Also, getting your SoCs from Intel still means you have a single supplier that could squeeze you in the next contract, especially if they find they really like your SoCs. With ARM, you can shop around for suppliers and keep several if your runs are large enough.
It isn't just the assembly lines, it is all the support industries like engineering, glass manufacturers, screw factories, etc. China is not just one big assembly line, they have built an entire manufacturing eco-system that would tough to replicate elsewhere. That won't stop countries from trying though.
There have been statements by Foxconn that they're thinking of adding automation to their lines. If that catches on in China, there will be a lot of newly unemployed proles wandering around causing the government new headaches. This is the government that gets it panties in a bunch the the Falun Gong to calisthenics on the government's front lawn. Other parts of the supply chain (engineers, parts suppliers, etc.) seem to be firmly fixed in China for the time being so Foxconn will probably stay there.
Muslim hordes invaded Europe way back when. Then the Europeans came to America. So this was just payback. Come to it, the Egyptians invaded N. Africa and the Mid-East. The people became Muslims and we know where that led.
How far back does one go before the argument is specious? Is there a magic number of years, generations?
Just to amplify what you said. What Kripke did was to show that one could provide models of intuitionistic and modal logics which had "possible worlds". To understand that, you must start with classical logic. In classical logic, a model determines the value of every logical formula. In short, each is either true or false. It does not suggest which is the "right" or "correct" or "this" world. In intuitionsism, a way of viewing mathematical statements, one starts with a present world and additions to it represent new knowledge. Presumably, since knowledge is infinite in scope, and given our ignorance, this is modeled as a partial order of increasing more informative worlds which answer more and and more questions as one goes up the order. It does not prescribe which path through the order it the "real" or "correct" path. Logic cannot do that.
Re modal logic, replace the partial order with a mere relation. Now you have more freedom to choose worlds, but logic does not choose worlds for you. It merely lays out the possibilities.
This is all rather formal and not connect to the physical world. The notion of possible world in logic is not really on all fours with a possible world in physics. In logic, possible means only that it is "accessible" from the present world, in a very abstract sense. Logic does not posit any "current" world unless you wish to characterize it as "every thing that is the case". Good luck figuring out what is or is not the case. The physical world in some sense is indistinct in the sense that we do not know what is "all that is the case" for "this" world except in an abstract sense.
The possible worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is a matching of infinitely branching mathematical models with infinitely branching mathematical models of Kripke, i.e. partial order. But logic won't ever be able to tell which is the correct path through that partial order, only tell you the possibilities unconstrained by physical theory. Physical theory will prune that partial order into something smaller...but probably not practicable except as it indicates consistent paths forward.
Only in reference for historical purposes. The point is that as a drag on the economy, it isn't. I do not mean to imply that it necessarily need be kept to historical percentages. That would be silly.
Not just that, the Shia-Sunni civil war would probably get a lot hotter, especially when Iran gets the bomb and the other countries decide they must have one as well or their dicks will look small in comparison. Also, the price of oil would go through the roof and deep-six the U.S. and other Western economies. And, as you mentioned, the pogroms against everyone who isn't Muslim.
Unless we get real economic forecasts of the implications of each point of Romney's plan, it is impossible to rate it. Similarly with Obama. And even with the forecasts, the U.S. economy is so large and so dynamic that I'm unsure what the forecasts would means years from now.
Personally, I think they should just start by revising the tax code to cut deductions and raise revenue and then see where we stand on the budget. Well, we should probably not increase the budget beyond the rate of inflation. In a few years, we revisit the cost-structure and decide on the next round of changes.
I think Romney and Obama should just shut the hell up about the wonders of their plans. They cannot fulfill those promises because the promises themselves have no meaning in such a complicated system as the U.S.
The other $2.7 Trillion goes for the rest of the discretionary budget (roughly $400-500 Billion). The remaining $2.3-2.2 Trillion goes for SS and the rest of the entitlements. Defense is now at one of its lowest points with respect to GDP since WW2. You won't be balancing anything by taking it out of Defense. That isn't saying Defense could not be streamlined, it could, but it won't solve the budget problem.
