"If they are necessary then, by definition, everyone will follow suit or die"
Yes. If you thought you had made a point here, you failed. The current state of pollution in China and India is such, that they MUST change, or deal with severe repurcussions.
Do a check on air pollution in China, then try to make the point that change isn't necessary.
And necessary doesn't mean IMMEDIATELY necessary. I need tires. Mine are worn, and replacing them is a NECESSITY, but not immediately.
If he meant need he was wrong. The wage they NEED is subsistence level. Since that's something few americans will settle for, it's a matter of WANT not NEED.
All the examples you give of why we NEED a certain wage are easily refuted. Rent split between 6 roommates is cheap, but who wants to live with 6 roommates. The bus is a viable, if extremely distasteful method of transport for most Americans. The fact that these alternatives suck doesn't matter, only that they get the job done.
No, it couldn't. The point of my post, which you completely missed, is that Chinese SOCIETY is a hindrance to their goals, as they are taught to follow not lead.
While I ususally err on the side of capitalism, I have to disagree with you.
The environmental laws exist because it was determined they were necessary. The fact that other countries don't follow them is a failure of policy by the government, and the fact that we CONTINUE to do business with such countries an even bigger failure.
The US is perfectly within it's rights to insist on a certain amount of equity when trading with other countries. Failing this allows them to keep prices down, and hurts competition here in the US.
While they are "choices" as you say, the choice between gross, unsustainable pollution or higher prices is really no choice at all.
As an American, I will have increased choice, and cheaper goods. In addition, companies will be driven to innovate or die. ALL of them, US, Chinese, everybody.
So China makes a statement about wanting to dominate the tech industry, and suddenly the US becomes a third world country?
Nonsense. The same things were said when Japan made a move to dominate the car industry, so what happened?
Nothing, that's what. Businesses change to compete, and the same thing will happen here.
It may be tough on manufacturing, but since those wages have been artificially propped up by unions, I don't care what happens to them. More importantly, if you made your living on something that will ultimately be automated, you deserve what you get.
"where workers need a certain wage to survive and thrive in their own country"
Not to cut up your post too much, but the above should read "WANT (or even demand) a certain wage" instead of need.
If people were forced to work 90 hours a week at a $7 hourly job to feed themselves they would. If you disagree, well, go without food for a wekk then get back to me.
So what if China wants to dominate anything? What have they EVER done right along these lines? The success they are currently having is because they emulate the West. If they are going to do what they intend, they need to innovate, not imitate.
Since China is primarily a society of followers, I doubt very seriously they'll be able to do anything more than make themselves a player, and then only because of the volume they can introduce.
India, on the other hand, well, I see them as a force. Which is probably why China is so eager to steal from... ahem work with them.
I'm only going to respond to part of your post, but I have some small expertise in this area.
The fact that other animals learn language is completely irrelevant. Two different machines can perform the same task, and do it in completely different ways. Animal language appears to be one example of this concept. The animals MAY be proficient with language (my opinion is that they are) but their brains don't have the same mechanisms that humans have. Animals also have problems with syntax, because humans have specific mechanisms in the brain that deal with it.
As to what you buy, that's up to you, but the facts are against you on this one.
While you make some good points, why act like a dick? If your argument is sound, should be able to skip the shitty attitude and get to the meat of it.
I'm NOT clueless, in fact I'm pretty technically savvy, but some things SIMPLY DO NOT WORK. Period. The laptop I chose was the result of months of deliberation and research. I did MY due diligence, but because it's a niche manufacturer, there was no way to know if linux would work.
So, I guess that makes me a moron. I'm not the one trying to take the position that broken software is ok, though, so maybe it's not me that's the moron.
I think you made some great points. In fact, the next time someone screams that they're not stealing by using p2p software to download copyrighted music, I'm going to give cut and paste your post.
Either you've never ridden on Amtrak, or you're a troll. The idea that an Amtrak train has a comfort advantage over anything other than a prison bus is laughable. It sucks, and I speak from experience. There are a few exceptions, but those are far more expensive than what most people would use.
Driving is only stressful and unpleasant because you ALLOW it to be, as no one but you is responsible for how you feel.
And since surveys of potential Amtrak customers support my point, I'll say I was speaking for them, not everybody as you assert.
