Comrade, You Are So Not Getting a Dell 600
theodp writes "At the World Economic Forum, Michael Dell's pitch to help Russia with its computers got the cold-as-Siberia shoulder from Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. 'We don't need help,' shot back Putin. 'We are not invalids. We don't have limited mental capacity' (video — rant starts at 1:24). 'Our programmers are some of the best in the world,' Putin continued. 'No one would contest that here — not even our Indian colleagues.'"
The Cold War Called ... (Score:4, Insightful)
"We don't need help. We are not invalids. We don't have limited mental capacity. Our programmers are some of the best in the world. No one would contest that here -- not even our Indian colleagues."
Failure to address the real issues (corruption, economy, etc) plaguing your society? Check.
Playing up a sense of extreme national pride, isolation and bullheadedness? Double check.
Burning a bridge? Triple check.
Putin, you would have made a fine leader during the Cold War for either side.
Real World Experience (Score:4, Insightful)
"Our programmers are some of the best in the world,"
Of course - after all, those viruses don't program themselves, now do they?
Prideful Putin ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Pride goeth before a fall.
"Best" (Score:4, Insightful)
> Our programmers are some of the best in the world
Yes. Just look at how they dominate the malware industry. And nobody is better at herding bots.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not going back far enough. The Russian fear of being perceived as backass country folk goes all the way back to the Tsars. Russia really wanted to be counted among European nobility, but could never really cut it, so they are hyper-sensitive to anything indicating that they are not up-to-date/cutting edge. AFAIK, "nekulturny" (literally, uncultured) is still the highest insult you can throw at a Russian.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, Putin is actually also correct to be worried. The 90s was full of foreign consultants coming over to Moscow and giving unbelievably bad advice that lead to premature loosening of all controls and a kleptocratic oligarchy shortly after that.
Now imagine that combined with a foreign profit seeking company offering to do the helping. I'm not entirely surprised Putin reacted as you would if Bill Gates came over to your FOSS startup and asked if you'd like an MS sales team to give you some free help and advice. Quite how naive do we assume Putin to be here? Russia isn't some failed state that cannot run it's own programs and make it's own choices. Authoritarian, yes, but competent at it.
Re:"Best" (Score:5, Insightful)
> Just look at how they dominate the malware industry. And nobody is better at herding bots.
That is one good example. They have lots of skilled people in a hellhole economy. And sending hard currency they don't have (mostly because of corrupt politicians like Putin it must be said) to buy stuff they could do themselves with labor so underutilized they accept the low returns of the malware industry out of desperation is do dumb even Putin gets it.
And I can totally understand why they wouldn't want a Dell. If they want Chinese made crap they have China's number, why would they want to cut the US in on the action just to get a Dell sticker on the box?
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:5, Insightful)
Not Invented Here slows down a lot more progress then it helps.
Nice slap down (Score:5, Insightful)
In Putin's defense, he was slapping down a marketing pitch. The linked article gets it wrong on a subtle but significant detail: Mr. Dell didn't ask "If" Dell could help, he asked "How" Dell could help.
Who can blame Putin for being offended by the implication that Russia needed Mr. Dell's help? So he let him have it with both barrels, much as any of us might react to an unwanted and annoying telemarketer, if they gave us a similarly arrogant pitch.
And by the way, shouldn't the lame jokes be changed to start with "In post-Soviet Russia"?
Re:It was a very mild rebuke (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it was more like "when are you going to start treating us as equals?"
Re:Programmers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Swell.
Your understanding of the situation reminds me of Bush looking at his polls.
Putin, not big on technology, took Dell's question as an insult, and retorted with a prideful display. Nothing more than that.
Chances of Dell selling much into Russia? Poorer-- although it would be a great counter-culture way to insult Putin. For that alone, an offset may have been made so as to prevent Dell from having to file an 8K (for downward trend warning due to sales-geek faux pas).
Don't go in to politics.
Wow, watch out (Score:1, Insightful)
I would have taken Putin by the word 20 years ago and they probably would have blasted IBM out of the country with some Lada-type Diesel computer made from scrap metal and old nuclear reactors. But today. Not so sure anymore. What kind of sensible person would actually install a Russian operating system (let alone entire hardware solution)? We know they write spyware, so do the Americans but does that bother us? No. Because at least the Americans hide their stuff at all costs. Russians are just too straight forward. "I don't like, I kill you.", "I want information, I break your legs, then encryption."
