest polluter in the world. First, you have it wrong. America is one of the cleaner countries in the world. And in terms of GDP and square km, we remain towards the top of that clean list. CHINA remains at the total bottom of the POLLUTION LIST.
Secondly, I am guessing that you are thinking in terms of CO2. Well, China surpassed America in terms of total CO2 emissions in late 2006. And they have accelerated even faster. They currently add 1-2 NEW 500 MW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK WITHOUT ANY CO2 OR POLLUTION CONTROL. OTH, America adds one ever couple of months (actually, I think in the last year, we have added only 1-2 new coal plants) and these have most of the pollution controls and even have ways to lower CO2 emissions.
If China wanted to hurt the US it would start shifting its dollar. It isn't a stable currency anymore anyway. The only thing that keeps it alive are foreign investments and that the OPEC trades its oil in $. No one in their right mind seriously thinks the US could even touch China military wise. You are thin stretched as it is fighting some small 3rd world countries. I guess the situation with the oil producing countries isn't that clear, you seem to be picking fights with those who don't want to follow your lead anymore.
The dollar has been hurt BECAUSE of china tying their currency to it. And that is starting to do some major damage to Euro, the yen, Canadian dollar, Australian dollar, Mexican peso, etc, etc, etc. As to 'touching china military wise', did I suggest that? Nope. That is your demented thoughts. I thought that we were insane to have elected W the first time. I was opposed to our invasion/occupation of iraq (and backed by my posts).
I really hope the world will, some distant time in the future maybe, refuse to pay the debts of the USA. All the money you spend without possessing it does not come out of thin air you know, wouldn't other countries stabilize your currency (read: Pay your debts) you'd completely fuck yourself by just printing more money as you do now.
Oh, China and japan are the ones buying our debt to force their money lower against the dollar as well as ALL OTHER FREELY TRADED MONEY. Unless you come from China, or from one of the many 3'rd world countries that have their small money fixed against ours, you will find that when we go into bankruptcy, it will have devastating effects around the world. As it is, America bailed out EU numerous times, and other countries around the world. Each time, America absorbed not just the costs, but the impact of those. When we go under, the western world will not have the ability to absorb that. And china has ZERO desire to do so. As it is, they are far more interested in gaining control.
The difference between Japan and China is that Japan DOES buy from us. Lots. China only buys resources. In fact, we have MANY things that they need. For starters, pollution control from most of the western nations. Yet, they are wanting us to GIVE THEM the tech. With China sitting on 4 TRILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS, they should be buying this and dropping their pollution and even CO2 emission. But, they do not. Japan wants to win at 2 way trade. China is in a cold war with western nations.
At this time, 10% cut is about a 5% cut of historical levels (which was about 1% of GDP). Right now, it is about.5%. The reason is that W/neo-cons effectively cut it 50% over the 8 years.
Do not get me wrong. For the life of me, I do not see this as being the place to cut (like eating our grain seed in late April), BUT, I also do not thing that this particular cut would prevent us from going to Mars. I would place the blame for that on the last 9 years of spending and bad cuts.
In the end, the real question is not the cut. The real question is, what will he replace this with? Will he push towards commercial space COMBINED with Direct (which COULD get by with less money)? Or will he do like a neo-con, do a cut, then push the agency to spend money foolishly?
What scares me the most, is that he may do the later, rather than the previous.
Actually, much of China's Russian tech was NOT licensed. Much of it was out and out stolen according to Russia.
However, we are already talking to all of the ISS partners on future space missions. That esp. includes Russia and ESA.
Finally, neither USSR nor China have ever been communist. They were totalitarian states, with command economy. China remains a totalitarian state, but with about a mix of command and capitalist economies. For example, Chinese gov. still tells all of the major companies what they will do with regard to buying and selling lines of business; recently, Chinese gov. was shooting down a company that was to buy GM's Hummer line.
Slashdot Mirror
America did it.
Really? Please provide proof of this. I seriously doubt you can. For starters, much of American laws were based on original UK law and Copyright and Patent had originated with UK. In fact, President Washington, who pushed for LIMITED TIME IP rights, has patent #1. Also, I believe that we provided protection to anyone that put an IP in our country regardless of citizenship. Of course, we did not use other nations IP system. Of course, NO NATION did, even after signing the berne treaty, none had really done a thing about it until the 80's (UK in 1988, and USA in 1989).
Perhaps more importantly, I notice that it was EU countries ripping off each other to ship goods to the colonies and their territories that caught my eye.
So, really, what proof do you have of this, because, IIRC, you have posted this multiple time.
Hopefully, the 25 will re-consider this idea and grab a number of the others to be laid off and approach another VC to start a new company. Heck, if smart, try to create 2 new companies out of it.
China is works closely with MS and Yahoo. Google does not.
First, I would look carefully at this. Google is sticking with western companies, specifically those that are based on English law (UK, Australia, Canada, and USA). They recently quit doing French and German. Now, the Chinese are claiming that their copyrights are infringed. Can Google simply drop the books? Seems to be fair, if none have been sold yet. In addition, if it has sold some, AND if they are to pay, then they should pay each book based on what one Chinese company would pay another (which is next to nothing if anything), and in Renminbi. China's fixing of their money, as well as their ignoring the IP theft of western goods, can and should work against them.
