Cook would probably avoid moving to any country where homosexuality is still punishable by death, so yeah, most of those 3rd world countries are out for him. But seriously, if you can afford to live anywhere, you're going to choose a place where your money will actually buy you the highest possible standard of living.
I know, it's great because there are so many young women being exported that you don't have to sleep with your boss very often at all!
Also pretty popular with the men charged with managing these young women, or so I've heard.
Comparative Advantage kind of screws the US. The thing we're best at is marketing, and we in fact suck at marketing to non-Americans. If only we could export lawyers...
Hitler was doing a great job of managing Europe... I wonder whatever happened to him. In other words, freedom might just be preferable to having an entire country "managed" by Trump, where laws would be passed by whoever could afford to pay the largest bribes.
Easily worked around, i.e. "We put the battery cover on in the US, therefore our device is assembled in the US. Anyone remember the Suburu brat, which shipped with seats in the truck bed solely to escape the tariff on imported trucks? Yeah, 2 rows of seating made it a car, sure. Fact is, tariffs make manufacturing less efficient, as decisions are made for tax reasons rather than technical ones. For example, Mercedes Sprinter vans are completely assembled and tested in Germany, then disassembled, marked carefully as to which vehicle each part came out of, shipped, and reassembled in the US -- all to avoid the tariff for an assembled van.
So, Rand Paul, then?
Actually, I liked Ron Paul, but of course the only thing Democrats and Republicans cooperate on is torpedoing 3rd party candidates.
Actually, Foxconn should soon be building a 100% automated assembly plant, in which case physically basing the plant in China is no longer much of an advantage, except for easy access to parts. Not clear whether robots are more or less expensive than young Chinese farm girls for manufacturing labor. The cost of programming and maintaining completely robotic assembly plants would be quite high.
"Made in USA" requirements for the US tech industry would do exactly what "Made in Britain" requirements did for the British auto industry - destroy it in the span of a few decades.
Hugo Chavez is actually a very good example. Immense popular appeal, and managed to coast for a while on the nationalization of the oil fields, but in practice he is quite clueless about how things actually work and rather inattentive to the policies implemented. In other words, much like Trump, he is all style and no substance.
A president that can set rules that only penalize a single corporation... can also set rules that immensely benefit a single corporation, and rake in a fortune in bribes. Hopefully, that is not allowed in our democracy. It it were, it might be more properly described as a kleptocracy. That doesn't mean that laws that only benefit a single company have never been passed; they have, but by bribing members of congress, not the president.
How do you think _anybody_ gets rich? It's by gambling with other people's money If you win the bet, you get paid off big time, if you lose, you pass off your losses to some other poor sucker (usually the bank that lent you money), or simply declare bankruptcy. Do this enough times, eventually you get rich. What I can't understand is, giving the number of times Trump-controlled businesses have gone bankrupt and screwed their creditors, why does anyone still lend him money? Other than lucrative bribes, I can't think of any logical reason.
No, the ships themselves aren't blocking light like a comet, the gravitational distortion caused by warp drives is causing gravitational lensing that refracts the light off in strange directions. Without knowing exactly how the warp drive works, it is impossible to calculate how many ships are necessary mess with the light to this massive degree... although a randomly distributed dust cloud between us and them still sounds like a much simpler explanation.
Any aliens foolish enough to make their presence easily detectable would have been wiped out by aliens smart enough to be incredibly stealthy a long time ago, so the argument that there are no detectable aliens out there is a sound one. Smart species don't advertise their position.
Technological progress is growing at a geometric rate, but that is mostly because population is also increasing at a geometric rate. The rate of change will likely be slowed at some point by a massive die off. In general, should the rate of progress be proportional to the number of scientists working on progress?
No, any alien capable of building a Dyson sphere would have eliminated all asteroids capable of causing problems long before the megastructure got big enough to cause detectable variations in starlight. Natural phenomena is still a better explanation than aliens, but the actual explanation might still involve some interesting science. I still like the dust cloud passing in front of it theory.
Slashdot Mirror
Using parts from...?
"Subcontractor" is business speak for "positive deniability", hence the current popularity of contractors.
So, the problem is that their miners are minors, then?
"Convince", like they do in New York: "This is a nice little company you've got here... it'd be a shame if anything were to happen to it!"
