On another note, cue the anti-french sentiment from a post-terror american centric peanut gallery... But at least this gives hope that the USA isn't the most litigious country in the world. Maybe you aren't #1 in everything after all.;)
That's a little trite. One has nothing to do with the other, but it is interesting how laws like this in other countries don't generate the kneejerk reaction they do in the US. The supposedly liberal France and Canada both have such a law. Where are all the open-minded, rights-protecting leaders of such countries when those laws were passed?
Point is every country has some stupid laws. And we Americans have been laughing at the French since looooooong before 9/11. That probably started sometime in 1939 or 1940 at the latest.;)
It appears that dust covering the solar panels is only one of a number of factors which will end up rendering the mars rover a paperweight.
The dust on the solar panels appears to be complicated by the fact that the batteries "lose capactity" and (probably most importantly) the sun moves past the latitude where the rover is located. Just like days get shorter in the winter...
What do you expect from the land of the 35-hour work week? 5 more hours could have made useful solar cells. Shame, shame.
99% of these lawsuits that people file against doctors that supposedly caused 'brain damage' to children when they were born are completly bogus. The fact that you child was born with down syndrome has just about as much to do with the doctor that delivered him\her as the sex of that child does.
I imagine this is your educated medical opinion, huh? For what it's worth, Down's syndrome is caused by trisomy 21 (that's having three of the 21st chromosome). It's never caused by birth trauma, and I know of no suits that have challenged as such. However, Cerebral Palsy is effectively a stroke suffered by the fetus/infant during the birth process. This is almost always caused by birth trauma, and in many of these cases this is due to medical negligence/incompetence.
The total crap part is that you can sue ANYTIME after birth and claim that the doctor that delivered you caused any problems that you have now. I personally talked to a doctor that is being sued by some parents because their child didnt get into the college they were planning on, so they sued the doctor for causing long lasting brain damage 18 years after the birth. The really sad part is the doctor lost the lawsuit and is now repsonsible for paying millions of dollars of damages to the family. And let me say, this is a totaly normal kid who simply didnt get high enough grades on his entrance exams to a college, not some highly deformed retarded human being.
I don't know what sort of sob stories your doctor friend told you, but one can usually tell cerebral palsy from a dumb kid. Just because the jury screwed up in that case doesn't mean that all doctors should get off the hook in all cases for screwing up.
I'm sure that the jury system in the US doesn't help, but don't expect your doctor buddy to tell you the whole truth, as he's just as biased as the plaintiffs.
Think that's bad? Imagine how you would be treated as a lawyer! Once they find out you're a lawyer many doctors will run ten times as many tests as they otherwise would. It pays to keep your mouth shut (or even lie) about your profession.
Um, good? In other words, doctors will exercise more diligence and generally do things to avoid getting sued, namely screwing up. I think I'll tell them all I'm a lawyer, thanks for the good idea!
Because of how businesses act. We don't assume anything we simply look around us and see that people with MBA have a very different moral outlook then we do.
How many businesses do you have an intimate working knowledge of? SCO maybe? Only ones in the news? You have to realize, this is self selecting - you don't hear about all the companies who do nothing wrong, and treat both their customers and shareholders well, and compete fairly with their competitors.
Does having an MBA make you evil? Maybe not. Maybe people who are already evil are attracted to the MBA degree and position. Who knows.
If you work at a large institution you know who the MBAs are. You know how they talk and act. No assumptions are required.
That's a mindless overgeneralization. How many MBA's do you actually personally know? The fact that this is tolerated and actually modded insightful is stunning. Substitute any other group of people and people would condemn statements like that.
Sorry, I was looking at the academic discounts. Looking there, I can configure around $2900.
Me too, but I decided to be fair and quote the "anybody" prices. With academic discount, I got my 15" with superdrive, airport extreme, 512 MB RAM, and Applecare for $2240.;)
The Apple with 1 GB ram and 17" screen and an 80GB 5400 RPM HDD is $3500. Compare to Acer at about $1500, and this isn't even comparable.