The course that Putin is sailing right now leads to the edge of the world and from his point of view
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Failure to address the real issues (corruption, economy, etc) plaguing your society? Check.
Playing up a sense of extreme national pride, isolation and bullheadedness? Double check.
Burning a bridge? Triple check.
Putin, you would have made a fine leader during the Cold War for either side.
I'm sorry - what country are you talking about, because quite few fit into this profile.
It may be a misconseption on my part but... (Score:0, Insightful)
"not even our Indian colleagues."
Am I the only one who thinks that even if there may be some good programers among them, most of the indians programmers are cheap labor like the chinese in manufacturing, they work long hours doing a so-so job without having much qualifications nor having to think much about the problems? This is based on what I've heard since I haven't worked with indians myself.
Delphi (Score:0, Insightful)
Maybe Putin meant to say that Russians were the best Delphi programmers in the world, which is probably true.
Unfortunately no one gives a crap about Delphi.
bezumetz, begletz dorogi net.. ti vidish neverni svet...
Dell needs a class in international business (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nice slap down (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a huge difference between declining assistance and going off on a childish diatribe because a businessman offered his services to you. Putin seems to be playing up to the state-owned press in Russia which lionizes everything he does.
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:3, Insightful)
Not Invented Here slows down a lot more progress then it helps.
Maybe in the short term, but in the long term when you are talking about a whole society inventing things. The USSR, having different needs and different mindsets, may have come up with unique technologies that where not tried here. For instance, what if they would have gone the trinary route instead of binary, or if they had made their first computers more like the ideas behind the thinking machine from MIT. I think then you wouldn't be saying that it was a waste of time because their technology would show more of what is possible.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.
Summary is a bit off (Score:5, Insightful)
Putin wasn't reacting to Dell offering computers so much as Dell suggesting that Russia had a problem with technical talent that needed addressing, which *is* obviously absurd! Even if Russia did have a problem developing IT talent, the solution isn't a big order of Dell computers, even if Dell honestly thinks it is.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Bush is gone...
But his mess isn't.
Poor translations (Score:1, Insightful)
Russian to English translation was mediocre (at least for the bits I could hear Putin say), so I wonder whether Dell's question had similarly poor translation and Putin didn't get the real meaning of what was asked.
I can see how his question could be translated to mean that Russian IT still sucks and needs help.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:3, Insightful)
Authoritarian, yes, but competent at it.
Bollocks. Competent at being authoritarian, yes, as you'd expect from a bunch of Chekists.
Oil production (output) has fallen since the re-nationalisation by Putin and his cronies, and now that oil prices have fallen, the dependance of the Russian economy on commodity exports, and - shock - foreign investment has been revealed.
Make no mistake, they're in big truoble just like the other major world economies.
Full of shit you are, young Jedi (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Putin has been addressing the economy pretty darn well. There was pretty dramatic GDP growth during his tenure.
2. While corruption is still high, it is MUCH lower than it was during Yeltsin years. Oligarchs don't open the doors in Kremlin with their foot anymore. The guy who tried to buy up enough of the parliament to pass his own laws (Khodorkovsky) is in the prison, where he will remain for a long time. Needless to say, the Russian people have much less sympathy to him that those who don't know what he's really in the prison for.
3. It's about time Russia asserted itself internationally. For nearly a decade and a half, Russia did exactly as IMF and Washington DC told it. Needless to say, neither of the two had Russia's interests in mind.
4. Putin was merely putting Dell in his place. Just because you got a ticket to Davos doesn't mean you're entitled to any kind of preferential treatment from the government. Dell is just "screwdriver assembly" company. There are plenty of those in Russia.
Questions?
Re:"Best" (Score:5, Insightful)
Eastern european programmers do tend to dominate things like the Top Coder and Google Code Jam competitions (although a Chinese guy won the latter last year), so there's certainly plenty of talent there. Let's not also forget that they've got things like the unmanned Progress ISS supply ship that we're totally dependent on - something that neither the US, Europe nor anywhere else has to offer.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
A failed state? (Score:3, Insightful)
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia [wikipedia.org]
Lower birth rates and higher death rates reduced Russia's population at a 0.5% annual rate, or about 750,000 to 800,000 people per year during the late 1990s and most of the 2000s. The UN warned that Russia's 2005 population of about 143 million could fall by a third by 2050.
