What about examples like www.genexus.com, www.windev.com or www.velneo.com ?

Despite not being 'famous', they are pretty succesful, in the sense that users are ahppy with them, and such users know 3GL languages and HATE to think working again in the 3GL way.

In my personal experience, I considers myself more a software architect than a programmer, and any of such 3 tools is a far better options for me than horrible ( compared to such 3 tools, regarding productivity) tools VisualStudio, Netbeans or Eclipse.

Software architects with real knowledge, can take a lot of advantage of such tools , I don't understand how people writes about supposed 'limitations', I hope they explain what are they talking about, perhaps they talk about cases equivalent in construction of giving an imaginary rapid-house-building tool to blue-collar workers without engineering and/or architecture knowledge?

Check also these links please, and tell us your opinion, if you wish. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...

FWIW, there are A LOT of examples of capuchin monkeys facing challenges and overcoming them WITHOUT NEVER WATCHING ANYONE DO IT before.

You see it in south american wild areas near cities, or even with very young orphan monkeys raised at human homes, chained, how they improvise tools to get food, or to get something to use it as a toy.

For instance, this is another video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

And more important, apart from abilities and facing challenges, it's when you interact with them, it seems so obvious that they understand you and try to communicate with you. Even when they look at you, and the use of their facial expressions, it even scares you of how human they seem, no other animal comes close to that, and I'vee seen trained chimps, gorillas, parrots, dolphins, elephants, etc.

I'll try to film myself some untrained monkeys for anyone who wish to see that with their own eyes. If you travel to Brazil or Bolivia, you'll find some of these monkeys in rural areas, to realize how smart they act without any training. OTOH in cities you'll find some trained monkeys that work as 'assistants' for street performers (but that's not the point discussed here about intelligent traits, not about tricks trained by humans).

I'm surprised that the AMAZING capuchin monkey is ignored (FAR smarter than chimp, in my experience, just not used in research as often as they should).

Personally, in South America I've seen them solving problems (like learning themselves COMING FROM THE WILD several yards far from the office, to operate a coffee machine and getting a cup of coffe in an office where the manager allowed them in, or entering a place and looking for magazines, imitating the human behavior) WITHOUT HUMAN TRAINING.

Behavior like this, but without formal training to do so (like happened with the chimps when doing tricks), just by watching and learning.

Please check videos like these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

China today communist? 'a few capitalistic principles' Are you kidding me?

Aren't you aware that USA is totally communist compared to today's China establishment, with almost slave workers, with practically no rights when they are born peasants migrating to a city? Do you call that ' a few capitalistic principles'?

What were my moderator colleagues thinking about when modding the quoted message as 'Insightful'? Will some of them explain it here please?

Let's use your same logic, if complexity needs to be created, ask yourself, how complex would such 'creator' be?

How come such complex creature, could come into existance, without a creator itself?

Then again, how complex would be the creator's creator? And we could go on into an infinite loop of creators? Do you get it?

Leaving racist rant aside, scientific Nobel pizes are serious, non-scientific prizes (peace, literature or even economy) are not in the same level of credibility, by any means.

Please leave the religious stuff elsewhere, slashdot is not a fertile place for fairy tales.

In many countries of the world, wifi is not always available, specially in rural areas.

You don't purchase a tablet to be offline when you are in the countryside, isn't it?

I'm not claiming Android is superior to Windows, what I'm asking is, what's the big deal of not having 3G integrated?

What would be the big deal to enable 3G in an expensive tablet? What makes it so impossible for MS? that s what I'd like to know.

If your car ends up dead, you should use signals, like triangles, to warn drivers.

Stupid people texting at red lights also contribute to traffic jams, cause they waste the green light, most of the time.

And I've seen them with my own eyes, they keep texting after driving, or talking at the phone. So, stopping them from the start is not a bad idea.

There are several cheap android tablets that support 3G ((4G, LTE, you get the point), so, what would be the excuse for not supporting 3g without the need of awful USB dongles?

I mean, real mobility should mean the ability to stay connected even in rural areas where no wifi is near, isn't it? for such expensive tablets, isn't it absurd not to have 3G ?

Thanks in advance for any explanation.

The country has the funding for the project, the 'short-term revenue' is not free of hassle and/or potential problems for the long term vision they have.

For bolivians, it's by far the lesser of 2 evils, to wait until they have everything in place. even if it means sacrificing short-term urges, than to rush in selling raw materials, without added value, repeating some (if not all) the mistakes of the past. The long-term vision is winning, and it's a bad thing for corporations, a double good is achieved.

Selling raw lithium would also be repeating former mistakes (not only letting them take control of the business).

That's why they are trying really hard to have the whole business in Bolivia, with the least foreing involvement as possible.

And if there's foreign involvement, it will be under strict conditions, getting sure that the bolivians won't be screwed again, as happened in the past.

I really don't see what's wrong with such approach.

Because the money is already being invested, but using bolivian's money (even money from country's international reserve) and bolivian workers (scientists and support staff), without the need to give corporations the lionshare and/or the control.

I repeat, the 'money' to get, would not change the bolivian situation (as happened before, where even the oil & gas money were pennies, compared to the country needs, while corporations got the lionshare).

So, it was better to take the change of the C scenario (very slim chance, imo), than to keep repeating the mistakes of the past, regarding dealing with greedy transnational corporations.