Cook would probably avoid moving to any country where homosexuality is still punishable by death, so yeah, most of those 3rd world countries are out for him. But seriously, if you can afford to live anywhere, you're going to choose a place where your money will actually buy you the highest possible standard of living.
At Fox they are!
Trump will build a wall to keep Mexican robots out of the US, and make Mexican AI overlords pay for it!
I know, it's great because there are so many young women being exported that you don't have to sleep with your boss very often at all! Also pretty popular with the men charged with managing these young women, or so I've heard.
Comparative Advantage kind of screws the US. The thing we're best at is marketing, and we in fact suck at marketing to non-Americans. If only we could export lawyers...
Hitler was doing a great job of managing Europe... I wonder whatever happened to him. In other words, freedom might just be preferable to having an entire country "managed" by Trump, where laws would be passed by whoever could afford to pay the largest bribes.
Easily worked around, i.e. "We put the battery cover on in the US, therefore our device is assembled in the US. Anyone remember the Suburu brat, which shipped with seats in the truck bed solely to escape the tariff on imported trucks? Yeah, 2 rows of seating made it a car, sure. Fact is, tariffs make manufacturing less efficient, as decisions are made for tax reasons rather than technical ones. For example, Mercedes Sprinter vans are completely assembled and tested in Germany, then disassembled, marked carefully as to which vehicle each part came out of, shipped, and reassembled in the US -- all to avoid the tariff for an assembled van.
So, Rand Paul, then? Actually, I liked Ron Paul, but of course the only thing Democrats and Republicans cooperate on is torpedoing 3rd party candidates.
Actually, Foxconn should soon be building a 100% automated assembly plant, in which case physically basing the plant in China is no longer much of an advantage, except for easy access to parts. Not clear whether robots are more or less expensive than young Chinese farm girls for manufacturing labor. The cost of programming and maintaining completely robotic assembly plants would be quite high.
"Made in USA" requirements for the US tech industry would do exactly what "Made in Britain" requirements did for the British auto industry - destroy it in the span of a few decades.
Hugo Chavez is actually a very good example. Immense popular appeal, and managed to coast for a while on the nationalization of the oil fields, but in practice he is quite clueless about how things actually work and rather inattentive to the policies implemented. In other words, much like Trump, he is all style and no substance.
A president that can set rules that only penalize a single corporation... can also set rules that immensely benefit a single corporation, and rake in a fortune in bribes. Hopefully, that is not allowed in our democracy. It it were, it might be more properly described as a kleptocracy. That doesn't mean that laws that only benefit a single company have never been passed; they have, but by bribing members of congress, not the president.
Many years later, Trump was looked up to as the founding father of the Idiocracy Movement...
Ad hominem attack -- does that make him a Republican, or just a Faux News talking head?
How do you think _anybody_ gets rich? It's by gambling with other people's money If you win the bet, you get paid off big time, if you lose, you pass off your losses to some other poor sucker (usually the bank that lent you money), or simply declare bankruptcy. Do this enough times, eventually you get rich. What I can't understand is, giving the number of times Trump-controlled businesses have gone bankrupt and screwed their creditors, why does anyone still lend him money? Other than lucrative bribes, I can't think of any logical reason.
No, the ships themselves aren't blocking light like a comet, the gravitational distortion caused by warp drives is causing gravitational lensing that refracts the light off in strange directions. Without knowing exactly how the warp drive works, it is impossible to calculate how many ships are necessary mess with the light to this massive degree... although a randomly distributed dust cloud between us and them still sounds like a much simpler explanation.
Any aliens foolish enough to make their presence easily detectable would have been wiped out by aliens smart enough to be incredibly stealthy a long time ago, so the argument that there are no detectable aliens out there is a sound one. Smart species don't advertise their position.
Any "future history" is indistinguishable from "bullshit"...
Technological progress is growing at a geometric rate, but that is mostly because population is also increasing at a geometric rate. The rate of change will likely be slowed at some point by a massive die off. In general, should the rate of progress be proportional to the number of scientists working on progress?
Human evolutionary pressure now favors larger breasts and butts, not smarter brains...
No, any alien capable of building a Dyson sphere would have eliminated all asteroids capable of causing problems long before the megastructure got big enough to cause detectable variations in starlight. Natural phenomena is still a better explanation than aliens, but the actual explanation might still involve some interesting science. I still like the dust cloud passing in front of it theory.