Yes, yes, we all realize there are reasons to prefer a powerbook - and I'm writing this on one, so any followup flames from my Mac comrades are misdirected - but 17" apples and this machine aren't even remotely in the same price point, as the Apple costs double.
So a major city has it. Seems to me the only people who would really gain anything are people in rural areas. I get > 3Mbps with my cable line, more than 3 times as fast for about the same price. Although, I can see it being great as a proof-of-concept...
First, you have to be damned rural not to have cable, so it's not really *novel* for that many people. That said, this offering sounds pretty good, and you don't have to get cable with it (if you don't want cable TV, or if you have DirecTV for example). It also brings another competitor to the party, which is always good - particularly since DSL seems to be losing the broadband war in a lot of ways.
From a lot of standpoints, this is a good thing. Let's put it this way - it's the only way to get real broadband for $30/month, without having to buy another product first. Well, I guess power, but I think I can assume everyone's got that, even with the pedantic slashdot crowd.
Ham Radio will interfere with it severely, and there won't be a damn thing the provider can do because it's under FCC part 15, which must accept any harmful interference, especially from PROPERLY LICENSED services. Of course, the same rules will also hold the power company for any interference caused to the amateur radio service. Don't expect this to be available for long. Maybe now everybody will see that it doesn't work and let the abomination die like it should.
Or we could just kill all you annoying Ham radio trolls and be done with all the problems.
Speak of an abomination dying like it should, sounds like Ham radio's time...
As Pepsi launches a new promotion... one in three bottle caps on specially marked bottles will win a free SCO license. Pepsi estimates that 90% of the wining bottlecaps will go unused because most of their market doesn't know what Linux even is...
I bet most Pepsi customers think Linux is that lady who sang the LOTR:ROTK song that won the Oscar on Sunday.
I'm not sure how much of a fossil bacteria-like creatures would leave behind. There might have been life, but still be no discernible fossils (even assuming that fossils would have been preserved). Chemical signature would be more likely method of identification. Then again, we might find fossils and not even recognize them! Life need not be organic. For example, A.G. Cairns-Smith's book "Genetic Takeover and the mineral origins of life" argues that the first forms of life on earth were colloidal clay organisms without organic chemistry. If Cairns-Smith is correct, then perhaps we should be looking for something like that on Mars insteI'm not sure how much of a fossil bacteria-like creatures would leave behind. There might have been life, but still be no discernible fossils (even assuming that fossils would have been preserved). Chemical signature would be more likely method of identification. Then again, we might find fossils and not even recognize them! Life need not be organic. For example, A.G. Cairns-Smith's book "Genetic Takeover and the mineral origins of life" argues that the first forms of life on earth were colloidal clay organisms without organic chemistry. If Cairns-Smith is correct, then perhaps we should be looking for something like that on Mars instead
USSR collapsed not because of the military spending spree (they were spending A LOT during all the time of their existence, and Military Industry was providing TONS of jobs
Certainly true, but it's somewhat empty jobs, as they didn't contribute to GDP, really. I mean, the Sov's never sold that much of their equipmnent. As such, it was a drain on the economy, and diverted money that could have been spent on other infrastructure or, say, food. For a modern example, see N. Korea - spends all their money on military while people starve. Sure, the military's the biggest employer - but that doesn't help anyone else.
The real reason for the collapse was the death of the Communist ideology in the population's minds. Thus, there was no stimulus to work well and invent.
I completely agree, that's why the system didn't work.
Such an attitude can't sustain participating in a technological race. Certainly, there were inventors and scientists who have worked for the sake of it, but it was not enough. Thus, the quality of manufacturing, ergonomics and comfort&convenience were very low et al.
