So whatever next comes out on top for market share will be the target. So what?
You don't even need to have the top 10 virus scanners installed even locally, there are websites that will happilly test your particular malware against the top 10 for you, automagically.
>I know I've seen copyright labels on a lot of NASA products and images and animations
A lot of those were tacked on by third parties.
There are a few culture thieves (publishers) that have been taking expired copyright/public domain stuff and tacking on a new copyright to it. As if this minimal sweat of the brow is enough to re-copyright.
And this is why gun control advocates will always be met with a big fat "No."
I think the NRA is fucking bogus and not representative of most lawful gun owners anymore, but the nannies who would turn us into England where a kitchen knife is classified as a deadly weapons need to STFD and STFU.
There's outsourcing, and there's outsourcing with getting clean code back and getting it on time. There's a difference. The difference is flying to east-bumfuck-nowhere (Bangalore, Shanghai, Bluefield WV) to have a sit-down/chat to find out who's the one who's contributing crap code and getting the contracting business to put him on someone else's project. This has a tendency to fail and it's why some businesses are bringing coding back home.
He has found a way to get the holy grail - cheap, good, and on-time instead of just picking two.
Yes, he just proved his own job could be outsourced to China, but then he should be promoted to a management position due to this skill.
Either that or he should just hang up his own shingle and compete.
>I was talking about "gun nuts". If that's how you identify yourself.....
Being disingenuous on top of being an asshole merely enhances you being an asshole, not the other way 'round.
You did nothing to enhance the discussion, but rather bring the fog of flamewars to it. Indeed, I *could* make an argument for universal background checks, because I believe in responsible gun ownership like they have in Switzerland, where every house has an "assault" weapon, pretty much, but I won't here, because you're not worth talking to, except to point out that you're a moron
The point is how many fucking bullets you fucking gun nuts want to put in your fucking guns: or in other words, how many children you can kill in a single burst.
Thousands. All of us who shoot really want to go out some day in a blaze of glory shooting preschoolers with grenade launchers, leaving nothing but a thin red mist of former preschoolers in our wake.
To rule out an idea because you can't test it is an indefeasible bias in favor of your current ideas
You're using that word wrongly....
But when one is trying to determine truth, one needs to work with the ensemble of all ideas consistent with current observations....and then add a large helping of uncertainty.
>I'm not saying it won't happen, I'm just saying it hasn't happened yet, and I'm curious as to why.
China lagged behind both Korea and Japan because of two things:
WWII (the Japanese invaded and such) and the Cultural Revolution. While WWII and the Korean War interfered with both the advancement of Japan and Korea, Japan was rapidly built up after the war and so was Korea after the Korean war. Because they were our buds and we gave them money to do so, because COMMUNISM.
China had to contend with the Cultural Revolution, which didn't really end when Mao died. The Cultural Revolution was also an anti-intellectual revolt due to misguided nativism - anything too "western" was counter-revolutionary and "bad" and that included engineering. It had to take Deng Xiaoping to start implementing reforms, and by that time, you're talking 1987 when he left office and reforms were underway, while Japan was *already* a manufacturing giant with luxury brands, and Korea was really beginning to become an economic and manufacturing powerhouse.
The PRC leadership now values anything that can advance STEM. They actually give it a lot more weight than we do here in the US. STEM is no longer viewed as "western."
It's no longer a question of "if" China will become an engineering powerhouse as well as the manufacturing giant it is, but when.
Give it 10 more years, which is a lot shorter than it seems right now.
I was just writing from the perspective of a resident of the US since WWII and a witness to rampant American Exceptionalism philosophy in my 47 years on this planet.
Of course if you want to look at the larger picture, yes, there is no actual race out there that is special and that success is always contingent on current circumstances (resources, ambition, etc), which is why I mentioned Jared Diamond's book, "Guns, Germs, and Steel," That book is actually an excellent read and doesn't seem as long or difficult as the physical dimensions of the book seem to indicate.
