Correct. but one of unplanned business plan of those founders is to get rich, famous, and well-connected enough to be selected to run a larger company with plenty of pays. In business / leadership world, if you can't prove you have successfully acquired those first, nobody pays you a shit. Once you acquire those, you will use it for your own goods more likely than not.
Selfishness is the most important natural characteristics of all lives -- from virus and bacteria to human beings -- that's why they compete and evolve. Even though they may act cooperatively sometimes but ultimately they are striking for their own interest. You can blame God or natural selection, depending whichever you believe.
There is no known system that can effective suppress selfishness. Communism tried that but resulting in power concentrated in a handful of dictators while rest of the people refused to work. Socialism tries that, through high tax, but resulting in stagnant economy. Capitalism does not try to suppress but to take use of that; it works the best still, though often resulting in concentration of economy resources. If you can come up one with a perfect system, we will award you with a Nobel Prizes in Peace and Economy.
If you think the top level executives make too much, try to start you own company and see how hard it is to even make the minimal wage for yourself and how much you have to bet your life on it up front. Then if you do succeed, you will promptly become one of the selfish executives. If you ever try managing people, you can also see how selfish or lazy your employees can be, especially in the time of company crisis.
That's being the case for the last millions of years and may probably be true for the next 1000 years. Maybe until eventually human beings become pets of robots (who will then fight for their own intergalactic interests.)
The word "regress" was chosen carefully for the sole fact that, yes, in this year 2010, there has been significant progress made in the United States and across the world in regards to the treatment of humanity on an ethical and moral scale.
The same can be said for nation in the center of this -- China. It may sound like news to you given that you only have censored front-page news. No matter how bad you think China's human rights situation is today, it is still much much better than 30 years ago or earlier, comparing to periods like Cultural Revolution or Great Leap Forward or the Qing Dynasty. It may not be up to the American standard (which wasn't that good either before the 1960's); but calling it regressive is simply ignorant. And most of the progress should be attributed to their international trades.
But in that case, the Yuan will plummet first, won't it?
On the other hand, I highly doubt the theory that China pegs Yuan to Dollar without any market support. Such theory is against the recent economic history and actuality in China. The best one could say is that the government may try to suppress value of Yuan, but it wouldn't work if the market fundamental would not allow it. That's because China has a vibrant black market. Back in 1993, the Yuan's official exchange rate is 3:1 against the Dollar, over twice as high as today's. Yet, nobody could sell their Yuan at that rate; if you wanted to buy USD, trade your Yuan at 8:1 in the black market. Eventually, the government readjusted the rate to that of the black market's. The market won. Today, you still can't exchange large amount in the white market, but the black market rate is pretty close to the official rate. This proves the rate should be about the right.
The same goes for imports. While China charges higher tariff on many imports, such as micro chips, most businesses get their supply from the black market channels which get the products by smuggling. That's how China works. Most things happen in the black market.
Of course, regular Americans wouldn't read about these details
The same can be said on the Google case; the government said that Google has not presented any evidence to them or made any formal complain so far. (you can google translate that.) Of course, we don't care, as long as we can make a front page story to reinforce our stuck up morale superiority and launch another useless verbal attack on our archrival.
And the bigger problem I have is that none of the English media wants to post this in their front page. I can only read it from oversea/HK media. If that's not bias and agenda, what it is.
I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled Chinese search result filtering in Google.cn despite of the lack of real actions from the Chinese government in the few two days, but/. editors keep refusing to put this relevant in the front page. This story casts a doubt on Google's stance, motive and commitment. Right, how can we be critical of our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom" and fighting the "evil" China? How can a hero backing down to the evil? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. How could the evil have not taken any real evil action on this particular matter? It would hurt our national morale, and so we should do self-censoring and forbidding to put it in the front page of any Western media outlet.
(Even your WSJ story does not mention that google has re-enabled filtering; while every Western media reported the (now temporary) suspension after Google announcement. It is oversea Chinese media that reported it and I picked up and verified with the exact same Chinese query I tried right after their temporary suspension back then.)