That's the key point I think - sustain. I completely agree that the lack of incentive held back their economy, and of course the inherently inefficiency of central planning. I simply think that the arms race (and the spending that accompanied it) brought on the end earlier than it would have.
This was what killed the economy and not the arms race.
Sure, like I said, I don't disagree in the least. To me, it's like someone with AIDS who gets a cold and dies. Technically, it's the cold virus that killed them - but really they died of AIDS. Same here - I believe the Sov's were killed by the arms race - but they died of a completely broken economy like you mention.
Even if we do have new jobs created, we don't know when they will be created or in what field. In the meantime, people have mortgages to pay and mouths to feed. You admit yourself that we are not good at getting rid of jobs painlessly. Shouldn't we get better at it before we embrace the trend whole-heartedly?
That's true, and what I was addressing was the macroeconomic side of things, where generalities are the norm. As such, I think the US economy is generally OK with, and more likely depends on, labor market turnover and the trade of low-tech jobs for high-tech jobs.
I admit that this rings hollow if it's your job that got cut (for example, auto manufacturing). Usually, people can retrain slightly and find another similar job that didn't get cut. Honestly, who has the same job for their entire lives anymore? I think everyone will have to retrain at some point, or more likely continually train.
The one exception to my analysis above is when a large employer pulls out of a small town, devastating the population and sending unemployment up to 50% overnight (see Flint, MI). I fully realize how terrible this is, and I believe this is a situation where government should get involved. I think that state and federal governments should match funds with local governments to attract new industries to small towns that lose primary employers. But the answer still isn't protectionism, which is implicitly the usual answer to the "offshoring" problem for most people.
BTW, a soviet style implosion isn't out of the question. Russia may be the future of America, a country ruled by oligarchs and plutocrats. Unless things change, I'd say it could happen as early as 2025.
It is of course impossible to prove such a statement either way, but I would bet against it. America's always been ruled by oligarchs and plutocrats, I hate to say, and I would say now less than ever. Two presidents in the last 20 years came from nothing (Carter and Clinton), and it was rare previously. You have your occasional Lincoln, but there were many more Adams', Jeffersons, etc. These were not poor men by any stretch. And I would say the country is ruled less by corporations now than 100 years ago (though still too much) - even MS doesn't compare to Standard Oil.
My point is extreme, but these things do have a trickle down effect on the economy. I have no problem with free markets when they are all on equal or somewhat equal footing. I do have a problem with the amount of Corporate welfare that goes on in America.
That's certainly true, and if all (or a significant amount) of white collar jobs go overseas, then this will occur. But they won't, and there are a lot of reasons why, including things like currency devaluation and such. My point wasn't meant for rational people (like you), but for the people who somehow think that all jobs will go overseas.
I think America is fine because we keep inventing new high-tech fields all the time. Computer programming was the cool thing - once - but now the cool thing is nanofabrication (for example). And the US university system makes sure that most such startups are done in the US. The US gets the brightest minds from across the world, and keeps us on top.
As an aside, I think the programming market is picking up - I'm looking for jobs, and damn near everything in the sciences requires programming to some degree. I think the only person who's in trouble is the programmer who ONLY knows how to program, but employers want scientific or financial knowledge.
Know what they say about being a one-trick pony...
but which are manufactured in Mexico and China anyhow. Oh, and while we're at it, that premium service sector is rapidly being outsourced to India and the Philippines. Your best bet to make it in America is to be born wealthy, otherwise move to the new land of opportunity, the middle orient!
If the parts are manufactured in Mexico and assembled in the US by skilled workers, so what? by the way, that's what Apple does.
The bottom line is that none of the doom and gloom you people are predicting has ever come true, and outsourcing of jobs (or mechanization of jobs) has always happened. In other words, the links to these arguments are non-unique, and the impacts therefore moot.