"Ever tried to install a "pure" Windows XP on a laptop lately?"
Yes, a few weeks ago.
"You probably run into the same problems as with a one-size-fits-all Linux distribution."
Nope. Every version of linux I've tried required significant time to set up, and still there were things that didn't work. Windows worked perfectly from the start.
I would love to do away with windows entirely, but linux doesn't work well enough yet.
As for the rest, no version of Linux has worked 100% on my laptop. So, who's right, you with your stance that it's ready, or the rest of us who have partially working equipment?
"Is Amtrak up a creek because of government mismanagement, or because their hands are tied by using tracks they're not allowed to own? How much longer until the current state of affairs in our telephone networks produces an Amtrak analog"
Never. Amtrak is failing because it offers a service no one wants, and the other problems are just peripheral.
Flying is competitive on price, and much faster. If time isn't an issue, then you drive. There is really no advantage to using Amtrak over other options.
So, does the word "sponsorship" carry the same connotation in Canada as "bribery"? Because if (ha as if there were any doubt) my government officials were on the take, I certainly wouldn't let them downplay it by calling it "sponsorship"
I think most people know it's dangerous. In fact I've seen no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Two shuttle disasters, numerous rocket failures and a HUGE hit movie whose only focus was a botched space mission have helped drive the point home.
But I could be wrong. I doubt it though, and I plan to ask a few people in passing conversation about the subject. Maybe I give people more credit than they deserve.
Slashdot Mirror
"If they are necessary then, by definition, everyone will follow suit or die"
Yes. If you thought you had made a point here, you failed. The current state of pollution in China and India is such, that they MUST change, or deal with severe repurcussions.
Do a check on air pollution in China, then try to make the point that change isn't necessary.
And necessary doesn't mean IMMEDIATELY necessary. I need tires. Mine are worn, and replacing them is a NECESSITY, but not immediately.
Do you understand now?
So, all of the free software I use now will go away?
Or, instead of your unrealistic, chicken-little scenario, I'll have the BEST tech for the LEAST money, running anything I like.
Why would you assume otherwise, apart from trying to troll?
And the quality of life in the US continues to improve. So, if you assume the same results for tech, you see my point.
Falling behind in one industry, no matter how important (what is more important to Americans that their cars?) isn't enough to turn the US into Congo.
So, what's your point? That I'm right about the industries reinventing themselves to compete (which has happened) or...what?
"Yeah, with 300 million educated" Which is more than the US. So, what's your point apart from the fact that you refute your own argument?
If he meant need he was wrong. The wage they NEED is subsistence level. Since that's something few americans will settle for, it's a matter of WANT not NEED.
All the examples you give of why we NEED a certain wage are easily refuted. Rent split between 6 roommates is cheap, but who wants to live with 6 roommates. The bus is a viable, if extremely distasteful method of transport for most Americans. The fact that these alternatives suck doesn't matter, only that they get the job done.
No, it couldn't. The point of my post, which you completely missed, is that Chinese SOCIETY is a hindrance to their goals, as they are taught to follow not lead.
While I ususally err on the side of capitalism, I have to disagree with you.
The environmental laws exist because it was determined they were necessary. The fact that other countries don't follow them is a failure of policy by the government, and the fact that we CONTINUE to do business with such countries an even bigger failure.
The US is perfectly within it's rights to insist on a certain amount of equity when trading with other countries. Failing this allows them to keep prices down, and hurts competition here in the US.
While they are "choices" as you say, the choice between gross, unsustainable pollution or higher prices is really no choice at all.
As an American, I will have increased choice, and cheaper goods. In addition, companies will be driven to innovate or die. ALL of them, US, Chinese, everybody.
That's just off the top of my head.
So China makes a statement about wanting to dominate the tech industry, and suddenly the US becomes a third world country?
Nonsense. The same things were said when Japan made a move to dominate the car industry, so what happened?
Nothing, that's what. Businesses change to compete, and the same thing will happen here.
It may be tough on manufacturing, but since those wages have been artificially propped up by unions, I don't care what happens to them. More importantly, if you made your living on something that will ultimately be automated, you deserve what you get.