From
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state [merriam-webster.com]
State: 5 a: a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory
If you need a body of people to be a state,
the I'd say that Russia is on its way to failure.
Russia - Where Russians go to die
-- The Onion
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:4, Insightful)
If this state is shared with the other large economies, it would fail to support your argument that the Russian government is not in fact reasonably competent. Other than that I would have to infer that you are claiming that all governments are incompetent. While I appreciate that this is a popular position for the Norquist/Libeterian crowd, I do not agree.
Re:Obama hype (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that you need to worry about is the God like persona that the media is painting Obama with. He may wind up being a good or even a great president, but no one is going to be able to live up to the hype that is being heaped upon him.
Ah, in my best 3rd-grade impersonation I can muster...He started it.
Seriously, you can blame the media up to a point, but the media didn't make over 500 campaign promises. He did. Let's see if he can merely live up to his own hype.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, those annoying conservative types and their spending. What we need are some good liberals in Congress and the White House to cut spending. Especially in times of recession. Prime example of cutting spending, of course, is the current Democrat-formed stimulus bill!
Sarcasm aside, if you look at past recessions (even CNN did this), Reagan's presidency/Congress got the US out of a recession that apparently Carter put us into. Reagan did spend, but certainly not like FDR spent. It seems that most liberals/democrats (I realize there is a different, but they tend to go together in practice) like FDR's version better - spend more, bigger government. Cutting taxes always seems to bring the outcry of "But the government doesn't have enough income to CUT taxes!" ... but then they want to spend MORE.
Obama is different, one might say? Well, he doesn't seem particularly interested in cutting spending, so far. He's trying to get Republican/Conservative support on basically a spending bill (the "stimulus" plan). I haven't seen him pushing democrats to cut spending yet. And I haven't heard any reform of the programs yet, either. Just more money. Wonder where the money will come from.
Great way to get the US out of a recession is to go further into debt. Yay.
And by the way, Clinton economics led TO a recession, not out of a recession. Recessions don't happen overnight, as seen with this one. Am I defending Bush II? Not exactly, although we DID get out of the recession that occurred right after Clinton's presidency (dot-com bubble bursting). But one also happened at the end of Bush II, and IMO he was far too spendy. But if he, a republican, was spending too much, I can't imagine what we're in for now.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Last night npr had a story [npr.org] about Obama's huge stimulus plan being the first real test of Keynesianism, and how conservatives (they quoted somebody from the Cato Institute) hated it.
I thought, Huh? It was Reagan who ushered in the modern era of huge government spending to juice the economy. Both Bushes did it too, with Jr taking it to new heights.
The main difference I see with Obama is that less of the money will go to the military-industrial complex and tax cuts for the rich, and more into infrastructure and services that benefit greater number of people. I think that's potentially good, but doesn't change the fact that the federal budget deficit is downright terrifying and unsustainable.
As for Reagan breaking up the Soviet Union, give me a break. Communism never works, with or without Reagan. It was Clinton who was smart enough to reap the peace dividend by closing bases and bring a govt. surplus, which Reagan never would have done.
Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure $150/bbl oil had nothing to do with it.
You have any room in that prison? There's a few US oligarchs who probably deserve a stay there.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:0, Insightful)
You mean Clinton's? How quickly the details of history are forgotten...
Re:It was a very mild rebuke (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure that was meant as an example only. The point being that GroupThink can hold us back. One of the arguments for capitalism is that you have N people all trying to find the best way to solve a problem, being rewarded when they do -- we're betting that it's more efficient in the long run to waste resources in the short term exploring different options and seeing which ones survive. When you see a whole group of players "give up" in a sense, and use the existing solution, you've got to be worried that there was some innovation there that just won't happen anytime soon now -- and if the idea is instilled that you should always go with the short-term efficiency of using off-the-shelf solutions, then you've got a long-term problem to deal with: entire generations raised to go with COTS rather than innovating. The bet here is that in the long term, it's more profitable to at least have some trained R&D people than an entire population of "users", dependent on others, and you can't have that without sometimes saying "no" to the salespeople.