Imagine, if you will, Rome not becoming top-heavy with administration and complacent, what that might have implied for whether it would collapse or not. Imagine China not retreating and becoming insular after its Zeng He's great trading ships plied the seas. Imagine the Chinese reaching North America 100 years before Columbus.
The US itself was once a knockoff place.
I grew up in Rhode Island, and I was just across the river from Slater's Mill last week.
But that is merely arguing for hypotheses that are untestable.
Science doesn't revolve around the untestable. We leave that to metaphysics and religion. Stuff we can't test, even mathematically, we can't do anything with, and testable things have gotten us where we are today in terms of scientific and technological advancement. Aristotle's penchant for thought experiments, trying to bend the Universe to how it *ought* to be, as opposed to how it *is* by direct or even indirect observation, held back scientific, technical, and philosophical advancement for a long time, until various members of the medieval Church started challenging it (I am currently reading "Before Galileo" by John Freely, a pretty good read).
Using untestable ideas (Last Thursdayism, a parody) that rely on recursive untestable hypotheses gets you nowhere, except a headache, religion, or madness (like TimeCube). As Carl Sagan illustrated in his book "The Demon Haunted World," I could attest that there is a dragon in my garage, and each objection I could nullify by making a untestable statement, like "he's invisible" and "no, paint won't stick" and "spreading powder on the floor won't detect his footprints since he floats" ad infinitum and ad nauseam. If i kept defending the invisible dragon to the bitter end, not letting you know that I was putting you on, you would find that I was quite mad.
And you are being a Bigot in assuming that the Japanese and Chinese are exactly the same and capable of the same accomplishments because they all look Asian.
No, I am saying that they are exactly the same and capable of the same because they are *human beings*.
LG used to be known as Gold Star. Gold Star was known as the "junk" brand of Sears, K-Mart, Zayre (oooh, I'm old) and other stores that targeted the low end consumer.
Gold Star had such a bad reputation that they changed their name to LG which stands for Lucky Gold Star.
Those that pooh-pooh the Chinese brands are ignoring all of the history since WWII. We used to laugh at Honda, Toyota, Kawasaki, Sony, NEC, Yamaha, and all the other Japanese brands, and now they high quality and popular (even luxury brands!). The American car and electronics manufacturers were complacent and we nearly completely lost automobile manufacturing entirely *twice* - only to be bailed out with government loans. We lost consumer electronics manufacturing entirely in the US.
Korean brands used to have a ridiculously bad reputation. Now we have Korean brands that people are more than willing to buy, sometimes preferring them over Japanese brands like Sharp. Hyundai used to be viewed as a disposable car (I had an Excel at one point). Now they are good quality transportation, as good as anything Japanese (but maybe not Infiniti or Acura).
And now we have idiots replying to this story saying that the Chinese will never make higher quality goods, as if the Chinese are somehow inherently inferior. This smacks of denial and racism, frankly, the same kind of denial and racism that we used against the Japanese and Koreans, before the Japanese and Koreans kicked our asses in manufacturing.
It feels good to think that you're superior to other people...but this is delusional. This is why Jared Diamond's book angered so many conservatives - he exposed the environmental, food, and natural transportation advantages people in the Middle East and Europe had over other locations on the planet. He detailed how these advantages were the real reason why European civilization became so successful, instead of some inherent quality of "white" people. And you see this every day. You see it in the denial that "those people over there" can't possibly be as good scientists and engineers as we in the US are.
It's a dumb worldview, and eventually self-defeating, because where the manufacturing goes, the science and engineering goes too. We here in the US are not special. Complacency brings down empires - political and economic both. We have been complacent for 60 years, because we thought the post WWII boom would go on forever.
People who take extreme positions like the world being 6000 years old deserve to be ridiculed. We laugh at the Flat Earth Society, why do we not laugh at these people who also have a warped world view that flies against reality, a reality that has been further against this "the world began in 4004 BC as calculated by a monk in the dark ages" since the Renaissance.
