The key difference is that sanctions and traditional methods are (generally) open and aboveboard - you know who is doing what to who, as it is announced widely beforehand and very visible in operation.
The only time sanctions are "open and aboveboard" is when the nation is dramatically at odds with the rest of the world - like North Korea and Sudan. But there is plenty of cloak-and-dagger economic warfare between countries, even between allies. For example, a key reason why America still has as many military bases as it does in Japan despite the lack of a legitimate threat of invasion from any country is because the ruling LDP politicians fear that if they force the US off of Japanese soil, America will force Japan to open up its domestic market to real international competition. This would force rapid, bloody economic change (see: South Korea a few years ago), which would surely cost the LDP, which has controlled the country almost every year since the end of WWII. (The only year it was defeated nationally was in 1993, when an eight-party coalition briefly took power before collapsing in on itself, as eight-party coalitions often do.) In that case, the threat of economic warfare forces Japan to acquiesce to the United States' foreign policy will, at the expense of its own people.
(Which isn't to say I'm against globalization in Japan, incidentally. I wish we could see a real fight between the US and Japan on this issue, since it has a good chance of resulting in both a globalized Japanese economy (inevitable and necessary, as they approach a point of almost zero growth) and a reduced American military presence in the Far East. That's two victories in my book.)
And let's not even get into the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, which are more ripe with espionage than Lebanon.
I'd normally agree with you, but the editors of Boing Boing definitely do understand the internet. Further, it's managed by experienced and interesting writers, who often give detailed and accurate analyses on technology issues, among other things. Even if you hate blogs, it's hard to hate Boing Boing.
Not everyone is intelligent enough to discern the difference between advertising and things people actually like.
Really? I don't remember going to Youtube because I saw an ad for it. In fact, I don't recall Youtube ever having to advertise itself at all. As a person between the age of 12 and 30, perhaps I wasn't intelligent enough to notice it?
Well, phone companies have never had the greatest track record on upholding the rights of their customers, so it's no wonder the FBI tells its agents they don't have to fill out any paperwork. The companies just bend right over.
Yes, because I'm sure they'll take the money they get from content providers and pour it into upgrading their network. You know, so that they can handle enough bandwidth that they don't have to charge the content providers anymore.
Oh, wait. That would cut off a source of income. Without net neutrality, they'd have a distinct profit motive to never upgrade.
Please. I agree that municipal governments shouldn't give any company exclusive rights to lay fiber, but that fiber is being laid across public property, so the people laying the fiber are going to have to get permits in any case. You can't deregulate it, like you might deregulate an enterprise operating on private property, if they're digging up public parks and roads. Since they're going to have to use the people's land to provide their service, the people can demand any provisions they want to check against the tendencies of the corporations involved to become abusive. Also, competition does not solve the network neutrality problem, because every single company would hose traffic if they felt they were allowed to. There would be no alternative to jump to!
Or maybe they could hire Larry Probst instead. At least he's in the game industry. I have no idea what they were thinking when they made the host of Survivor their CEO.
Your attempt to equate one with the other is a slap in the face to those migrants who jump through hoops to gain legal status.
I love this argument. Isn't it more a slap to the face of those migrants that the government set up all those hoops to keep them out in the first place? People say that the immigration system needs to be reformed, but turn around and demand that the people who couldn't make their way through the insane bureaucracy be thrown out the country. I don't have any problem with people breaking unjust laws, immigration laws included. In fact, unjust laws should be broken, and the people who break them should be respected. Read up on civil disobedience.
I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....
I'm more concerned about banks that help the super-rich hide their money from the IRS than ones that help impoverished migrant workers open up checking accounts. By the way, isn't it better that they're putting their money into the bank system, where it can be reinvested back into the economy? I thought the main complaint about immigrants was that they don't give anything back.
a portable hacking device that can scan other connections for open ports, and automatically launch code execution exploits from a built-in exploit platform.
You know that guy too? Don't worry, I'm pretty sure he's legit. I just used his service to order some chemicals to clean the dye off of a suitcase full of money I'm splitting with an exiled doctor from Nigeria. Can you believe it? This doctor contacted me right out of the blue, and all I needed was a U.S. bank account and a sympathetic heart. And, except for the chemicals, this is all at no cost to me! I can't believe such a great proposition initially got filtered to my spam folder!
Resource for resource, Russia is the RICHEST COUNTRY ON EARTH. It just hasn't worked out how to effectively extract those resources. Yet.