As mentioned in my post and in/. front page last week, google has suspeneded the filtering after their announcement. Why re-enabled rather quietly? That part I have problem with. If they have stood up, why backed down? (And the Chinese government only made some general stanard statement, no real threat either. Why is that not mentioned in Western media?) all in all, I'm as disappointed by our media as by the CCP's.
This is a bit off-topic but I have nowhere else to post this. I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled search result filtering in Google.cn despite of the lack of REAL actions from the Chinese government in the last two days, but/. editors keep refusing to put this relevant in the headline. Right, how can we be critical of our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom" and fighting the evil China? How can a hero backing down to the evil China? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. Can someone find a way to post this news report (which can be verified search "June 4" in google.cn and which I can't find any English language sources)?!
This is not quite off-topic. I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled search result filtering in Google.cn in the last two days, but/. editors keep refusing to put it in the front page. Right, how can we criticize our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom"? How can a hero backing down to the evil China? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. Can someone find a way to post this report?!
No. My prediction is that Google will be intact in China, because Google is too large and famous for the government to confront. The government has been playing low key in foreign affairs for long times. They would do the same this time, just sit and wait this matter loses its steam. At meantime, their Great Firewall can just filter out the content by itself, much like what it did before google.cn was set up. (In fact, I have no idea why Google needs to set up google.cn in the first place, other than trying to sell ads; people in China could access google.com and the government couldn't successfully block it due to large number of citizen complains.)
Democracy is relatively. Nobody, not even the toughest dictator, can afford to anger a large number of people. Chinese government knows this very well.
No market values? Where do you think the loads of advertisement on baidu.com and any other Chinese websites are for? And do you know that China is already biggest market for cars and that GM has grown something like 40% of sales year over year in China while on government rescue here in the US? Chinese are doing pretty well financially, comparing to what they have before and probably comparing to what Americans now have in the US. That's why the CCP is still ruling.
In China people are not allowed to own many properties and resell them over and over again contributing to speculative expectations that any bit of land should be worth millions.
The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.
Well... they learn how to lie about their technical accomplishment to the public faster than anything. The design of this train, like the government-sponsored commercial jets and supercomputers they are making, are from foreign companies and key components are imported; only the end products are assembled in China, much like your iPhone. These are publicly acknowledged facts in the news even in China. Yet they claim to "own the IP" in the headline, because the officials want to use such catchy phrases to get promotion. What you fear may be true one day, but it will be long long time, not before they can develop a culture of trust.
Our competitive advantages are not in making cheap stuff, but in that we have an overall higher trust and integrity.
In my observation of software patents, those that are really mathematical in nature like a new compressing algorithm, 3-D rendering algorithm, etc are actually the ones that are most genuine, non-obvious, creative. Come on, if those are trivial, can you come up with one that beats the existing ones now? On the other hand, the low quality / troll patents, like those involving UI or famous EOLA browser plugin patent, are usually non-mathematical in the the usual sense. You could argue it is still math, but even a mathematician would not look at it that way. Are we doing it the opposite way?
Many inventors and most companies cannot finance patent litigation. Even if they can finance the litigation, they're too risk adverse to monetize it this way. There is a lot of risk in patent litigation. It's much easier to take a lowball license fee than it is to risk/pay for 1) reexamination and 2) actual litigation.
That's because the nobody would kill a pig before it grows up. Why wasting money suing a little company having hard time meeting its payroll; wait until it gets big funding or IPO or wait until a big guy stepping on the patent, and then plenty of lawyers will work for you on contingent fee basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct. but one of unplanned business plan of those founders is to get rich, famous, and well-connected enough to be selected to run a larger company with plenty of pays. In business / leadership world, if you can't prove you have successfully acquired those first, nobody pays you a shit. Once you acquire those, you will use it for your own goods more likely than not.
Selfishness is the most important natural characteristics of all lives -- from virus and bacteria to human beings -- that's why they compete and evolve. Even though they may act cooperatively sometimes but ultimately they are striking for their own interest. You can blame God or natural selection, depending whichever you believe.