"where workers need a certain wage to survive and thrive in their own country"
Not to cut up your post too much, but the above should read "WANT (or even demand) a certain wage" instead of need.
If people were forced to work 90 hours a week at a $7 hourly job to feed themselves they would. If you disagree, well, go without food for a wekk then get back to me.
So what if China wants to dominate anything? What have they EVER done right along these lines? The success they are currently having is because they emulate the West. If they are going to do what they intend, they need to innovate, not imitate.
Since China is primarily a society of followers, I doubt very seriously they'll be able to do anything more than make themselves a player, and then only because of the volume they can introduce.
India, on the other hand, well, I see them as a force. Which is probably why China is so eager to steal from... ahem work with them.
"The rest of the world is standing at the top of the hole saying "good riddance to bad rubbish"
No, a few countries that don't matter are saying that. The WORLD is not. There is a difference.
Sucks when your own stupid logic is used against you, huh?
Ok, so then by your logic Linux is a piece of crap.
If you like that better than "not ready" that's up to you.
I'm only going to respond to part of your post, but I have some small expertise in this area.
The fact that other animals learn language is completely irrelevant. Two different machines can perform the same task, and do it in completely different ways. Animal language appears to be one example of this concept. The animals MAY be proficient with language (my opinion is that they are) but their brains don't have the same mechanisms that humans have. Animals also have problems with syntax, because humans have specific mechanisms in the brain that deal with it.
As to what you buy, that's up to you, but the facts are against you on this one.
While you make some good points, why act like a dick? If your argument is sound, should be able to skip the shitty attitude and get to the meat of it.
I'm NOT clueless, in fact I'm pretty technically savvy, but some things SIMPLY DO NOT WORK. Period. The laptop I chose was the result of months of deliberation and research. I did MY due diligence, but because it's a niche manufacturer, there was no way to know if linux would work.
So, I guess that makes me a moron. I'm not the one trying to take the position that broken software is ok, though, so maybe it's not me that's the moron.
I think you made some great points. In fact, the next time someone screams that they're not stealing by using p2p software to download copyrighted music, I'm going to give cut and paste your post.
Either you've never ridden on Amtrak, or you're a troll. The idea that an Amtrak train has a comfort advantage over anything other than a prison bus is laughable. It sucks, and I speak from experience. There are a few exceptions, but those are far more expensive than what most people would use.
Driving is only stressful and unpleasant because you ALLOW it to be, as no one but you is responsible for how you feel.
And since surveys of potential Amtrak customers support my point, I'll say I was speaking for them, not everybody as you assert.
"Ever tried to install a "pure" Windows XP on a laptop lately?"
Yes, a few weeks ago.
"You probably run into the same problems as with a one-size-fits-all Linux distribution."
Nope. Every version of linux I've tried required significant time to set up, and still there were things that didn't work. Windows worked perfectly from the start.
I would love to do away with windows entirely, but linux doesn't work well enough yet.
Why the sarcasm?
As for the rest, no version of Linux has worked 100% on my laptop. So, who's right, you with your stance that it's ready, or the rest of us who have partially working equipment?
"Is Amtrak up a creek because of government mismanagement, or because their hands are tied by using tracks they're not allowed to own? How much longer until the current state of affairs in our telephone networks produces an Amtrak analog"
Never. Amtrak is failing because it offers a service no one wants, and the other problems are just peripheral.
Flying is competitive on price, and much faster. If time isn't an issue, then you drive. There is really no advantage to using Amtrak over other options.
So, does the word "sponsorship" carry the same connotation in Canada as "bribery"? Because if (ha as if there were any doubt) my government officials were on the take, I certainly wouldn't let them downplay it by calling it "sponsorship"
It's interesting that you got modded insightful without actually saying anything. Gotta love those mods.
Perhaps there should be a "+1 blindly following the herd" option.
I think most people know it's dangerous. In fact I've seen no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Two shuttle disasters, numerous rocket failures and a HUGE hit movie whose only focus was a botched space mission have helped drive the point home.
But I could be wrong. I doubt it though, and I plan to ask a few people in passing conversation about the subject. Maybe I give people more credit than they deserve.
Again, attack the person. What are you 13? Get a girlfriend man. Or a boyfriend, whatever.
I imagine you're not a very nice person at all.
That didn't work!!!