The United States makes too much money off of China and vice versa for either country to go to war with each other. Taiwan and the rest are meaningless. Money talks, people. Why would you active seek to destroy a country that is the mainstay of your economy (that goes for both China and the US)?
Money can do anything, except provide a liquid mean of exchange and also a value to be held as capital. But then again, this whole comment is a sort of economics-troll. Back to whatever the hell we were talking about before...
The full scope and scale of this technology in the years to come. I'm a first year chinese student at Vassar College, with the full intention of becoming fluent - will learning a second language become useless and a waste of time when this technology improves to such a point that people will be able to speak quickly and naturally in their native tongue and have everyone else understand them with the help of a simple computer?
While it is always fun to entertain such doomsday scenarios in ones' mind, I don't think that anything like this is possible. Current demands of most large corporations (Microsoft, Apple, any number of others) along with the internet-using public are for a universally-connected internet. Any company that simply creates its own network is going to face a huge revenue loss.
I think I could have written something of this sort- but hats off to you for getting to the bottom of this: There really is no 'correct' english.
That said, I'd wager that the submitter just lost a flamewar with a guy, and the closing statement must have been something like:
'your a faget' - you can't answer to that.
Hopefully I can just get google to hack a server, give me any and all illegal information, serve me with a summons, take me to court, jail me, and then parole me in the future without any effort on my part!
Too bad the US is going to make you adopt it. I don't really see why all you people fail to see the balance of power here. The United States is the staple of the entire world's economy. Is canada willing to give up a huge amount of its exports (86.6%) in order to give the US a big 'fuck you'? I doubt it. This is how things were with the British in the 18th & 19th centuries, the french in the 16th and 17th, and a whole bunch of other countries for as long as there have been countries. Stop crying, and start thinking rationally.
Thanks for the awesome reply - as a high school senior just dipping my toes into studying greats like Adam Smith - I can in no way pretend to know my shit when it comes to this.
In regards to this issue - Ballmer raised the issue that corporations should not be at all involved in social issues, and I completely agree with you (if I understand what you are saying): if you are a corporation in today's world, you cannot simply pursue your own ends and count on the "invisible hand" to make sure everyone else is happy. The interesting thing though, is that this article makes to say that Ballmer doesn't think this way.
Ballmer raises an interesting question. On the one hand, there is the principle of Adam Smith that states that through pursuing your own personal gain you are benefiting society, and on the other hand there are the people who believe that corporations should have as little to do with society as possible. Myself, I side with the former. Corporations are huge presences in our societies and should therefore be conscious of their social impact. A good corporation is as philanthropic as it is profitable.
No, they didn't. The danger in this is that Microsoft can be sued for it (though they probably won't). It's a well-known practice for companies to license software that is far from done to companies. I don't know if I can discuss any of the lawsuits I know of (confidentiality issues) but it's pretty easy to find examples of companies selling vaporware to customers, and once the customers update 500 times, they realize the software does absolutely nothing, and consequently sue.
His movies and books are always far fetched and extraneous, but they always turn out well. Remember the only good arnold s. movie? Philip k. dick. his movies always rule, and this one will be no exception.
Slashdot Mirror
The United States makes too much money off of China and vice versa for either country to go to war with each other. Taiwan and the rest are meaningless. Money talks, people. Why would you active seek to destroy a country that is the mainstay of your economy (that goes for both China and the US)?
Money can do anything, except provide a liquid mean of exchange and also a value to be held as capital. But then again, this whole comment is a sort of economics-troll. Back to whatever the hell we were talking about before...
The full scope and scale of this technology in the years to come. I'm a first year chinese student at Vassar College, with the full intention of becoming fluent - will learning a second language become useless and a waste of time when this technology improves to such a point that people will be able to speak quickly and naturally in their native tongue and have everyone else understand them with the help of a simple computer?
While it is always fun to entertain such doomsday scenarios in ones' mind, I don't think that anything like this is possible. Current demands of most large corporations (Microsoft, Apple, any number of others) along with the internet-using public are for a universally-connected internet. Any company that simply creates its own network is going to face a huge revenue loss.
I think I could have written something of this sort- but hats off to you for getting to the bottom of this: There really is no 'correct' english. That said, I'd wager that the submitter just lost a flamewar with a guy, and the closing statement must have been something like: 'your a faget' - you can't answer to that.
Hopefully I can just get google to hack a server, give me any and all illegal information, serve me with a summons, take me to court, jail me, and then parole me in the future without any effort on my part!
Too bad the US is going to make you adopt it. I don't really see why all you people fail to see the balance of power here. The United States is the staple of the entire world's economy. Is canada willing to give up a huge amount of its exports (86.6%) in order to give the US a big 'fuck you'? I doubt it. This is how things were with the British in the 18th & 19th centuries, the french in the 16th and 17th, and a whole bunch of other countries for as long as there have been countries. Stop crying, and start thinking rationally.
Would be if the astronauts landed during a gunbattle in Falluja. Ok, so maybe not THAT funny...but still...
Thanks for the awesome reply - as a high school senior just dipping my toes into studying greats like Adam Smith - I can in no way pretend to know my shit when it comes to this.
In regards to this issue - Ballmer raised the issue that corporations should not be at all involved in social issues, and I completely agree with you (if I understand what you are saying): if you are a corporation in today's world, you cannot simply pursue your own ends and count on the "invisible hand" to make sure everyone else is happy. The interesting thing though, is that this article makes to say that Ballmer doesn't think this way.
Ballmer raises an interesting question. On the one hand, there is the principle of Adam Smith that states that through pursuing your own personal gain you are benefiting society, and on the other hand there are the people who believe that corporations should have as little to do with society as possible. Myself, I side with the former. Corporations are huge presences in our societies and should therefore be conscious of their social impact. A good corporation is as philanthropic as it is profitable.
No, they didn't. The danger in this is that Microsoft can be sued for it (though they probably won't). It's a well-known practice for companies to license software that is far from done to companies. I don't know if I can discuss any of the lawsuits I know of (confidentiality issues) but it's pretty easy to find examples of companies selling vaporware to customers, and once the customers update 500 times, they realize the software does absolutely nothing, and consequently sue.
His movies and books are always far fetched and extraneous, but they always turn out well. Remember the only good arnold s. movie? Philip k. dick. his movies always rule, and this one will be no exception.