Don't do many science experiments, do you? If you had to design a fusion reactor, for which you need to figure out how to make fusion self-sustaining, would you (a) build all the support structure of turbines, steam pipes, etc. as well as the design and build the fusion reactor, or (b) figure out how to make fusion self-sustaining and then worry later about the support structure? Hint, you rarely if ever build the engineering before figuring out the science since how the science comes out will indicate how the engineering should proceed. It's an experiment, not a finalized design.
Yes, but the congress-critter's belief in a sky magician will have an effect on you, just not directly. That bozo on an S&T committee and his motto appears to be "we don't need no stinkin' science".
If you had said the Federal Debt, then you'd be correct, but only because the Federal Deficit is the yearly amount we fail to collect in taxes for expenses incurred. What do you think the Federal Gov. does with your payroll taxes?
"but it would upset consumers to not at least meet the standards set out there by Mocrosoft's base model"...consumers? Care about MS's base model? Not bloody likely.
Saying it was the inability to realize how big the consumer smartphone space would be points to a bigger culture difference. Apple has almost never expressed an interest in the business market, probably thinking that MS had it all sown up. So the difference goes farther back than phones. I doubt Apple could have predicted that the consumer market would wag the business dog. Jobs was many things but he couldn't predict the future. Rather, MS got blindsided when the consumer angle started impacting their core business business in ways they never imagined. It had nothing to do with Ballmer, Gates, Allen, et. al. in the sense that none of them would have seen this. However, it does have a lot to do with that gang pissing on consumers and fondling business. When Apple paid attention to consumers, consumers responded. When it was just the PC world, consumers were a small, well corralled flock. When the consumer devices that did what consumers wanted became apparent, Apple only caught the initial gleam in the iPod. When that hit, Jobs put two and two together and created a consumer satisfier company. The bullshit of "Apple fanbois" sucking up the distortion field was always crap, Jobs knew it. When he realized that in consumer devices that compute, he got there before everyone else and the rest is history. Whether Apple keeps its crown is an open question.
Son, you have no understanding of the U.S. monetary system. The federal reserve can increase the money supply, they are an independent agency, independent of the other three branches. However, they are constrained in how much they can ease the money supply. Beyond a certain level, it creates an inflation and the fed is has two mandates, keep inflation low and keep employment high.
Social security is a trust fund...kind of. The U.S. government is not allowed to "store" money in a trust fund and you wouldn't want them to because it would be sucking money out of the economy. So the rest of the government writes IOUs to spend the money you and your employer send in for SS. Remember that eye-watering number known as the federal debt? The really BIG number? Well, consider that your SS trust fund. What, you say, you mean the government hasn't been squirreling away our SS money under a giant mattress? No, young Grasshopper, it's been spending it like a drunken sailor. You have approximately squat...well, actually negative squat since you and the rest of us are on the hook for that money.
And where will a good chunk of that money go to when we finally cough it up? Why, the Me Generation. It turns out the Me Generation has also been spending like drunken sailors and not saving for retirement. So the Blue Hairs will be demanding their cut which will turn out to be several times more than they ever paid in. Are you going to tell Granny she can't have yours? Do you want to make her day? She can come to live with you since you won't be able to afford the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed and will demand the government provide.
And before you get all highly outraged over whatever you are referring to as the mafia-style protection racket, let us not forget that you, Grasshopper, have helped spend America into the toilet. Now stop whining, gird your loins, and start paying for all those government benefits you have been demanding your congress guy/gal produce for "the people". Oh, and stop thinking you are going to take it out of the military. They only get 3 percent or less of GDP and less than a 1/3 of the budget. The rest of the discretionary spending (total disc. sp. is about 1/3 of the budget) covers neat things like NIH, FAA, etc., the part of the government that works. The other 2/3 covers Entitlements. You believe in those, right? The ones that are about to explode in cost because the Me Generation is starting to retire in droves. And if you think of taking all the military's funding, you still are about $400-500 Billion short of covering this years deficit, so you won't be paying down the debt with it either.