Yes, do as you say _think_ about it! But try to take it a step further. The scenario you've described is not that likely to happen, for a simple reason and that is: India won't be cheap forever! The Indian programmers will eventually start demanding better healthcare, education for the kids etc. Whether they pay for it themselves or the government taxes their income more does not really matter. The point is that it will evolve in some stable state, where the Indians will be as expensive as Americans. Want an example: Check out what's happening in Eastern Europe skilled workforce used to be dirt cheap there and is still probably cheaper than most Europe and e.g. in Prague the difference is becoming rather negligible.
People also forget that more high-paying jobs in these areas also breed consumers. One need only look at post-WWII, when Japan became an economic power, and believe it or not, this did not wreck the American economy as was probably predicted.
If India becomes more wealthy, it will become a market for the high-priced products and services that America sells.
I wish you would stop speculating on the age of posters. You are coming across to me as a pretentious ass.
On the first one, I wasn't speculating, because he said he was a Goldwater supporter in high school. That election was in 1964, in case you're not aware. So no pretense is required there, as that makes the poster over the age of 50.
So what you're saying is that long term, the US will revert to a feudal society where entire tribes of hairdressers, cleaners and chefs are in the employ of one very rich lord of the manor?
As opposed to making things used by the rich lord of the manor? Look, US labor is *expensive*. Therefore, it makes NO SENSE to have things done here that can be done elsewhere cheaper. As far as your "disposable income" point goes, there's no better way to kill people's disposable income than to institute protectionist practices that raise the price of goods.
I saw a stat that to keep a single $30,000 steelworking job in the US, it would cost US consumers $300,000. Just want to make sure that you realize that WE ALL pay through the nose for the sort of protectionist practices that keep outmoded US jobs in the country.
When you start seeing places like BestBuy and CompUSA closing shop, it's time to get out of the country. Disposable income is a great driving force in the economy - and it makes those service jobs possible.
And as soon as I see that, I will. But with the proliferation of electronics affordable to everyone, it WON'T HAPPEN.
Seriously, what in the history of the US or economic theory makes you think anything like this is going to happen?
What is going to happen when most of the Jobs are outsourced to other countries and in order to make a middle class/lower middle class living you have to move to another country? Do you think India will take our working class? Mexico? Good luck.
You're forgetting about the massive amount of service jobs that simply can't be outsourced, like cutting hair, making food, cleaning, and the like. It may be that lower classes don't make things for exporting, but that's hardly going to force imminent economic collapse.
The second part of your statement is simply not true. There is no evidence that the Soviets tried to keep up with US military spending. The USSR collapsed because the system was flawed, was imploding, and gorbachev was smart enough to recognize it AND initiate change. The drain of fighting in Afghanistan for 10 years accelerated what was inevitable
Then I suppose all those missles and planes they kept building came free? I don't know how old you are, but if you missed that whole arms proliferation thing, you either weren't alive or weren't paying attention. If you really refuse to believe that, I'll dig up some Soviet GDP numbers and military spending as a fraction thereof.
I know Reagan lovers love to give him credit for the fall of the soviet empire but he just happened to be at the right place at the right time.
That's true enough - I don't think Reagan's spending the Soviets to death was intentional, but it certainly helped them meltdown.
A computer programmer, electrical engineer, or another white-collar worker loses his job and he's out 30,000+ in sunk education costs(counting room and board, and even more for lost wages over a 4 year degree).
And if every programming degree left, you might be right. But they're not. In fact, I would wager that those left *permanantly* unemployed in their field because of outsourcing are NOT the people spending $30,000 for education. It's more like the ITT crowd.
Part of the problem with programmers (in fact, a lot of the problem) was overhiring in the 90's followed by dot bomb. Without all the people who majored in CS then, we'd have no problem now.
In fact, I'd say that a small fraction of 4-year-college-level jobs will leave anytime soon. I'm hearing a lot of chicken little and little evidence.