But to top this off, they have political power. The Flat Earth Society has no political power, because any FES candidate running for office would be questioned about his ability to work for his constituents by operating on some sort of actual logic. But we give a break to those who believe in the calculations of a medieval monk. (funny how the people who claim YEC claim to be biblical literalists, when there is nothing in the bible, actually, that spells out actual age of the Earth even when calculating the begats - the begats must use WAGs for ages and such).
There are opinions that recognize some sort of reality, and there are the ones who, when looked at briefly rationally, one must believe the people who hold such a belief are insane. At least the Democrats and Republicans, even the most extreme on either side have philosophies that are based at least somewhat on the observation of human behaviour. Creationists? The shoehorns for their worldviews are made of Adamantium.
The scientific method works because the universe is consistent and not arbitrary. That you can create models and test them against reality. It's far better than Aristotle's gedankeneperiments on how things "should" work instead of investigating the reality.
For example, we know that light has a speed and that it's pretty consistent throughout the universe and that the physics concerning light tells us how far away things are. If a photon has been travelling 4.6 billion years to get to us, the universe is *at least* that old because it had to originate somewhere.
There is the Young Earth Creationist assumption that God created the entire universe including "old" photons in flight all at once, merely to fool Man (and that fossils are the same thing, to test one's faith). This is inelegant, and basically says that God is a capricious asshole.
And you say that both the scientific and religious opinions deserve equal weight because "hurr durr, we don't know anything"
Then why were we given brains to witness the universe? Because God set us all up to fail?
Such a being doesn't deserve worship. Satan is more respectable in that regard.
>If you don't care about teaching such people, you can ignore the second one.
I've tried to teach people. I've had a discussion on here that exemplified what happens.
I took someone at his word that he was serious about being a Young Earth Creationist, that he had a valid opinion, and that maybe I could convince him otherwise by appealing to his belief that God is All Powerful, and that, really, the literal biblical Creationism bullcrap is merely a limit by Man on what God can do, because "who the heck are you to say that God didn't use the Big Bang and Evolution to create Man?"
I could get him right up to the edge of knowledge, that the idea of biblical literal creationism is a human fable constructed by savages who didn't even know that the Earth revolves around the Sun. And if you're God, isn't it far more elegant to create something that operates on its own instead of having to meddle with it every second?
You get them right up to that point, and then they repeat something they were told when they were 5 years old.
Maybe it's time that people who buy into that were finally told that believing that stuff is like still believing in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
>Bringing the word 'apes' into any discussion about the development of life is sure to aggravate certain groups.
Good. Let them be mad. Let them rail against reality.
It's high time we stopped walking on eggs about this issue. There is this fallacy that each person's opinion about the universe is just as valid as another's. As if we have to be polite about them like we have to be polite about the pictures of their kids.
No. No we don't.
If you believe the universe was created in 4004 BC at 9am, you are a nut. There are no qualifiers to go with that. Not "you might be a nut" or "some people would disagree with you." No. You're a full-blown nutcase.
And yes, we are apes. Big naked apes. Deal with it.
Money laundering doesn't have to be done with money. Any exchange of value used to obfuscate verboten activity is per-se money laundering
Transferring a bag of coconuts from the trunk of one car to the trunk of another, representing an exchange of value, when done to obfuscate illegal activity, is money laundering.
That's US law, and it's the law in a bunch of other countries too.
Slashdot Mirror
So whatever next comes out on top for market share will be the target. So what?
You don't even need to have the top 10 virus scanners installed even locally, there are websites that will happilly test your particular malware against the top 10 for you, automagically.
I don't see the point of your message, honestly.
--
BMO
The question is did they get enough batteries on their battery card to qualify for free batteries?
(does Radio Shack still do this?)
--
BMO
>I know I've seen copyright labels on a lot of NASA products and images and animations
A lot of those were tacked on by third parties.
There are a few culture thieves (publishers) that have been taking expired copyright/public domain stuff and tacking on a new copyright to it. As if this minimal sweat of the brow is enough to re-copyright.