Grasshopper, so young, so pointy-headed, so innocent. Grow the fuck up.
The Allies controlling the seas helped stop Germany. However, what really stopped Germany was Hitler. He had a hard on for taking the Soviet Union. He more or less stopped paying attention to Britain because he didn't have to. They were not going anywhere. In 1941, it was Go East Young German. And that happened until Stalingrad (1942-1943) and a host of other battles. Stalin was pleading for the West to open the Western Front and was pissed that it didn't happen. The West finally moved....on N. Africa in 1942 and promptly got their butt handed to them. After slugging it out and eventually reaching Italy in 1943, then D-Day happened...in 1944. This was approx 3 years after Germany attacked the Soviet Union. They didn't win, however, for Stalin's pleas to defend Communism. It was only when he invoked nationalism that he could get the conscripts to fight.
When the Western invasion started making gains, Hitler still moved divisions to fight against the SU. His fear of Stalin greatly outstripped his fears of the West who he thought would sue for peace at the first possible moment. He knew Stalin would never sue for peace, especially after Germany double-crossed him after signing the non-aggression pact with the SU. He took personal control of the Eastern front and fucked it up royally for Germany. Hitler had very little actual military training and an ego that would not let him listen to the German high command.
Hitler was the West's and the Soviet Union's best weapon which, after some initial success, screwed up in ways never before imagined.
"Someone is being a dick, and risking ruining their reputation in a misguided attempt to muscle in on the other's business."
I don't think that is entirely true. If Google was not behind a competing platform, then it would be true. Apple probably fears that Google will make their software work better on their OSs which would make Apple's iStuff look bad. So whether Apple likes it or not, they are forced into building competing software for their own iThings.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, getting your SoCs from Intel still means you have a single supplier that could squeeze you in the next contract, especially if they find they really like your SoCs. With ARM, you can shop around for suppliers and keep several if your runs are large enough.
Wow, can you show us the memo from Samsung so we can all revel in the joy of reading it?
The terrorists would just blow up the HSR trains, there's too many groups that have an interest in screwing it up.
It isn't just the assembly lines, it is all the support industries like engineering, glass manufacturers, screw factories, etc. China is not just one big assembly line, they have built an entire manufacturing eco-system that would tough to replicate elsewhere. That won't stop countries from trying though.
There have been statements by Foxconn that they're thinking of adding automation to their lines. If that catches on in China, there will be a lot of newly unemployed proles wandering around causing the government new headaches. This is the government that gets it panties in a bunch the the Falun Gong to calisthenics on the government's front lawn. Other parts of the supply chain (engineers, parts suppliers, etc.) seem to be firmly fixed in China for the time being so Foxconn will probably stay there.
More like a snake at a dinner party who acts surprised when a guest is missing and there's that suspicious lump slowing sliding down its snake belly.
Muslim hordes invaded Europe way back when. Then the Europeans came to America. So this was just payback. Come to it, the Egyptians invaded N. Africa and the Mid-East. The people became Muslims and we know where that led.
How far back does one go before the argument is specious? Is there a magic number of years, generations?
Just to amplify what you said. What Kripke did was to show that one could provide models of intuitionistic and modal logics which had "possible worlds". To understand that, you must start with classical logic. In classical logic, a model determines the value of every logical formula. In short, each is either true or false. It does not suggest which is the "right" or "correct" or "this" world. In intuitionsism, a way of viewing mathematical statements, one starts with a present world and additions to it represent new knowledge. Presumably, since knowledge is infinite in scope, and given our ignorance, this is modeled as a partial order of increasing more informative worlds which answer more and and more questions as one goes up the order. It does not prescribe which path through the order it the "real" or "correct" path. Logic cannot do that.
Re modal logic, replace the partial order with a mere relation. Now you have more freedom to choose worlds, but logic does not choose worlds for you. It merely lays out the possibilities.
This is all rather formal and not connect to the physical world. The notion of possible world in logic is not really on all fours with a possible world in physics. In logic, possible means only that it is "accessible" from the present world, in a very abstract sense. Logic does not posit any "current" world unless you wish to characterize it as "every thing that is the case". Good luck figuring out what is or is not the case. The physical world in some sense is indistinct in the sense that we do not know what is "all that is the case" for "this" world except in an abstract sense.