Think about it. If the entire employment of the US is outsourced (other than politicians, lawyers, doctors, nurses, hair dressers, and food preparation workers), there isn't going to be much of a market for stocks among the peons. Not only that, but the lawyers will sue the doctors, the doctors will malpractice the lawyers, and the politicians will have no constituents, only a rebellion.
If you really are old enough to have remembered Goldwater, then you're old enough to have heard these tired arguments every five years every time ANY industry goes overseas. You're also old enough to (supposedly) have some historical context on this. Will all jobs go overseas? Well, over 50 years, almost ALL tech jobs will. I guarantee it. Hell, all the "tech" jobs from 1950 have. Is there anything wrong with that? No, because they're replaced by whatever becomes high tech.
Looked at another way, if the US maintains a static labor market, we will become irrelevant and reduced to 2nd-world status quickly. Would you want to have the same sort of jobs available to Americans now that existed 50 years ago? Of course not, because bolt-turning jobs don't pay well, because anyone in the world can do that now. Unless the US keeps innovating, there's nothing to sustain the high salaries commanded by US labor. Unfortunately, we haven't figured out a totally painless way of getting rid of jobs that become less-needed as we innovate, but getting rid of certain jobs has to happen. Don't worry, assuming the US economy stays healthy over the long term, they WILL be replaced. This has occurred in a healthy manner for 100 years. Note that the total loss of manufacturing jobs that has occurred over the last 50 years has had NO ill effect upon the US economy or unemployment. Do you have any reason to suspect this one is different as you claim? Or is it just because the white collar nature of these jobs hits too close to home?
Face it, this isn't a liberal/conservative issue anyway. The US is staring at its onrushing demise just like the USSR was a few years ago. In both cases it will be due to corruption and selfishness.
That's too ridiculous to even be speculative. The USSR collapsed because its centralized economy fundamentally didn't work, and because Reagan tricked them into a military spending spree - which gave us a bunch of debt but killed them. Put it this way - if you're so certain, how about a rough year for the US's USSR-style demise?
The problem is when people start using words like "all." Does all software need to be free? Of course not. Does all software need to be proprietary? Again, of course not.
Not only that, not all software that *this guy* writes has to be free. I definitely disagree with the article writer's assumption that "fame" won't get you a job - in CS, employers want porfolios, and working on Open Source is a great way to get that experience before someone will pay you.
Second, even if one *has* a job, working for a free project is (in effect, or in the case of FSF, actually) charity work. I guess computer scientists are the only ones to donate their skills to a good cause? Because Doctors Without Borders doesn't do anything like that. And lawyers never do pro bono work right?
As you say, I'm having a hard time seeing who loses - I've never heard of someone who does good work for a free project and can't parlay that into a job, and the output is (with the exception of anything GUI) top-notch.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a little trite. One has nothing to do with the other, but it is interesting how laws like this in other countries don't generate the kneejerk reaction they do in the US. The supposedly liberal France and Canada both have such a law. Where are all the open-minded, rights-protecting leaders of such countries when those laws were passed?
Point is every country has some stupid laws. And we Americans have been laughing at the French since looooooong before 9/11. That probably started sometime in 1939 or 1940 at the latest. ;)
What do you expect from the land of the 35-hour work week? 5 more hours could have made useful solar cells. Shame, shame.
I imagine this is your educated medical opinion, huh? For what it's worth, Down's syndrome is caused by trisomy 21 (that's having three of the 21st chromosome). It's never caused by birth trauma, and I know of no suits that have challenged as such. However, Cerebral Palsy is effectively a stroke suffered by the fetus/infant during the birth process. This is almost always caused by birth trauma, and in many of these cases this is due to medical negligence/incompetence.
The total crap part is that you can sue ANYTIME after birth and claim that the doctor that delivered you caused any problems that you have now. I personally talked to a doctor that is being sued by some parents because their child didnt get into the college they were planning on, so they sued the doctor for causing long lasting brain damage 18 years after the birth. The really sad part is the doctor lost the lawsuit and is now repsonsible for paying millions of dollars of damages to the family. And let me say, this is a totaly normal kid who simply didnt get high enough grades on his entrance exams to a college, not some highly deformed retarded human being.
