Hm, "Foxconn... the world's largest maker of phone handsets"? Not even close...
Nokia 37%, Samsung 21%, LG 11%, Motorola & SE both 5%; while SE and perhaps Motorola might be using some OEM manufacturers, it's rather unlikely for LG and Samsung. And Nokia owns all their fabs (most of them not in China, 125k employees)
Remember that religions reached this refined state in a sort of blind way - after all there were many faiths which simply died out, which proved not adapted good enough; especially when in competition with some that were. Few thousand years ago a mythology of one Babylonian tribe wasn't nothing special, lived among many other; but over time it for and passed further some modifications here and there - few of them eventually proving very competitive.
But it seems that "elders" of religions aren't typically aware of this. It also totally escapes the attnetion of folk conciousness of given faith, obviously. No actions directed specifically at it - and as we can see lately, some concious acts of churches can actualy prove detrimental to them.
It is possible to get ahead. Question is - do we want to?
Perhaps crafting some appropriate philosophical system could be acceptable...
You know, there's quite a bit of consensus (there's that word again!) that US intelligence agencies collecting data about foes, or potential foes, also provide some hints to US companies...
In a discussion it's ususally a good idea to keep on the issues it touched upon previously, not forgetting about them and just throwing new ones in. And bringing those particular factors doesn't make you look good - they essentially boil down to "we already are wasteful when it comes to resources during production of a car, so we have a right to continue doing it after it's built". Those "cars so small that they looked like a glorified golf cart" (such false characterisations go a long way towards building certain approach...) are what's normal on Earth, not "weird".
Another poster gave decently passable argument BTW - you build way too short merging lanes (but in that case you can either limit speeds or rebuild those lanes)
Consuming without the will to put hard limits on oneself is plenty amoral; if all externalities were to be taken into account there's also no way it could be legal while operating by the current rules. Look how wasteful you are, claiming for yourself almost three times more resources than the most lean places with comparable standard of living (and even those most likely exceed what this planet can provide long term). How much of all the above are the needs? Or...how come people at your place convinced themselves that they are? On what basis? (and considering that it's also claiming disproportionally large part of some global "resources per capita" metric)
What you're saying could be also, basically, said like this: "I made a horrible choice, so I will stick with it for now...at least as far as not trying more to deal with it goes; oh, and life is hard" (really? Compared to what?)
It's dishonest to approach human waste as a law of nature; choosing, it seems, one narrow meaning of "waste". You're thinking of byproducts of human processes - but we can strive to perform those as efficiently as possible (and without exceeding sustainable limits on input and output levels) Some things can be so easy...like setting your damn computer to go into hibernation if you forget about turning it off (I would think people on/. know that computers can perform actions largely autonomously...)
"Faulty" as far as those places would be concerned. I'm sure Sweden, Finland or Germany would love to find valid reason to ban Huawei equipment in the EU.
This wasn't about HP, only about the time required to reach given speed; your cars aren't that heavier (and those which are...well, that's another problem)
Justifying wasteful HP levels with possible close calls is a vicious cycle. Would you prefer tanks?
"You" as applying to a group or country (really, practically any country...); it's not my fault EN doesn't distinguish readily between second persons of singular and plural.
And sure, perhaps I overdo trying being neutral about current situation (that was about the Chinese), circumstances of which are still unfolding and won't be properly known for some time. Perhaps it will turn out they do a lot more copying than everybody thought; perhaps the contrary.
And Japanese had rather peculiar circumstances at the time...
Gear of such kind would also have to pass approval from several institutions. Also in places which are not only moderately decent corruption-wise...but have probably strong interest in discovering a reason to ban such faulty equipment (having in their borders Nokia Siemens, Ericsson...). Yes, it's formally probably only compliance with electromagnetic regulations and communication standards, but c'mon.
"Debt" (figurative of course) - it's not like Chinese got much in return for those inventions, also discoveries, etc. But some of those things were probably of great benefit to progress outside their borders.