The possible worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is a matching of infinitely branching mathematical models with infinitely branching mathematical models of Kripke, i.e. partial order. But logic won't ever be able to tell which is the correct path through that partial order, only tell you the possibilities unconstrained by physical theory. Physical theory will prune that partial order into something smaller...but probably not practicable except as it indicates consistent paths forward.
Only in reference for historical purposes. The point is that as a drag on the economy, it isn't. I do not mean to imply that it necessarily need be kept to historical percentages. That would be silly.
Not just that, the Shia-Sunni civil war would probably get a lot hotter, especially when Iran gets the bomb and the other countries decide they must have one as well or their dicks will look small in comparison. Also, the price of oil would go through the roof and deep-six the U.S. and other Western economies. And, as you mentioned, the pogroms against everyone who isn't Muslim.
Unless we get real economic forecasts of the implications of each point of Romney's plan, it is impossible to rate it. Similarly with Obama. And even with the forecasts, the U.S. economy is so large and so dynamic that I'm unsure what the forecasts would means years from now.
Personally, I think they should just start by revising the tax code to cut deductions and raise revenue and then see where we stand on the budget. Well, we should probably not increase the budget beyond the rate of inflation. In a few years, we revisit the cost-structure and decide on the next round of changes.
I think Romney and Obama should just shut the hell up about the wonders of their plans. They cannot fulfill those promises because the promises themselves have no meaning in such a complicated system as the U.S.
The other $2.7 Trillion goes for the rest of the discretionary budget (roughly $400-500 Billion). The remaining $2.3-2.2 Trillion goes for SS and the rest of the entitlements. Defense is now at one of its lowest points with respect to GDP since WW2. You won't be balancing anything by taking it out of Defense. That isn't saying Defense could not be streamlined, it could, but it won't solve the budget problem.
Don't do many science experiments, do you? If you had to design a fusion reactor, for which you need to figure out how to make fusion self-sustaining, would you (a) build all the support structure of turbines, steam pipes, etc. as well as the design and build the fusion reactor, or (b) figure out how to make fusion self-sustaining and then worry later about the support structure? Hint, you rarely if ever build the engineering before figuring out the science since how the science comes out will indicate how the engineering should proceed. It's an experiment, not a finalized design.
Don't understand much about science do you. Back to the Dark Ages with ye!
So, you are saying you have no faith? Because if you did, you wouldn't care about evidence.
Yes, but the congress-critter's belief in a sky magician will have an effect on you, just not directly. That bozo on an S&T committee and his motto appears to be "we don't need no stinkin' science".
The eWaste is mostly from manufacturing components. Moving assembly to the U.S. won't contribute much to eWaste.
If you had said the Federal Debt, then you'd be correct, but only because the Federal Deficit is the yearly amount we fail to collect in taxes for expenses incurred. What do you think the Federal Gov. does with your payroll taxes?
"but it would upset consumers to not at least meet the standards set out there by Mocrosoft's base model"...consumers? Care about MS's base model? Not bloody likely.
Ummm...so you are saying that MS should promote a mouse-cellphone....
Saying it was the inability to realize how big the consumer smartphone space would be points to a bigger culture difference. Apple has almost never expressed an interest in the business market, probably thinking that MS had it all sown up. So the difference goes farther back than phones. I doubt Apple could have predicted that the consumer market would wag the business dog. Jobs was many things but he couldn't predict the future. Rather, MS got blindsided when the consumer angle started impacting their core business business in ways they never imagined. It had nothing to do with Ballmer, Gates, Allen, et. al. in the sense that none of them would have seen this. However, it does have a lot to do with that gang pissing on consumers and fondling business. When Apple paid attention to consumers, consumers responded. When it was just the PC world, consumers were a small, well corralled flock. When the consumer devices that did what consumers wanted became apparent, Apple only caught the initial gleam in the iPod. When that hit, Jobs put two and two together and created a consumer satisfier company. The bullshit of "Apple fanbois" sucking up the distortion field was always crap, Jobs knew it. When he realized that in consumer devices that compute, he got there before everyone else and the rest is history. Whether Apple keeps its crown is an open question.