--
BMO
And this is why gun control advocates will always be met with a big fat "No."
I think the NRA is fucking bogus and not representative of most lawful gun owners anymore, but the nannies who would turn us into England where a kitchen knife is classified as a deadly weapons need to STFD and STFU.
--
BMO
There's outsourcing, and there's outsourcing with getting clean code back and getting it on time. There's a difference. The difference is flying to east-bumfuck-nowhere (Bangalore, Shanghai, Bluefield WV) to have a sit-down/chat to find out who's the one who's contributing crap code and getting the contracting business to put him on someone else's project. This has a tendency to fail and it's why some businesses are bringing coding back home.
He has found a way to get the holy grail - cheap, good, and on-time instead of just picking two.
Yes, he just proved his own job could be outsourced to China, but then he should be promoted to a management position due to this skill.
Either that or he should just hang up his own shingle and compete.
--
BMO
>I was talking about "gun nuts". If that's how you identify yourself .....
Being disingenuous on top of being an asshole merely enhances you being an asshole, not the other way 'round.
You did nothing to enhance the discussion, but rather bring the fog of flamewars to it. Indeed, I *could* make an argument for universal background checks, because I believe in responsible gun ownership like they have in Switzerland, where every house has an "assault" weapon, pretty much, but I won't here, because you're not worth talking to, except to point out that you're a moron
--
BMO
The point is how many fucking bullets you fucking gun nuts want to put in your fucking guns: or in other words, how many children you can kill in a single burst.
Thousands. All of us who shoot really want to go out some day in a blaze of glory shooting preschoolers with grenade launchers, leaving nothing but a thin red mist of former preschoolers in our wake.
Or, you know, the nut here is you.
--
BMO
To rule out an idea because you can't test it is an indefeasible bias in favor of your current ideas
You're using that word wrongly....
But when one is trying to determine truth, one needs to work with the ensemble of all ideas consistent with current observations....and then add a large helping of uncertainty.
OK, so I'm being trolled.
Bye.
--
BMO
>I'm not saying it won't happen, I'm just saying it hasn't happened yet, and I'm curious as to why.
China lagged behind both Korea and Japan because of two things:
WWII (the Japanese invaded and such) and the Cultural Revolution. While WWII and the Korean War interfered with both the advancement of Japan and Korea, Japan was rapidly built up after the war and so was Korea after the Korean war. Because they were our buds and we gave them money to do so, because COMMUNISM.
China had to contend with the Cultural Revolution, which didn't really end when Mao died. The Cultural Revolution was also an anti-intellectual revolt due to misguided nativism - anything too "western" was counter-revolutionary and "bad" and that included engineering. It had to take Deng Xiaoping to start implementing reforms, and by that time, you're talking 1987 when he left office and reforms were underway, while Japan was *already* a manufacturing giant with luxury brands, and Korea was really beginning to become an economic and manufacturing powerhouse.
The PRC leadership now values anything that can advance STEM. They actually give it a lot more weight than we do here in the US. STEM is no longer viewed as "western."
It's no longer a question of "if" China will become an engineering powerhouse as well as the manufacturing giant it is, but when.
Give it 10 more years, which is a lot shorter than it seems right now.
--
BMO
I can't argue with anything you've said.
I was just writing from the perspective of a resident of the US since WWII and a witness to rampant American Exceptionalism philosophy in my 47 years on this planet.
Of course if you want to look at the larger picture, yes, there is no actual race out there that is special and that success is always contingent on current circumstances (resources, ambition, etc), which is why I mentioned Jared Diamond's book, "Guns, Germs, and Steel," That book is actually an excellent read and doesn't seem as long or difficult as the physical dimensions of the book seem to indicate.
Imagine, if you will, Rome not becoming top-heavy with administration and complacent, what that might have implied for whether it would collapse or not. Imagine China not retreating and becoming insular after its Zeng He's great trading ships plied the seas. Imagine the Chinese reaching North America 100 years before Columbus.
The US itself was once a knockoff place.