Yeah...how intensive crash test campaign was performed? How many real world accidents? How much people inside would be stressed from the "advice" not to be in the way of opening airbags? (if they had no restraints...)
So how would it fly considering that Huawei gear is used in places with sensible "copyright protection" (or whatever it's called in a given day) / etc.?
Then apparently good & reliable enough; either way, I don't think it's a coincidence that few networks using them, from my general area, seem to be at least as good as other in network reliability perceived by users; and offering them great deals. Shouldn't they also only improve?
Yes, they were a bit sidelined for few last centuries; considering the above list it's not totally unreasonable to look at any possible present "tech stealing" as collecting debt, in the process of revving up again.
US German enginners and Soviet German engineers also come to mind (nevermind all the German patents, tech, etc.); or ignoring by the US early intellectul rights (or whatever the promoted term was back then) when it suited you.
Now it just suits you to point out possibly similar things in others.
There was similar "consensus" about Japanese or perhaps even Koreans not a long time ago...
Seriously, don't you see a problem with reaching it in the group of colleagues? (or that pretty much anybody doing it has some interest in coming to such conclusion)
Such devices are really just a side business for Huawei anyway. They are big in mobile network equipment - base stations, their backbone, etc. Apparently it's comparably good & reliable to "old" brands, while being significantly cheaper. And becoming more and more popular.
Don't forget Symbian, with almost half of smartphone sales and also licensing quite a bit of MS tech. But I guess MS would be prefer to have a bit more...leverage.
why we don't hear people using such style of defense for some of the so called "feature phone" platforms?... (no, not the version castrated / never brought to you / uglyfied by US carriers)
Slashdot Mirror
Hm, "Foxconn ... the world's largest maker of phone handsets"? Not even close...
Nokia 37%, Samsung 21%, LG 11%, Motorola & SE both 5%; while SE and perhaps Motorola might be using some OEM manufacturers, it's rather unlikely for LG and Samsung. And Nokia owns all their fabs (most of them not in China, 125k employees)
If only that could be changed...imagine the possibilities ;)
Remember that religions reached this refined state in a sort of blind way - after all there were many faiths which simply died out, which proved not adapted good enough; especially when in competition with some that were. Few thousand years ago a mythology of one Babylonian tribe wasn't nothing special, lived among many other; but over time it for and passed further some modifications here and there - few of them eventually proving very competitive.
But it seems that "elders" of religions aren't typically aware of this. It also totally escapes the attnetion of folk conciousness of given faith, obviously. No actions directed specifically at it - and as we can see lately, some concious acts of churches can actualy prove detrimental to them.
It is possible to get ahead. Question is - do we want to?
Perhaps crafting some appropriate philosophical system could be acceptable...
US has no spies? No industrial espionage?
You know, there's quite a bit of consensus (there's that word again!) that US intelligence agencies collecting data about foes, or potential foes, also provide some hints to US companies...
In a discussion it's ususally a good idea to keep on the issues it touched upon previously, not forgetting about them and just throwing new ones in.
And bringing those particular factors doesn't make you look good - they essentially boil down to "we already are wasteful when it comes to resources during production of a car, so we have a right to continue doing it after it's built". Those "cars so small that they looked like a glorified golf cart" (such false characterisations go a long way towards building certain approach...) are what's normal on Earth, not "weird".
Another poster gave decently passable argument BTW - you build way too short merging lanes (but in that case you can either limit speeds or rebuild those lanes)
Consuming without the will to put hard limits on oneself is plenty amoral; if all externalities were to be taken into account there's also no way it could be legal while operating by the current rules. Look how wasteful you are, claiming for yourself almost three times more resources than the most lean places with comparable standard of living (and even those most likely exceed what this planet can provide long term).
How much of all the above are the needs? Or...how come people at your place convinced themselves that they are? On what basis? (and considering that it's also claiming disproportionally large part of some global "resources per capita" metric)
What you're saying could be also, basically, said like this: "I made a horrible choice, so I will stick with it for now...at least as far as not trying more to deal with it goes; oh, and life is hard" (really? Compared to what?)