There is no known system that can effective suppress selfishness. Communism tried that but resulting in power concentrated in a handful of dictators while rest of the people refused to work. Socialism tries that, through high tax, but resulting in stagnant economy. Capitalism does not try to suppress but to take use of that; it works the best still, though often resulting in concentration of economy resources. If you can come up one with a perfect system, we will award you with a Nobel Prizes in Peace and Economy.
If you think the top level executives make too much, try to start you own company and see how hard it is to even make the minimal wage for yourself and how much you have to bet your life on it up front. Then if you do succeed, you will promptly become one of the selfish executives. If you ever try managing people, you can also see how selfish or lazy your employees can be, especially in the time of company crisis.
That's being the case for the last millions of years and may probably be true for the next 1000 years. Maybe until eventually human beings become pets of robots (who will then fight for their own intergalactic interests.)
Google has been very vocal and very public about this.
really
The word "regress" was chosen carefully for the sole fact that, yes, in this year 2010, there has been significant progress made in the United States and across the world in regards to the treatment of humanity on an ethical and moral scale.
The same can be said for nation in the center of this -- China. It may sound like news to you given that you only have censored front-page news. No matter how bad you think China's human rights situation is today, it is still much much better than 30 years ago or earlier, comparing to periods like Cultural Revolution or Great Leap Forward or the Qing Dynasty. It may not be up to the American standard (which wasn't that good either before the 1960's); but calling it regressive is simply ignorant. And most of the progress should be attributed to their international trades.
Is our new found hero responsible for great acts like pleading stay and re-eanling the filtering quietly. Certainly, we are allowed to know, not on the front-page.
But in that case, the Yuan will plummet first, won't it?
On the other hand, I highly doubt the theory that China pegs Yuan to Dollar without any market support. Such theory is against the recent economic history and actuality in China. The best one could say is that the government may try to suppress value of Yuan, but it wouldn't work if the market fundamental would not allow it. That's because China has a vibrant black market. Back in 1993, the Yuan's official exchange rate is 3:1 against the Dollar, over twice as high as today's. Yet, nobody could sell their Yuan at that rate; if you wanted to buy USD, trade your Yuan at 8:1 in the black market. Eventually, the government readjusted the rate to that of the black market's. The market won. Today, you still can't exchange large amount in the white market, but the black market rate is pretty close to the official rate. This proves the rate should be about the right.
The same goes for imports. While China charges higher tariff on many imports, such as micro chips, most businesses get their supply from the black market channels which get the products by smuggling. That's how China works. Most things happen in the black market.
Of course, regular Americans wouldn't read about these details
The same can be said on the Google case; the government said that Google has not presented any evidence to them or made any formal complain so far. (you can google translate that.) Of course, we don't care, as long as we can make a front page story to reinforce our stuck up morale superiority and launch another useless verbal attack on our archrival.
I'm sitting here in California, USA w/o using any proxy. You can try the above link. If you don't read Chinese, try google of that link: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.cn%2Fsearch%3Fhl%3Dzh-CN%26source%3Dhp%26q%3D%25E5%2585%25AD%25E5%259B%259B&sl=zh-CN&tl=en Try that in the States. You should see the results ahve little to do with the June 4 event and the translated text "According to local laws, regulations and policies, some search results are not shown."
And the bigger problem I have is that none of the English media wants to post this in their front page. I can only read it from oversea/HK media. If that's not bias and agenda, what it is.
I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled Chinese search result filtering in Google.cn despite of the lack of real actions from the Chinese government in the few two days, but /. editors keep refusing to put this relevant in the front page. This story casts a doubt on Google's stance, motive and commitment. Right, how can we be critical of our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom" and fighting the "evil" China? How can a hero backing down to the evil? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. How could the evil have not taken any real evil action on this particular matter? It would hurt our national morale, and so we should do self-censoring and forbidding to put it in the front page of any Western media outlet.
(Even your WSJ story does not mention that google has re-enabled filtering; while every Western media reported the (now temporary) suspension after Google announcement. It is oversea Chinese media that reported it and I picked up and verified with the exact same Chinese query I tried right after their temporary suspension back then.)