I grew up in Rhode Island, and I was just across the river from Slater's Mill last week.
--
BMO
But that is merely arguing for hypotheses that are untestable.
Science doesn't revolve around the untestable. We leave that to metaphysics and religion. Stuff we can't test, even mathematically, we can't do anything with, and testable things have gotten us where we are today in terms of scientific and technological advancement. Aristotle's penchant for thought experiments, trying to bend the Universe to how it *ought* to be, as opposed to how it *is* by direct or even indirect observation, held back scientific, technical, and philosophical advancement for a long time, until various members of the medieval Church started challenging it (I am currently reading "Before Galileo" by John Freely, a pretty good read).
Using untestable ideas (Last Thursdayism, a parody) that rely on recursive untestable hypotheses gets you nowhere, except a headache, religion, or madness (like TimeCube). As Carl Sagan illustrated in his book "The Demon Haunted World," I could attest that there is a dragon in my garage, and each objection I could nullify by making a untestable statement, like "he's invisible" and "no, paint won't stick" and "spreading powder on the floor won't detect his footprints since he floats" ad infinitum and ad nauseam. If i kept defending the invisible dragon to the bitter end, not letting you know that I was putting you on, you would find that I was quite mad.
--
BMO
And you are being a Bigot in assuming that the Japanese and Chinese are exactly the same and capable of the same accomplishments because they all look Asian.
No, I am saying that they are exactly the same and capable of the same because they are *human beings*.
Meet your new status, fuckhead.
--
BMO
You're seriously arguing for Last Thursdayism? Really?
--
BMO
I've seen nobody say "China can never make quality hardware."
Oh look.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3376583&cid=42562759
Even modded insightful.
--
BMO
LG used to be known as Gold Star. Gold Star was known as the "junk" brand of Sears, K-Mart, Zayre (oooh, I'm old) and other stores that targeted the low end consumer.
Gold Star had such a bad reputation that they changed their name to LG which stands for Lucky Gold Star.
Those that pooh-pooh the Chinese brands are ignoring all of the history since WWII. We used to laugh at Honda, Toyota, Kawasaki, Sony, NEC, Yamaha, and all the other Japanese brands, and now they high quality and popular (even luxury brands!). The American car and electronics manufacturers were complacent and we nearly completely lost automobile manufacturing entirely *twice* - only to be bailed out with government loans. We lost consumer electronics manufacturing entirely in the US.
Korean brands used to have a ridiculously bad reputation. Now we have Korean brands that people are more than willing to buy, sometimes preferring them over Japanese brands like Sharp. Hyundai used to be viewed as a disposable car (I had an Excel at one point). Now they are good quality transportation, as good as anything Japanese (but maybe not Infiniti or Acura).
And now we have idiots replying to this story saying that the Chinese will never make higher quality goods, as if the Chinese are somehow inherently inferior. This smacks of denial and racism, frankly, the same kind of denial and racism that we used against the Japanese and Koreans, before the Japanese and Koreans kicked our asses in manufacturing.
It feels good to think that you're superior to other people...but this is delusional. This is why Jared Diamond's book angered so many conservatives - he exposed the environmental, food, and natural transportation advantages people in the Middle East and Europe had over other locations on the planet. He detailed how these advantages were the real reason why European civilization became so successful, instead of some inherent quality of "white" people. And you see this every day. You see it in the denial that "those people over there" can't possibly be as good scientists and engineers as we in the US are.
It's a dumb worldview, and eventually self-defeating, because where the manufacturing goes, the science and engineering goes too. We here in the US are not special. Complacency brings down empires - political and economic both. We have been complacent for 60 years, because we thought the post WWII boom would go on forever.
--
BMO
People who take extreme positions like the world being 6000 years old deserve to be ridiculed. We laugh at the Flat Earth Society, why do we not laugh at these people who also have a warped world view that flies against reality, a reality that has been further against this "the world began in 4004 BC as calculated by a monk in the dark ages" since the Renaissance.