I don't know what sort of sob stories your doctor friend told you, but one can usually tell cerebral palsy from a dumb kid. Just because the jury screwed up in that case doesn't mean that all doctors should get off the hook in all cases for screwing up.
I'm sure that the jury system in the US doesn't help, but don't expect your doctor buddy to tell you the whole truth, as he's just as biased as the plaintiffs.
Before posting a site containing multiple images to frikkin' slashdot, you may want to check your server's bandwidth ability.
Um, good? In other words, doctors will exercise more diligence and generally do things to avoid getting sued, namely screwing up. I think I'll tell them all I'm a lawyer, thanks for the good idea!
How many businesses do you have an intimate working knowledge of? SCO maybe? Only ones in the news? You have to realize, this is self selecting - you don't hear about all the companies who do nothing wrong, and treat both their customers and shareholders well, and compete fairly with their competitors.
Does having an MBA make you evil? Maybe not. Maybe people who are already evil are attracted to the MBA degree and position. Who knows.
If you work at a large institution you know who the MBAs are. You know how they talk and act. No assumptions are required.
That's a mindless overgeneralization. How many MBA's do you actually personally know? The fact that this is tolerated and actually modded insightful is stunning. Substitute any other group of people and people would condemn statements like that.
And no, I'm not an MBA.
Me too, but I decided to be fair and quote the "anybody" prices. With academic discount, I got my 15" with superdrive, airport extreme, 512 MB RAM, and Applecare for $2240. ;)
Yes, yes, we all realize there are reasons to prefer a powerbook - and I'm writing this on one, so any followup flames from my Mac comrades are misdirected - but 17" apples and this machine aren't even remotely in the same price point, as the Apple costs double.
First, you have to be damned rural not to have cable, so it's not really *novel* for that many people. That said, this offering sounds pretty good, and you don't have to get cable with it (if you don't want cable TV, or if you have DirecTV for example). It also brings another competitor to the party, which is always good - particularly since DSL seems to be losing the broadband war in a lot of ways.
From a lot of standpoints, this is a good thing. Let's put it this way - it's the only way to get real broadband for $30/month, without having to buy another product first. Well, I guess power, but I think I can assume everyone's got that, even with the pedantic slashdot crowd.
Or we could just kill all you annoying Ham radio trolls and be done with all the problems.
Speak of an abomination dying like it should, sounds like Ham radio's time...
I bet most Pepsi customers think Linux is that lady who sang the LOTR:ROTK song that won the Oscar on Sunday.
Actually, bacteria do in fact leave fossil records
I don't know much (actually, anything) regarding purported non-carbon "life," but regular ol' bacteria can leave fossils, believe it or not.
Certainly true, but it's somewhat empty jobs, as they didn't contribute to GDP, really. I mean, the Sov's never sold that much of their equipmnent. As such, it was a drain on the economy, and diverted money that could have been spent on other infrastructure or, say, food. For a modern example, see N. Korea - spends all their money on military while people starve. Sure, the military's the biggest employer - but that doesn't help anyone else.
The real reason for the collapse was the death of the Communist ideology in the population's minds. Thus, there was no stimulus to work well and invent.
I completely agree, that's why the system didn't work.
Such an attitude can't sustain participating in a technological race. Certainly, there were inventors and scientists who have worked for the sake of it, but it was not enough. Thus, the quality of manufacturing, ergonomics and comfort&convenience were very low et al.
That's the key point I think - sustain. I completely agree that the lack of incentive held back their economy, and of course the inherently inefficiency of central planning. I simply think that the arms race (and the spending that accompanied it) brought on the end earlier than it would have.
This was what killed the economy and not the arms race.