Son, you have no understanding of the U.S. monetary system. The federal reserve can increase the money supply, they are an independent agency, independent of the other three branches. However, they are constrained in how much they can ease the money supply. Beyond a certain level, it creates an inflation and the fed is has two mandates, keep inflation low and keep employment high.
Social security is a trust fund...kind of. The U.S. government is not allowed to "store" money in a trust fund and you wouldn't want them to because it would be sucking money out of the economy. So the rest of the government writes IOUs to spend the money you and your employer send in for SS. Remember that eye-watering number known as the federal debt? The really BIG number? Well, consider that your SS trust fund. What, you say, you mean the government hasn't been squirreling away our SS money under a giant mattress? No, young Grasshopper, it's been spending it like a drunken sailor. You have approximately squat...well, actually negative squat since you and the rest of us are on the hook for that money.
And where will a good chunk of that money go to when we finally cough it up? Why, the Me Generation. It turns out the Me Generation has also been spending like drunken sailors and not saving for retirement. So the Blue Hairs will be demanding their cut which will turn out to be several times more than they ever paid in. Are you going to tell Granny she can't have yours? Do you want to make her day? She can come to live with you since you won't be able to afford the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed and will demand the government provide.
And before you get all highly outraged over whatever you are referring to as the mafia-style protection racket, let us not forget that you, Grasshopper, have helped spend America into the toilet. Now stop whining, gird your loins, and start paying for all those government benefits you have been demanding your congress guy/gal produce for "the people". Oh, and stop thinking you are going to take it out of the military. They only get 3 percent or less of GDP and less than a 1/3 of the budget. The rest of the discretionary spending (total disc. sp. is about 1/3 of the budget) covers neat things like NIH, FAA, etc., the part of the government that works. The other 2/3 covers Entitlements. You believe in those, right? The ones that are about to explode in cost because the Me Generation is starting to retire in droves. And if you think of taking all the military's funding, you still are about $400-500 Billion short of covering this years deficit, so you won't be paying down the debt with it either.
Grasshopper, so young, so pointy-headed, so innocent. Grow the fuck up.
The Allies controlling the seas helped stop Germany. However, what really stopped Germany was Hitler. He had a hard on for taking the Soviet Union. He more or less stopped paying attention to Britain because he didn't have to. They were not going anywhere. In 1941, it was Go East Young German. And that happened until Stalingrad (1942-1943) and a host of other battles. Stalin was pleading for the West to open the Western Front and was pissed that it didn't happen. The West finally moved....on N. Africa in 1942 and promptly got their butt handed to them. After slugging it out and eventually reaching Italy in 1943, then D-Day happened...in 1944. This was approx 3 years after Germany attacked the Soviet Union. They didn't win, however, for Stalin's pleas to defend Communism. It was only when he invoked nationalism that he could get the conscripts to fight.
When the Western invasion started making gains, Hitler still moved divisions to fight against the SU. His fear of Stalin greatly outstripped his fears of the West who he thought would sue for peace at the first possible moment. He knew Stalin would never sue for peace, especially after Germany double-crossed him after signing the non-aggression pact with the SU. He took personal control of the Eastern front and fucked it up royally for Germany. Hitler had very little actual military training and an ego that would not let him listen to the German high command.
Hitler was the West's and the Soviet Union's best weapon which, after some initial success, screwed up in ways never before imagined.
And logicians, computer scientists, engineers, etc...just about any of the technical subjects. For the rest, let them eat Word.
"Someone is being a dick, and risking ruining their reputation in a misguided attempt to muscle in on the other's business."
I don't think that is entirely true. If Google was not behind a competing platform, then it would be true. Apple probably fears that Google will make their software work better on their OSs which would make Apple's iStuff look bad. So whether Apple likes it or not, they are forced into building competing software for their own iThings.