But to top this off, they have political power. The Flat Earth Society has no political power, because any FES candidate running for office would be questioned about his ability to work for his constituents by operating on some sort of actual logic. But we give a break to those who believe in the calculations of a medieval monk. (funny how the people who claim YEC claim to be biblical literalists, when there is nothing in the bible, actually, that spells out actual age of the Earth even when calculating the begats - the begats must use WAGs for ages and such).
There are opinions that recognize some sort of reality, and there are the ones who, when looked at briefly rationally, one must believe the people who hold such a belief are insane. At least the Democrats and Republicans, even the most extreme on either side have philosophies that are based at least somewhat on the observation of human behaviour. Creationists? The shoehorns for their worldviews are made of Adamantium.
--
BMO
Then why create models of anything ever?
The scientific method works because the universe is consistent and not arbitrary. That you can create models and test them against reality. It's far better than Aristotle's gedankeneperiments on how things "should" work instead of investigating the reality.
For example, we know that light has a speed and that it's pretty consistent throughout the universe and that the physics concerning light tells us how far away things are. If a photon has been travelling 4.6 billion years to get to us, the universe is *at least* that old because it had to originate somewhere.
There is the Young Earth Creationist assumption that God created the entire universe including "old" photons in flight all at once, merely to fool Man (and that fossils are the same thing, to test one's faith). This is inelegant, and basically says that God is a capricious asshole.
And you say that both the scientific and religious opinions deserve equal weight because "hurr durr, we don't know anything"
Then why were we given brains to witness the universe? Because God set us all up to fail?
Such a being doesn't deserve worship. Satan is more respectable in that regard.
--
BMO
>If you don't care about teaching such people, you can ignore the second one.
I've tried to teach people. I've had a discussion on here that exemplified what happens.
I took someone at his word that he was serious about being a Young Earth Creationist, that he had a valid opinion, and that maybe I could convince him otherwise by appealing to his belief that God is All Powerful, and that, really, the literal biblical Creationism bullcrap is merely a limit by Man on what God can do, because "who the heck are you to say that God didn't use the Big Bang and Evolution to create Man?"
I could get him right up to the edge of knowledge, that the idea of biblical literal creationism is a human fable constructed by savages who didn't even know that the Earth revolves around the Sun. And if you're God, isn't it far more elegant to create something that operates on its own instead of having to meddle with it every second?
You get them right up to that point, and then they repeat something they were told when they were 5 years old.
Maybe it's time that people who buy into that were finally told that believing that stuff is like still believing in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
--
BMO
>Bringing the word 'apes' into any discussion about the development of life is sure to aggravate certain groups.
Good. Let them be mad. Let them rail against reality.
It's high time we stopped walking on eggs about this issue. There is this fallacy that each person's opinion about the universe is just as valid as another's. As if we have to be polite about them like we have to be polite about the pictures of their kids.
No. No we don't.
If you believe the universe was created in 4004 BC at 9am, you are a nut. There are no qualifiers to go with that. Not "you might be a nut" or "some people would disagree with you." No. You're a full-blown nutcase.
And yes, we are apes. Big naked apes. Deal with it.
--
BMO
Money laundering doesn't have to be done with money. Any exchange of value used to obfuscate verboten activity is per-se money laundering
Transferring a bag of coconuts from the trunk of one car to the trunk of another, representing an exchange of value, when done to obfuscate illegal activity, is money laundering.
That's US law, and it's the law in a bunch of other countries too.
"It can't be money laundering if it's not money"
Yeah, enjoy prison, guy.
--
BMO
>Till then we can always take ginger pills to cure the motion sickness.
I did know that gingers had no souls but I didn't know we ground them up into pills.
--
BMO
But I have hair in my ears. I need it under my hat!
--
BMO
Because induction coils still need to be made of metals. Because physics.
--
BMO
And where are they now?
I'll tell you.
They are dead.
--
BMO
But those aren't even related to what we're talking about.
Go be pedantic elsewhere.
--
BMO