Sure, like I said, I don't disagree in the least. To me, it's like someone with AIDS who gets a cold and dies. Technically, it's the cold virus that killed them - but really they died of AIDS. Same here - I believe the Sov's were killed by the arms race - but they died of a completely broken economy like you mention.
That's true, and what I was addressing was the macroeconomic side of things, where generalities are the norm. As such, I think the US economy is generally OK with, and more likely depends on, labor market turnover and the trade of low-tech jobs for high-tech jobs.
I admit that this rings hollow if it's your job that got cut (for example, auto manufacturing). Usually, people can retrain slightly and find another similar job that didn't get cut. Honestly, who has the same job for their entire lives anymore? I think everyone will have to retrain at some point, or more likely continually train.
The one exception to my analysis above is when a large employer pulls out of a small town, devastating the population and sending unemployment up to 50% overnight (see Flint, MI). I fully realize how terrible this is, and I believe this is a situation where government should get involved. I think that state and federal governments should match funds with local governments to attract new industries to small towns that lose primary employers. But the answer still isn't protectionism, which is implicitly the usual answer to the "offshoring" problem for most people.
BTW, a soviet style implosion isn't out of the question. Russia may be the future of America, a country ruled by oligarchs and plutocrats. Unless things change, I'd say it could happen as early as 2025.
It is of course impossible to prove such a statement either way, but I would bet against it. America's always been ruled by oligarchs and plutocrats, I hate to say, and I would say now less than ever. Two presidents in the last 20 years came from nothing (Carter and Clinton), and it was rare previously. You have your occasional Lincoln, but there were many more Adams', Jeffersons, etc. These were not poor men by any stretch. And I would say the country is ruled less by corporations now than 100 years ago (though still too much) - even MS doesn't compare to Standard Oil.
That's certainly true, and if all (or a significant amount) of white collar jobs go overseas, then this will occur. But they won't, and there are a lot of reasons why, including things like currency devaluation and such. My point wasn't meant for rational people (like you), but for the people who somehow think that all jobs will go overseas.
I think America is fine because we keep inventing new high-tech fields all the time. Computer programming was the cool thing - once - but now the cool thing is nanofabrication (for example). And the US university system makes sure that most such startups are done in the US. The US gets the brightest minds from across the world, and keeps us on top.
As an aside, I think the programming market is picking up - I'm looking for jobs, and damn near everything in the sciences requires programming to some degree. I think the only person who's in trouble is the programmer who ONLY knows how to program, but employers want scientific or financial knowledge.
Know what they say about being a one-trick pony...
If the parts are manufactured in Mexico and assembled in the US by skilled workers, so what? by the way, that's what Apple does.
The bottom line is that none of the doom and gloom you people are predicting has ever come true, and outsourcing of jobs (or mechanization of jobs) has always happened. In other words, the links to these arguments are non-unique, and the impacts therefore moot.
People also forget that more high-paying jobs in these areas also breed consumers. One need only look at post-WWII, when Japan became an economic power, and believe it or not, this did not wreck the American economy as was probably predicted.
If India becomes more wealthy, it will become a market for the high-priced products and services that America sells.
And I suppose it "scales" itself? And your logic would certainly predict that no new projects are being conceived, since we can "scale" the old ones.
On the first one, I wasn't speculating, because he said he was a Goldwater supporter in high school. That election was in 1964, in case you're not aware. So no pretense is required there, as that makes the poster over the age of 50.
But you can wish whatever the hell you want.
As opposed to making things used by the rich lord of the manor? Look, US labor is *expensive*. Therefore, it makes NO SENSE to have things done here that can be done elsewhere cheaper. As far as your "disposable income" point goes, there's no better way to kill people's disposable income than to institute protectionist practices that raise the price of goods.
I saw a stat that to keep a single $30,000 steelworking job in the US, it would cost US consumers $300,000. Just want to make sure that you realize that WE ALL pay through the nose for the sort of protectionist practices that keep outmoded US jobs in the country.