Re:Nice slap down (Score:4, Insightful)
Possibly, but I'd direct you to Robert Heinlein's essays on how to deal with Russians and the Russian system, "Pravda Means Truth" and "Inside Intourist", both in Expanded Universe. These were written based on personal experience travelling inside Russia, with his wife learning Russian fluently enough to talk to people there without needing a translator. They provide quite a bit of insight into why Putin reacts the way he does.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
and when does it become the next guy's mess? (Score:3, Insightful)
because I am curious.
I would say two years in, because 9/11 wasn't Bush's mess either, he just got stuck with it.
Re:Beware of geeks bearing gifts. (Score:2, Insightful)
Because the beauty of his joke was that everyone who read it would come up with, "Geeks bearing gifts", as it was just a simple substitution of one letter and at the same time educate some of the people who do not know where the original adage comes from.
The best textbooks are like this, in that they give you enough theory to draw your own hypothesis about a specific application. The worst textbooks give you a theory and than the author's own application of said theory.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Obama is that less of the money will go to the military-industrial complex and tax cuts for the rich, and more into infrastructure and services that benefit greater number of people. I think that's potentially good, but doesn't change the fact that the federal budget deficit is downright terrifying and unsustainable.
I have no argument that Bush (and both GOP/Democrat congresses) spent way too much, but the current "Stimulus/Recovery/Whatever-the-hell" bill is good money after bad. A significant portion of the money goes into Medicaid, Medicare, and "state-aid".
Cover state budget holes, and state legislatures will spend the money on something else. Meanwhile, the federal budget gets a new, higher, $1 trillion dollar deficit a year floor.
You want Keynesian Stimulus? Spend $200-400 billion on infrastructure. You want Reagan Stimulus? Spend $200-400 on infrastructure, and another $200-400 on pro-business tax cuts.
The current bill is neither of those things, pays a small amount towards national 'capital' assets, and borrows a vast amount of money to fill structural holes in state budgets.
*shrug*
I don't think you can stimulate the economy, or fix long-term structural budgetary problems, by kicking funding for schools, healthcare, and other transfer payments down the road 2 years (which is *exactly* what this bill does). So; Pell Grants get $20 billion for 2009-2010? What about 2011? Not only does the shortfall get bigger, but then we have to cope with the additional interest on the borrowed money to fill today's budgetary hole.
I'm all for targeted tax cuts that increase future tax revenue (capital gains taxes). I'm all for infrastructure funding that either reduces future budgetary needs (energy efficiency can do that), or increases economic activity (better ports, internet, and highways ->more business->bigger tax base).
But if we spend/borrow $1 trillion, and don't get a significant amount of long term growth out of it, we're just digging a deeper hole, and that's exactly what the big O is planning to do.
I've told other people, and I'll post it on Slashdot, for which I'll get ridiculed. Unless there are some dramatic sunset provisions in this bill, or the economy starts magically growing at 4-5% a year, people will remember the days of Bush as "The Good Old Days", when budget deficits were no more than a few hundred billion, and the national debt was under $20 trillion. When spending $600 billion on a war over 5 years was considered profligate waste.
We've pole-vaulted over the $1 trillion dollar per-year deficit level, and we don't even have anything cool to show for it (like, I dunno, space factors, a city on the moon, or Nuclear Fusion).
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:4, Insightful)
When has it ever been about intelligence when Politics or politicians are involved?
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not just nationalism. It's hubris. That has been a part of Russia's collective psyche for at least the past 100 years. They're not going to let anyone tell them what to do, and they balk at receiving help from anyone - it's a sign of weakness. They have a strong "us and them" [washprofile.org] mentality which has not faded away one bit since the end of Communism.
I can't really fault Russians or Putin for that, other countries are loud and proud of themselves [usa-patriotism.com] and can also be a bit protectionist [dw-world.de] from time to time. But in Putin's case, it could be incredibly self-destructive, although I would bet that his people will support him even if it means economic disaster.
I'll probably get modded troll for that second paragraph, but just remember, in post-Soviet Russia, troll mods YOU.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
This is surely incorrect. The USSR functioned for almost seven decades. The people of the Ukraine clearly had a falling standard of living as Stalin starved them but failed to successfully revolt or change the system. Likewise in China, the cultural revolution was not something associated with a huge rise in living standards but Communism survived. Or the Castros in Cuba after the fall of the USSR and resultant drop in subsidy. Or Afghanistan moving from Soviet subsidy to Taliban control. Or the long reign of Pinochet in Chile. Or, indeed, the continued existence of Zimbabwe as a state.