Ronald reagan;
He is the jackass that W emulated; Lots of debt for no reason and invasion/occupation of other nations for no real reason. Basically, reagan is the start of the destruction of the Republican party, as well as America, Combined with the perversion of decent conservative principles.
And yet, this technology was STARTED in 1960s; Under Kennedy. So, I would thank all the presidents since and including Kennedy who has kept this going. The only thing that reagan will really be known for, will be the beginning of monster deficits for no reason.
Yes, but the question will be, can a UAV equipped with a laser take out other aircrafts and missiles. I mean, you may have an aircraft that is moving at less than 2000 mph with a missile that MAY move at say 4000 mph (Russia's new missiles), vs a UAV that is moving at say 600 mph, but has weapons and intelligence that move at over 100,000 TIMES FASTER AND will have an easier time targeting? I will bet on the slow moving aircraft once the intelligence is improved.
It is time to equip UAVs with this and be able to take out individuals. That would be useful in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. For example, we spot a top AQ leaders, then we take him right away. I like the speed of this as well as the ability to hit small targets. Also useful would be the ability to protect some of our structures. Recently, AQ hit one of our forward bases in Afghanistan that had less than 50 ppl at it. They sent several hundred to attack. A UAV that is in the air that can easily spot and take out enemies in the area would be useful.
MS is hit hard because they have had similar bad ideas, combined with having hired bad developers (and getting worse). But MS is now focused on Security, and is slowly making progress. I fear that if and when they surpass *nix (Linux, BSD, OSX, and some of the smaller ones like Solaris :) ) in security, that *nix will suddenly be slammed with virus and worms. And it will appear to happen overnight, even though it will be possible openings like this that slowly turn the heads of the writers.
This system is already brighter than Palmisano and his staff combined. Probably do a whole lot less damage to the company.
Exactly. MS PAID LOTS of companies to switch to IIS. Problem is, that problems continue so a number of companies have quietly switched back to Apache and other servers, since MS only paid for the switch, not for the continued staying on IIS.
Bing will follow a similiar bell curve as more ppl realize that Bing is simply manipulated results. HOWEVER, it will never go back to flatline. The reason is that it is the default for Windows install. Considering that MSN is pretty much the default for Windows and will likely indicate what is likely, then Bing will probably get to about 25, maybe 30 % (due to MS payments) and then will trend back to under 20%. It will continue that way until Google's leadership is turned over to business ppl who will then kill innovation (think IBM, GE, Disney, Intuit, Yahoo, etc).
However, they did this same strategy with domainNames to get IIS up in rankings in late 2007 through early 2008. How are they doing now?
Actually, both Russia and Canada pollute a lot more than you realize. Keep in mind that they have lots of coal plants and are up north. Though with that said, they are about 1/2 of America, but they are more than Australia (much smaller population in a nearly as large area as Canada). However, I suspect that both Russia and Canada can absorb a lot of jobs and not show the effect since they both have undeveloped hydro capabilities.
You are correct about moving the jobs elsewhere to clean up. That has happened far too much too the west. But, what is needed is to put pressure on all countries that have large emissions. It will either cause the jobs to move (which will drop the emissions), or it will cause that location to change their approach. For example, China might suddenly work hard to put Solar Thermal on their coal plants. For most of the west, we have much cleaner coal than china (apparently, they have some of the worst coal in the world), but our plants are older and less efficient. This would encourage change up to newer more efficient plants along with solar thermal/geo-thermal.
Actually, W left it at .55% of the GDP, while most of NASA life has been around 1% for dems and .9% for republicans. As such, if we really want NASA to get back to where it was prior to W/neo-cons, then we should increase its budget to about 30-32 BILLION.
In fact, china has already said that they going for space. It makes sense. They are putting up MULTIPLE military only space stations (which have NO use except as a weapons platform), as well recently a Chinese general said that they were going into space weapons.
Any dirt on the surface will EXPLODE that theory AND the skin. INSTANTLY.
Yes, but the test really were not needed. Look, if you had plans (both bought and stolen) for a car, a bomb, or a rocket, could you not put it together if you had money? Absolutely. China's 3 year is time to refine and test approaches and fill in the gaps of knowledge that are missing and simply piece these things together. The hard part is that by obtaining tech from both countries and trying to mix them, they do not know what will work together well. What so many miss is that China has gotten in just 3 missions what it took USSR and USA a decade of many launches EACH YEAR. They simply substituted 'By hook, or by crock' for expensive research.
Hmmm. Just several years ago, these units did not have the power to run for multiple shots and would not be ready until after 2015. Now, it appears that we have solved the power issue. Chemical storage (batteries) can not do it (high energy, but not enough power). Likewise a chemical approach would not allow for lots of shots (it would be more like 10-20 shots; no more).
What changed? Is there a new supercap coming that has VERY HIGH power storage? Perhaps with high power AND high energy (charge it on the ground and then take the energy up)?
And India is actually quite clean compared to most of developed China. China has the majority of the worse polluted sites in the world and it is increasing exponentially.