When you start seeing places like BestBuy and CompUSA closing shop, it's time to get out of the country. Disposable income is a great driving force in the economy - and it makes those service jobs possible.
And as soon as I see that, I will. But with the proliferation of electronics affordable to everyone, it WON'T HAPPEN.
Seriously, what in the history of the US or economic theory makes you think anything like this is going to happen?
You're forgetting about the massive amount of service jobs that simply can't be outsourced, like cutting hair, making food, cleaning, and the like. It may be that lower classes don't make things for exporting, but that's hardly going to force imminent economic collapse.
Then I suppose all those missles and planes they kept building came free? I don't know how old you are, but if you missed that whole arms proliferation thing, you either weren't alive or weren't paying attention. If you really refuse to believe that, I'll dig up some Soviet GDP numbers and military spending as a fraction thereof.
I know Reagan lovers love to give him credit for the fall of the soviet empire but he just happened to be at the right place at the right time.
That's true enough - I don't think Reagan's spending the Soviets to death was intentional, but it certainly helped them meltdown.
And if every programming degree left, you might be right. But they're not. In fact, I would wager that those left *permanantly* unemployed in their field because of outsourcing are NOT the people spending $30,000 for education. It's more like the ITT crowd.
Part of the problem with programmers (in fact, a lot of the problem) was overhiring in the 90's followed by dot bomb. Without all the people who majored in CS then, we'd have no problem now.
In fact, I'd say that a small fraction of 4-year-college-level jobs will leave anytime soon. I'm hearing a lot of chicken little and little evidence.
If you really are old enough to have remembered Goldwater, then you're old enough to have heard these tired arguments every five years every time ANY industry goes overseas. You're also old enough to (supposedly) have some historical context on this. Will all jobs go overseas? Well, over 50 years, almost ALL tech jobs will. I guarantee it. Hell, all the "tech" jobs from 1950 have. Is there anything wrong with that? No, because they're replaced by whatever becomes high tech.
Looked at another way, if the US maintains a static labor market, we will become irrelevant and reduced to 2nd-world status quickly. Would you want to have the same sort of jobs available to Americans now that existed 50 years ago? Of course not, because bolt-turning jobs don't pay well, because anyone in the world can do that now. Unless the US keeps innovating, there's nothing to sustain the high salaries commanded by US labor. Unfortunately, we haven't figured out a totally painless way of getting rid of jobs that become less-needed as we innovate, but getting rid of certain jobs has to happen. Don't worry, assuming the US economy stays healthy over the long term, they WILL be replaced. This has occurred in a healthy manner for 100 years. Note that the total loss of manufacturing jobs that has occurred over the last 50 years has had NO ill effect upon the US economy or unemployment. Do you have any reason to suspect this one is different as you claim? Or is it just because the white collar nature of these jobs hits too close to home?
Face it, this isn't a liberal/conservative issue anyway. The US is staring at its onrushing demise just like the USSR was a few years ago. In both cases it will be due to corruption and selfishness.
That's too ridiculous to even be speculative. The USSR collapsed because its centralized economy fundamentally didn't work, and because Reagan tricked them into a military spending spree - which gave us a bunch of debt but killed them. Put it this way - if you're so certain, how about a rough year for the US's USSR-style demise?
Not only that, not all software that *this guy* writes has to be free. I definitely disagree with the article writer's assumption that "fame" won't get you a job - in CS, employers want porfolios, and working on Open Source is a great way to get that experience before someone will pay you.
Second, even if one *has* a job, working for a free project is (in effect, or in the case of FSF, actually) charity work. I guess computer scientists are the only ones to donate their skills to a good cause? Because Doctors Without Borders doesn't do anything like that. And lawyers never do pro bono work right?
As you say, I'm having a hard time seeing who loses - I've never heard of someone who does good work for a free project and can't parlay that into a job, and the output is (with the exception of anything GUI) top-notch.