Thanks. I can try there
Generally, the Chinese government does not censor most English contents but almost all Chinese contents.
As mentioned in my post and in /. front page last week, google has suspeneded the filtering after their announcement. Why re-enabled rather quietly? That part I have problem with. If they have stood up, why backed down? (And the Chinese government only made some general stanard statement, no real threat either. Why is that not mentioned in Western media?) all in all, I'm as disappointed by our media as by the CCP's.
This is a bit off-topic but I have nowhere else to post this. I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled search result filtering in Google.cn despite of the lack of REAL actions from the Chinese government in the last two days, but /. editors keep refusing to put this relevant in the headline. Right, how can we be critical of our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom" and fighting the evil China? How can a hero backing down to the evil China? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. Can someone find a way to post this news report (which can be verified search "June 4" in google.cn and which I can't find any English language sources)?!
This is not quite off-topic. I have attempted to post the reports that Google has backed down in China and re-enabled search result filtering in Google.cn in the last two days, but /. editors keep refusing to put it in the front page. Right, how can we criticize our new found American hero defending the precious "freedom"? How can a hero backing down to the evil China? Hero can't make fundamental principle error, or you are not allowed to know when it does. Can someone find a way to post this report?!
Democracy is relatively. Nobody, not even the toughest dictator, can afford to anger a large number of people. Chinese government knows this very well.
No market values? Where do you think the loads of advertisement on baidu.com and any other Chinese websites are for? And do you know that China is already biggest market for cars and that GM has grown something like 40% of sales year over year in China while on government rescue here in the US? Chinese are doing pretty well financially, comparing to what they have before and probably comparing to what Americans now have in the US. That's why the CCP is still ruling.
Their army of almighty and omnipotent pigeons will answer customers. Have they all flied away or been BBQ'ed?
In China people are not allowed to own many properties and resell them over and over again contributing to speculative expectations that any bit of land should be worth millions.
Do you know anything about China -- or its real estate market?
The Chinese aren't idiots; they learn and are about to surpass the west in many technological areas.
Well... they learn how to lie about their technical accomplishment to the public faster than anything. The design of this train, like the government-sponsored commercial jets and supercomputers they are making, are from foreign companies and key components are imported; only the end products are assembled in China, much like your iPhone. These are publicly acknowledged facts in the news even in China. Yet they claim to "own the IP" in the headline, because the officials want to use such catchy phrases to get promotion. What you fear may be true one day, but it will be long long time, not before they can develop a culture of trust.
Our competitive advantages are not in making cheap stuff, but in that we have an overall higher trust and integrity.
So perhaps we can just mandate mathematical (that includes algorithmic) genuity and solve it all?
In my observation of software patents, those that are really mathematical in nature like a new compressing algorithm, 3-D rendering algorithm, etc are actually the ones that are most genuine, non-obvious, creative. Come on, if those are trivial, can you come up with one that beats the existing ones now? On the other hand, the low quality / troll patents, like those involving UI or famous EOLA browser plugin patent, are usually non-mathematical in the the usual sense. You could argue it is still math, but even a mathematician would not look at it that way. Are we doing it the opposite way?
Many inventors and most companies cannot finance patent litigation. Even if they can finance the litigation, they're too risk adverse to monetize it this way. There is a lot of risk in patent litigation. It's much easier to take a lowball license fee than it is to risk/pay for 1) reexamination and 2) actual litigation.
That's because the nobody would kill a pig before it grows up. Why wasting money suing a little company having hard time meeting its payroll; wait until it gets big funding or IPO or wait until a big guy stepping on the patent, and then plenty of lawyers will work for you on contingent fee basis.
Couldn't believe nobody has marked me as Funny. boring crowd!
Oh.. it must be in either the FAA security manual or Coast Guard security manual. Please post them to Wikileak. Thanks a lot!
I just read through all TSA security manuals and don't find anything about this road being dangerous. Can you post your source of proof to Wikileak?