Per-Capita has to be one of the WORST ways that I can think to rank it. Just look at Kyoto. It is a TOTAL JOKE. Even now, every nation involved in it is working hard to cheat at it, rather than just do the right thing. Also, just because a nation decides to not control their population should not mean that others should pay for it. Instead, it should be seen as efficiency of GDP AND the size of their state (i.e. tonnes per sq. km). With this approach, the CO2 AND GDP can be easily measured.
Also, in terms of efficiency of CO2 per say $1000 GDP, China is at the absolute bottom. That is related to the fact that they are cutting corners on everything that they can. And if we look at the idea of just CO2 per-capita, then we are all screwed. Nations will cheat on the ppl count, and more importantly, you will find that if everybody on the planet emitted at the level that China CURRENTLY emits it, it will be MORE emissions than we currently do. Worse, China is working to NOT control their emissions. They keep saying that they will lower it, but they do not want to commit to it. Of course, many nations, including CHina, simply break their treaties.
You might want to start to do some buying of that anti pollution tech yourself. Last time I checked USA refused any commitment to lower its pollution at all and was the biggest polluter in the world.
First, you have it wrong. America is one of the cleaner countries in the world. And in terms of GDP and square km, we remain towards the top of that clean list. CHINA remains at the total bottom of the POLLUTION LIST.
Secondly, I am guessing that you are thinking in terms of CO2. Well, China surpassed America in terms of total CO2 emissions in late 2006. And they have accelerated even faster. They currently add 1-2 NEW 500 MW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK WITHOUT ANY CO2 OR POLLUTION CONTROL. OTH, America adds one ever couple of months (actually, I think in the last year, we have added only 1-2 new coal plants) and these have most of the pollution controls and even have ways to lower CO2 emissions.
If China wanted to hurt the US it would start shifting its dollar. It isn't a stable currency anymore anyway. The only thing that keeps it alive are foreign investments and that the OPEC trades its oil in $. No one in their right mind seriously thinks the US could even touch China military wise. You are thin stretched as it is fighting some small 3rd world countries. I guess the situation with the oil producing countries isn't that clear, you seem to be picking fights with those who don't want to follow your lead anymore.
The dollar has been hurt BECAUSE of china tying their currency to it. And that is starting to do some major damage to Euro, the yen, Canadian dollar, Australian dollar, Mexican peso, etc, etc, etc. As to 'touching china military wise', did I suggest that? Nope. That is your demented thoughts. I thought that we were insane to have elected W the first time. I was opposed to our invasion/occupation of iraq (and backed by my posts).
I really hope the world will, some distant time in the future maybe, refuse to pay the debts of the USA. All the money you spend without possessing it does not come out of thin air you know, wouldn't other countries stabilize your currency (read: Pay your debts) you'd completely fuck yourself by just printing more money as you do now.
Oh, China and japan are the ones buying our debt to force their money lower against the dollar as well as ALL OTHER FREELY TRADED MONEY. Unless you come from China, or from one of the many 3'rd world countries that have their small money fixed against ours, you will find that when we go into bankruptcy, it will have devastating effects around the world. As it is, America bailed out EU numerous times, and other countries around the world. Each time, America absorbed not just the costs, but the impact of those. When we go under, the western world will not have the ability to absorb that. And china has ZERO desire to do so. As it is, they are far more interested in gaining control.
Actually, I am glad to see the 5-10% cut across the board. We need to get control of this deficit.
Interesting about MSFC. BUT, that is the land of Dick Shelby. It will be interesting to see what will happen in congress.
The difference between Japan and China is that Japan DOES buy from us. Lots. China only buys resources. In fact, we have MANY things that they need. For starters, pollution control from most of the western nations. Yet, they are wanting us to GIVE THEM the tech. With China sitting on 4 TRILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS, they should be buying this and dropping their pollution and even CO2 emission. But, they do not. Japan wants to win at 2 way trade. China is in a cold war with western nations.
At this time, 10% cut is about a 5% cut of historical levels (which was about 1% of GDP). Right now, it is about .5%. The reason is that W/neo-cons effectively cut it 50% over the 8 years.
Do not get me wrong. For the life of me, I do not see this as being the place to cut (like eating our grain seed in late April), BUT, I also do not thing that this particular cut would prevent us from going to Mars. I would place the blame for that on the last 9 years of spending and bad cuts.
In the end, the real question is not the cut. The real question is, what will he replace this with? Will he push towards commercial space COMBINED with Direct (which COULD get by with less money)? Or will he do like a neo-con, do a cut, then push the agency to spend money foolishly? What scares me the most, is that he may do the later, rather than the previous.
Actually, much of China's Russian tech was NOT licensed. Much of it was out and out stolen according to Russia.
However, we are already talking to all of the ISS partners on future space missions. That esp. includes Russia and ESA.
Finally, neither USSR nor China have ever been communist. They were totalitarian states, with command economy. China remains a totalitarian state, but with about a mix of command and capitalist economies. For example, Chinese gov. still tells all of the major companies what they will do with regard to buying and selling lines of business; recently, Chinese gov. was shooting down a company that was to buy GM's Hummer line.