That may be true, but natural resources aren't the most important thing to an economy. Many parts of Africa have abundant natural resources but still remain in abject poverty. Japan has very limited natural resources, but has one of the strongest economies in the world. Banking, manufacturing, consumer goods, the tech industry, the service industry, and effective, stable government are more important than natural resources, and Russia is lacking in each case. Going forward, natural resources are going to matter less and less to the global economy, as new technology bypasses the need for supplies of coal, oil, wood, gas, etc. at the levels that we're using them now. Russia needs to reinvest the wealth from its exports of raw materials into other industries, or it's in for a world of hurt.
considering that they cornered 45% of the space launch business and is the world's largest exporter of oil and gas, the USA needs Russia more than Russia needs the USA
That's a bit of a jump to make. The USA isn't nearly as dependent on Russian oil and gas as Europe is, and if Russia collapses, the USA can launch satellites on their own just fine. Besides, the Russian economy is too heavily based on natural resources. And even though they're sitting on massive natural gas reserves, they can't deliver enough of the product for their own citizens, because their industry is geared towards export. In the industrial sector, one of Russia's areas of strength in the Soviet era, practically none of its products can compete on the international market. The birth rate has been sharply declining, creating a rapidly increasing median age, which will place an even greater burden on their economy. They've never quite recovered from years of communist stagnation. Overall, the Russian economy is very weak, especially compared to the booming economic growth in China, another massive country that had to make a systemic change from communism to capitalism. And from a diplomatic standpoint, the United States is the world's foremost military and economic power, while Russia's influence has drastically declined since the Soviet Union broke apart. Russia most certainly need the USA more than the USA needs Russia.
It will, rather, allow the user to 'use their vehicle as a computer in key ways, such as hands-free cell phone calls or downloading music or receiving e-mail.'
I'm more worried about the RIAA impounding my car as evidence until the trial's over.
If I were your wife, I'd be less concerned about the display disappearing and more concerned about my electric bikini frying me when I go into the water.
Actually, strike that. I'd be most concerned about the fact that you bought me a pair of television screens to use as a swimsuit.
A more impressive absentee is one that they mention in the "things code doesn't do in real life" list - Jeff Goldblum from Independence Day. He hacked an alien spacecraft with a Mac in the space of a couple of minutes.
It seems to me like blind people would be even more likely than sighted people to experience deja vu. If you think about it, only four senses need to be replicated, and all four are more likely to recur than identical visual patterns.
What if I welcomed our (x) overlords? Or asked if it runs Linux? Would I be hilarious then?
Looking at the moderation on posts I've made, I can tell a couple of things. One, because of the frequent "Funny" mods, I can tell that there are at least a few people who were amused by the posts, which is, of course, the point. Two, because of the sporadic "Overrated" mods, I can tell that there are some other people out there who are taking jokes way too seriously. If you don't find a post funny, you shouldn't take it like it's some sort of personal affront. People who mod a joke that intends to be funny "Overrated" are really wasting their mod points, in my opinion. Humor is subjective.
Even though Google uses some clever numerics to calculate the eigenvectors to a 25 billion by 25 billion matrix by iteration, it still takes several hours to finish.
Please. I can do that on paper in, like, five minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
The only time sanctions are "open and aboveboard" is when the nation is dramatically at odds with the rest of the world - like North Korea and Sudan. But there is plenty of cloak-and-dagger economic warfare between countries, even between allies. For example, a key reason why America still has as many military bases as it does in Japan despite the lack of a legitimate threat of invasion from any country is because the ruling LDP politicians fear that if they force the US off of Japanese soil, America will force Japan to open up its domestic market to real international competition. This would force rapid, bloody economic change (see: South Korea a few years ago), which would surely cost the LDP, which has controlled the country almost every year since the end of WWII. (The only year it was defeated nationally was in 1993, when an eight-party coalition briefly took power before collapsing in on itself, as eight-party coalitions often do.) In that case, the threat of economic warfare forces Japan to acquiesce to the United States' foreign policy will, at the expense of its own people.
(Which isn't to say I'm against globalization in Japan, incidentally. I wish we could see a real fight between the US and Japan on this issue, since it has a good chance of resulting in both a globalized Japanese economy (inevitable and necessary, as they approach a point of almost zero growth) and a reduced American military presence in the Far East. That's two victories in my book.)
And let's not even get into the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, which are more ripe with espionage than Lebanon.
I'd normally agree with you, but the editors of Boing Boing definitely do understand the internet. Further, it's managed by experienced and interesting writers, who often give detailed and accurate analyses on technology issues, among other things. Even if you hate blogs, it's hard to hate Boing Boing.