I would suggest that authoritarianism does not require a rise in living standards to keep on going, and indeed I would suggest that a perception of danger and mass insecurity in the face of either economic or military threat is what often creates it in hard times. If you are American you have surely just lived through a period where the political utility of the perceptual emergency was clear.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
While I appreciate that this is a popular position for the Norquist/Libeterian crowd, I do not agree.
Well, never though of myself as a Libertarian...
To clarify my thoughts; well, all G7 Govs. seem to have dropped the economic ball - in some way or another - in recent times, so we may, I suggest, reasonably claim that they're all incompetent in that regard.
Let's turn to the main point, to whit Putin. He has ruthlessly and systematically concentrated power just as much as any Tzar, (to be fair, so have others - think Burlusconi, Chavez...) I suggest it is therefore reasonable to assign the current condition of the Russian economy and state pretty much to him.
Now, do you seriously suggest that those two things are in good shape? Major western economies are in the toilet, for sure, but on all other criteria (democracy, corruption, life expectancy...) we're way ahead. My concern is that the signs are not good for progress in Rusia on ANY front.
If both do it, I prefer the one that does openly (Score:4, Insightful)
Obama is different, one might say? Well, he doesn't seem particularly interested in cutting spending, so far. He's trying to get Republican/Conservative support on basically a spending bill (the "stimulus" plan). I haven't seen him pushing democrats to cut spending yet.
I didn't see the republicans pushing for smaller government recently.
There was a lot of big talk, but the government spending and debt kept getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger.
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly. Who is to say that "corporate theft and spying", or rather, the less rhetoric and hate filled "acquired by means other than inventing", is wrong? Most of the world did/does this. Not only that, but many developing nations are required to do this, else they would fall further behind the rest of the "honest" world.
Thirdly. Did you really need to phrase things the way you did? Do you really subscribe to the "west is best" or "west invented everything" attitude? If you do, then history disagrees with you, for the most part.
Re:Dell needs a class in international business (Score:2, Insightful)
Bzzzt! Wrong attitude. Unless your objective is to get into a pointless argument or pissing contest.
Taking into account the opposing POV is hardly 'bootlicking', it's common sense. It also costs nothing. Arrogance OTOH, has no value. What consolation is it to you that you refused to be a 'bootlicker' in your opinion, if it means you fail to achieve your goals?
You take into account the opposing POV to find the course of action most likely to produce the desired result. If Dell had phrased his question differently, he could have gotten the answer he was looking for. Instead, he got some useless nationalistic banter. If it'd been a business negotiation, Dell would have risked losing out on the deal, and both sides would probably lose.
Diplomacy is not a zero-sum game, and it's not pandering or bootlicking. It's the dignified art of getting stuff done without getting sidetracked into pointless discussions. Saying 'my way or the highway' does not tend to get things done, and does not make someone a good leader, if that's what you think. Because leaders, pretty much by definition, are people who get things done.
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, those annoying conservative types and their spending.
Are you saying this in complete ignorance of the fact that during the Reagan, Bush I and II administrations that the most national debt was piled on?
Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Putin did not address the economy well. Rising commodity prices addressed the Russian economy. No structural problems were addressed, and until they are, Russia will falter every time commodity prices go down. What happened to the scientific prowess of the Soviet Union? Putin has not restored that. Russia is not a leader in any high-tech industries, despite what Putin thinks.
3) Putin is asserting Russia's interests in a typically moronic Russian manner. That is to say, he is trying to set Russia up as a Great Power and an ideological competitor to the West. But it doesn't have the population, resources, or technology to do this, so all it is doing is spending its money wastefully on these vanity projects. I mean, take something like selling missiles to Syria. It gains Russia almost nothing (some small money in arms sales and close ties with an country that still leaves Russia without any real leverage in the Middle East), but Russia pursues it because it is a poke in the eye to America. Much of Russia's policy seems more geared towards annoying the US (to prove that Russia can do what it wants) than doing anything useful for Russia.
Let me put it this way. In 20 years, China and India will be rich and fully integrated into the global system. Russia, which 20 years ago was far ahead of both, will likely not be. For that, Putin needs to answer.