It's dishonest to approach human waste as a law of nature; choosing, it seems, one narrow meaning of "waste". You're thinking of byproducts of human processes - but we can strive to perform those as efficiently as possible (and without exceeding sustainable limits on input and output levels) /. know that computers can perform actions largely autonomously...)
Some things can be so easy...like setting your damn computer to go into hibernation if you forget about turning it off (I would think people on
"Faulty" as far as those places would be concerned. I'm sure Sweden, Finland or Germany would love to find valid reason to ban Huawei equipment in the EU.
This wasn't about HP, only about the time required to reach given speed; your cars aren't that heavier (and those which are...well, that's another problem)
Justifying wasteful HP levels with possible close calls is a vicious cycle. Would you prefer tanks?
In communist China, government controls...you? O_o
So you think people in other places don't drive 60+ mph?... (hence no need for merging into traffic going at such speed...)
"You" as applying to a group or country (really, practically any country...); it's not my fault EN doesn't distinguish readily between second persons of singular and plural.
And sure, perhaps I overdo trying being neutral about current situation (that was about the Chinese), circumstances of which are still unfolding and won't be properly known for some time. Perhaps it will turn out they do a lot more copying than everybody thought; perhaps the contrary.
And Japanese had rather peculiar circumstances at the time...
Gear of such kind would also have to pass approval from several institutions. Also in places which are not only moderately decent corruption-wise...but have probably strong interest in discovering a reason to ban such faulty equipment (having in their borders Nokia Siemens, Ericsson...). Yes, it's formally probably only compliance with electromagnetic regulations and communication standards, but c'mon.
"Debt" (figurative of course) - it's not like Chinese got much in return for those inventions, also discoveries, etc. But some of those things were probably of great benefit to progress outside their borders.
...Honda 4 cylinder engine. It probably took 3 minutes to get up to 55mph...
Is that how people justify the waste their bring, for no good reason?
Yeah...how intensive crash test campaign was performed? How many real world accidents? How much people inside would be stressed from the "advice" not to be in the way of opening airbags? (if they had no restraints...)
So how would it fly considering that Huawei gear is used in places with sensible "copyright protection" (or whatever it's called in a given day) / etc.?
Then apparently good & reliable enough; either way, I don't think it's a coincidence that few networks using them, from my general area, seem to be at least as good as other in network reliability perceived by users; and offering them great deals.
Shouldn't they also only improve?
A fun read to go through: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions
Yes, they were a bit sidelined for few last centuries; considering the above list it's not totally unreasonable to look at any possible present "tech stealing" as collecting debt, in the process of revving up again.
US German enginners and Soviet German engineers also come to mind (nevermind all the German patents, tech, etc.); or ignoring by the US early intellectul rights (or whatever the promoted term was back then) when it suited you.
Now it just suits you to point out possibly similar things in others.
Yeah, in many places it is required merely to know, on favorable enough terms, powerful persons from applicable parties.
You seriously think they ship slightly modified Cisco firmware?
If there were any...
Huawei couldn't really become a bit popular in Europe, networks cooperating with them bringing competition (shocker) and price wars.
There was similar "consensus" about Japanese or perhaps even Koreans not a long time ago...
Seriously, don't you see a problem with reaching it in the group of colleagues? (or that pretty much anybody doing it has some interest in coming to such conclusion)
Such devices are really just a side business for Huawei anyway. They are big in mobile network equipment - base stations, their backbone, etc. Apparently it's comparably good & reliable to "old" brands, while being significantly cheaper. And becoming more and more popular.
Don't forget Symbian, with almost half of smartphone sales and also licensing quite a bit of MS tech. But I guess MS would be prefer to have a bit more...leverage.
why we don't hear people using such style of defense for some of the so called "feature phone" platforms?... (no, not the version castrated / never brought to you / uglyfied by US carriers)