Well, phone companies have never had the greatest track record on upholding the rights of their customers, so it's no wonder the FBI tells its agents they don't have to fill out any paperwork. The companies just bend right over.
Yes, because I'm sure they'll take the money they get from content providers and pour it into upgrading their network. You know, so that they can handle enough bandwidth that they don't have to charge the content providers anymore.
Oh, wait. That would cut off a source of income. Without net neutrality, they'd have a distinct profit motive to never upgrade.
Please. I agree that municipal governments shouldn't give any company exclusive rights to lay fiber, but that fiber is being laid across public property, so the people laying the fiber are going to have to get permits in any case. You can't deregulate it, like you might deregulate an enterprise operating on private property, if they're digging up public parks and roads. Since they're going to have to use the people's land to provide their service, the people can demand any provisions they want to check against the tendencies of the corporations involved to become abusive. Also, competition does not solve the network neutrality problem, because every single company would hose traffic if they felt they were allowed to. There would be no alternative to jump to!
Or maybe they could hire Larry Probst instead. At least he's in the game industry. I have no idea what they were thinking when they made the host of Survivor their CEO.
Nothing says "I love you" like etching your girlfriend's name onto a cold metal construct and shooting it into the black oblivion of space.
You know that guy too? Don't worry, I'm pretty sure he's legit. I just used his service to order some chemicals to clean the dye off of a suitcase full of money I'm splitting with an exiled doctor from Nigeria. Can you believe it? This doctor contacted me right out of the blue, and all I needed was a U.S. bank account and a sympathetic heart. And, except for the chemicals, this is all at no cost to me! I can't believe such a great proposition initially got filtered to my spam folder!
That may be true, but natural resources aren't the most important thing to an economy. Many parts of Africa have abundant natural resources but still remain in abject poverty. Japan has very limited natural resources, but has one of the strongest economies in the world. Banking, manufacturing, consumer goods, the tech industry, the service industry, and effective, stable government are more important than natural resources, and Russia is lacking in each case. Going forward, natural resources are going to matter less and less to the global economy, as new technology bypasses the need for supplies of coal, oil, wood, gas, etc. at the levels that we're using them now. Russia needs to reinvest the wealth from its exports of raw materials into other industries, or it's in for a world of hurt.
That's a bit of a jump to make. The USA isn't nearly as dependent on Russian oil and gas as Europe is, and if Russia collapses, the USA can launch satellites on their own just fine. Besides, the Russian economy is too heavily based on natural resources. And even though they're sitting on massive natural gas reserves, they can't deliver enough of the product for their own citizens, because their industry is geared towards export. In the industrial sector, one of Russia's areas of strength in the Soviet era, practically none of its products can compete on the international market. The birth rate has been sharply declining, creating a rapidly increasing median age, which will place an even greater burden on their economy. They've never quite recovered from years of communist stagnation. Overall, the Russian economy is very weak, especially compared to the booming economic growth in China, another massive country that had to make a systemic change from communism to capitalism. And from a diplomatic standpoint, the United States is the world's foremost military and economic power, while Russia's influence has drastically declined since the Soviet Union broke apart. Russia most certainly need the USA more than the USA needs Russia.
If I were your wife, I'd be less concerned about the display disappearing and more concerned about my electric bikini frying me when I go into the water.
Actually, strike that. I'd be most concerned about the fact that you bought me a pair of television screens to use as a swimsuit.
A more impressive absentee is one that they mention in the "things code doesn't do in real life" list - Jeff Goldblum from Independence Day. He hacked an alien spacecraft with a Mac in the space of a couple of minutes.
It seems to me like blind people would be even more likely than sighted people to experience deja vu. If you think about it, only four senses need to be replicated, and all four are more likely to recur than identical visual patterns.
What if I welcomed our (x) overlords? Or asked if it runs Linux? Would I be hilarious then?
Looking at the moderation on posts I've made, I can tell a couple of things. One, because of the frequent "Funny" mods, I can tell that there are at least a few people who were amused by the posts, which is, of course, the point. Two, because of the sporadic "Overrated" mods, I can tell that there are some other people out there who are taking jokes way too seriously. If you don't find a post funny, you shouldn't take it like it's some sort of personal affront. People who mod a joke that intends to be funny "Overrated" are really wasting their mod points, in my opinion. Humor is subjective.
Incidentally, thanks for the signature.
Even though Google uses some clever numerics to calculate the eigenvectors to a 25 billion by 25 billion matrix by iteration, it still takes several hours to finish.
Please. I can do that on paper in, like, five minutes.
And the remaining 1,000 are in foreign languages, which have notoriously small vocabularies.