4) What Dell said is standard business/political talk. It's a polite way of asking, "Is there anything we can invest in that would make both of us rich?" That's why politicians go on foreign trips trying to drum up business from investors, and why countries fly their own investors overseas to meet with foreign countries to solidify relations. Even if there are no specific opportunities for Dell right now, it is incredibly stupid for Putin to respond this one. It just sends a message to foreign investors that they are not wanted in Russia (a message already sent by Putin's actions to seize foreign investments in Russia's oil). How does eliminating foreign investment help the Russian people?
Re:The Cold War Called ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Notice the very different slopes between the last 3 republican presidential administration and Clinton's. Reagan almost tripled the national debt, Bush I made it go up almost 50% to it and then good ole Baby Bush made it go up almost 80%. Damn that tax and spend "liberal", Bill Clinton, and his not piling on to the national debt as much as those "fiscally responsible" conservative presidents!
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, do you seriously suggest that those two things are in good shape? Major western economies are in the toilet, for sure, but on all other criteria (democracy, corruption, life expectancy...) we're way ahead. My concern is that the signs are not good for progress in Rusia on ANY front.
I would agree that the West is indeed ahead on all fronts (including economically, in fact) but it is important to bear in mind the legacy that Putin came into power with. It is not entirely propaganda that makes people compare him positively to Yeltsin, I would say. The Russian body politic looks at Putin and compares him to Gorbachev's dismantling of the USSR and Yeltsin's disposal of the assets of the state for pennies on the dollar and loss of societal control. It is therefore not surprising that a program of controlling the oligarchs and bringing them under Kremlin control is popular. The Russian economy was starting to diversify, but was indeed focussed in energy. I think it is however fair to say that the economy did better under Putin than under any Russian leadership for at least a generation.
In terms of democracy, it is of course going backwards. I am however not entirely sure that's not what Russians as a body politic (which is very different from the urban intelligentsia) actually wants. It's a problem. I would also say that in a country where Stalin almost won a greatest Russian poll (while being Georgian, oddly enough) Putin's centralisation of power is not only not as big as any Tzar's but actually quite restrained. The rule of Stalin was essentially that of a Communist Tzar, and he killed millions.
The counterargument is that Putin's air force almost bombed me in Gori, Georgia. I was however mildly amused by this.
Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi (Score:3, Insightful)
It's no coincidence that oil prices tripled during his stay in the office. Now they're back down, and we'll see how long that GDP growth will last.
While corruption is still high, it is MUCH lower than it was during Yeltsin years. Oligarchs don't open the doors in Kremlin with their foot anymore. The guy who tried to buy up enough of the parliament to pass his own laws (Khodorkovsky) is in the prison, where he will remain for a long time. Needless to say, the Russian people have much less sympathy to him that those who don't know what he's really in the prison for.
I won't even comment on Khodorkovsky - anyone who knows enough about the case knows that it was a case of political persecution, pure and simple. Even if you go by the official version, he was charged with tax evasion, not "buying the parliament".
Anyway, corruption is still there and as rampant as ever - it's just that, now that the official party of power is the "party of bureaucracy", it's considered normal. Meanwhile, the number of government workers (read: bureaucrats) in Russia has grown steadily during Putin's reign, and today actually exceeds their number in the USSR, for a country which has less than 2/3rds of the population of the USSR!
It's about time Russia asserted itself internationally ... Questions?
Good luck doing that with demotivated, undertrained and abused conscript cannon fodder making up the bulk of the military, with military tech 20 years old (very few new developments since the collapse of the USSR, and most of those don't even leave prototype stage), and with no coherent ideology save for "We are awesome 'cause we say so, and we're gonna whine a lot if you disagree, and maybe even punch you if we think you're weak enough".
- fellow Russian
Birds of a feather? (Score:2, Insightful)
However arrogant and egotistical you might think Putin is, Michael Dell is worse. I thought how Putin responded was restrained by comparison to what I would have said in the same situation. The larger context illuminates just how bigoted were Dell's comments. What a putz.
As an American socialist, Dell's attitude and values exemplify why I despise the American economic system as it is, and by extension our political system, since the same selfish arrogant egotistical bigoted putzes move freely back and forth between the two.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite. I can see why Putin's nationalist bluster about not needing the outside world might appeal to Joe Vodkabottle types in the sticks in Russia, but I'm surprised it appeals here on /.
If an American President had said it, you'd be mocking him.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually I think China and Russia have always been authoritarian apart from a few brief interregnums. Like the joke about women who date nice guys only when they are 'between bastards', China and Russia only have reformist governments when they are between tyrants. Typically those reformist governments collapse under attack from multiple would be tyrants. One tyrant wins and things go back to normal.
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:2, Insightful)
What I mean by cut off is that they mostly just started using processors from the free world instead of making their own.
"Free" ;)
A recession is just a reduction in credit (Score:3, Insightful)
and a correlated reduction in debt.
The way to get out is to print (no, not borrow) money. Reducing the deficit, paying off the national debt, reducing personal or corporate debt will all cause a recession under the existing monetary system because it nukes the equivalent amount of credit.
It's all fairly simple once you understand that 95% of US money is credit and realise that growth == inflation == credit and debt.
Re:Birds of a feather? (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps you should move to Russia and put your childish rebelion to work,
However, from what I heard in the video, the problem is more of a translation problem then an insult. Dell was simply saying we will be happy to set up shop and allow you to tap our resources because we want to sell things to you. It's obvious that the word help which when companies speak of it in the US, they usually mean provide something you want to buy, got translated in a way that questioned Russia's competence in IT. As Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in the beginning, we are not invalids, you should help them. Where in the later part of the video, he talks about using imports and partners from other countries as crutched more or less but stated their goals were to build Russia's abilities and support local development and sources.
Now, he basically conflicts the impression of the beginning statement with an actual statement made further into the video. This tells me that Micheal Dell was a country boy in a big city where what he thought he said meant something else. In America, the sales person generally asks how can I help you with the intentions of making a sale. In this case, Russia's terminology or customs probably aren't aware of this so it came across insulting instead of just a sales pitch. The comments were not bigoted, arrogant or egotistical at all, they were just different styles that were lost in translation.
Re:If both do it, I prefer the one that does openl (Score:2, Insightful)
You're right, and I would criticize Bush II for not pushing for smaller government, less spending, etc. I don't criticize him for spending where government SHOULD spend.
On the other hand, we appear to want to spend more on a lot more programs now. It was bad enough with the spending by republicans; it appears that it will be worse with the spending by democrats.
There was a lot of big talk by Obama and democrats, too. But post-election, I have heard very little about "cutting spending." New cars for government employees doesn't exactly sound like "cutting unnecessary spending."
I will criticize republicans or democrats, I don't care. Right now, though, republicans are voting against spending, and I give them credit for that. Democrats, overwhelmingly, are for it, pushing for it, EXCITED about the government, gov't spending, and debt getting bigger. And their version of "bipartisan" means "republicans have to vote for this, too, but we're not changing anything in it." So, I'll criticize them for that.
Openly, you say? Didn't Obama, for example (I know, Obama != Congress), very much stress the problem of the spending the last 8 years? In his first week or so in office, has he done anything about it? Not really, but he sure is pushing other things (including abortion stuff). IMO, what you push for when you are first given the power to push shows where your real priorities are. Openly? Yeah, openly now, but he wasn't necessarily elected on a policy of "I want to spend more on unreformed government programs." At least, that's not the message I got.
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:4, Insightful)
We have so far seen what a large communist economy can accomplish in USSR. We have seen what a minimally capitalist Russia can do. But from the way Putin has been moving, he is not planning to stop there. It seems like he wants to be a monopoly player in any sector Russia has the power to do it. He is playing a game of chess with eastern Europe as his chessboard when it comes to oil pipelines. Attacking Georgia was a case of sacrificing a pawn to make a move on the queen - The BTC [wikipedia.org] pipeline is the pipeline that will break Russia's monopoly on gas and Russia just made a move on it.
The same thing goes for any natural resources, Aluminium to Manganese -- Russia lets the oligarchs consolidate the industry with no regards to monopoly issues and at the last minute captures them back from them (or gets enough power to control the exports). You can't fault Russia for lack of extreme capitalism.
That said, it works for natural resources, but lack of protection for entrepreneurs has been a disaster in all other fields. Their productivity is actually falling in most sectors and they have been able to export limited number of branded products. If I were Putin, I would have asked for help in developing entrepreneurial culture,
Re:And Michael Looked Back (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's turn to the main point, to whit Putin. He has ruthlessly and systematically concentrated power just as much as any Tzar, (to be fair, so have others - think Burlusconi, Chavez...)
What about Bush? OK, he hasn't been ruthless against his own citizens, only a subset of foreign citizens, but he has systematically concentrated power too.
Re:TopCoder (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not what I hear from friends at work who migrated from Russia to, on their words, "any country on the west that would accept me". They often told histories about how smart young people from Russia had to survive by doing "tricks" and acting "cute" to foreigners and big national companies at events such as Math/Chess/Programming competitions. A good and modern example of this situation is the malware scene.
It's all about need. Those eastern european kids really need to win these competitions. They can't afford to be "normal" because the job market for normal people was always a great mess at Russia.
The same kid from the west, with the same capabilities, will simply dismiss so much work just for some competition and say "ohhh, screw this, I tried". The number of kids from the west who actually need this kind of victory is extremely small and this group is mostly composed of empoverished folks and people with extremely serious issues related to socialization and self-esteem.
Being quick and dirty: "spoiled" (that's always relative - I'm considering a eastern european view) kids won't put that much effort into this kind of event. They don't really care about being named "Top Coder" as they're living an extremely confortable life at the moment and will achieve good job positions at the future just for beinga national with a good diploma. That's why the malware scene is really weak at the US: people have better options.
That's also bad for the west: if you were born at the US and attended a good university, you'll end up being a manager without needing much knowledge or even an IT-related graduation. That sucks because it means that our companies are being run by spoiled idiots instead of leading the race of improvement technology creation.
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate you, SQL people. You seem to be fond of NULL but abandon it (like many other ideas) half way. And then make a living out of it.
Re:In Soviet Russia (Score:3, Insightful)
Pervasive corruption was what did in the Soviet Union.
Stealing or cheating to achieve a group objective was
not considered a big thing there and such practices
were actually institutionalized.
This can be a bit problem for ex-Soviets abroad. ...as far as "West is best goes": where would the Soviets
be without stolen German techonology and some of the
corresponding scientists.
Although the same goes for the US though...
Russia certainly has the potential. They just have chosen
to squander much of it for the past few decades. When their
engineers cease fleeing to London to work as waiters, things
will probably shape up considerably.
Re:"Best" (Score:4, Insightful)
Short answer: You have no idea what you are talking about.
Long answer:
Performance is independent of reliability or cost. And though Soyuz and Progress may be cheaper per launch - when you compare the costs of the multiple launches required to replace a single Shuttle flight, all the sudden they aren't a bargain anymore. The last numbers I saw indicated it would take nearly 18 launches of Soyuz and Progress to partially replace a single Shuttle flight. I say partially because Soyuz/Progress cannot support spacewalks, cannot return cargo/tools/handling equipment, and cannot deliver equipment much larger than a medium sized suitcase.
You want to compare Soyuz and Shuttle reliability? Let's do, let's compare 95 odd Soyuz flights to 120 odd Shuttle flights...
Fatal Accidents
Non fatal accidents
It's not a pretty picture - and it gets worse when you consider the Progress collision with MIR, something Shuttle has never done...
Ares will have to be a poor performer indeed to even approach the Soyuz record.
I didn't say it was currently obsolete, I said it will be obsolete. Currently it is obsolescent.
So what? That doesn't change the fact that ATV's performance (cargo capacity) is far higher.
Being reliable doesn't mean it isn't obsolescent and approaching obsolescence.
Care to cite a Japanese spacecraft design exhibiting this characteristic? Meanwhile, we can discuss how Soyuz has steadily lost capability in its evolution from general purpose orbiter to hyper specialized space station taxi. Then there is Progress, which has made some progress. Then there is Shuttle - which has new computers, a new flight control system, a new display system, new solid rocket motors, new SSME's (increasing thrust), a new external tank that increases payload to orbit by many tons.
Re:Geek girls would be ok (Score:3, Insightful)
You haven't met many geek girls have you?
Re:Full of shit you are, young Jedi (Score:3, Insightful)
(They also had some very good mathematicians, which is probably partly why the NSA modified the DES S-boxes to make it more secure. In fact, they still do have good mathematicians.)