So in other words you'd like to protect the unelected government of china from potential strife with its people by giving charity to them?

Again, money goes further in china, if said workers can save for homes when they go back to their villages the deal they strike is not that bad, else they'd stay on their farms. Now look at american workers. Walmart doesn't pay a living wage, much of their workers are essentially subsidized with government programs. The same exists for all minimum wage labor in america, yet the apple bashing folks aren't about to fix this, they need to cry over some chinese workers? How about you look at yourself before pointing fingers!! 45 million americans on food stamps as I've said. chinese spent 4 billion on art alone last year. Time to mind your own business I say, their problems are their responsibility, time to take our own problems on before we point fingers.

Well the main issue is folks are missing the actual point. China has one government with absolute power, and has cornered the market on manufacturing, you jump when they say jump or you go out of business when the iphone 5 fails to be delivered on time because some government official decides to get in the way. With absolute power comes absolute responsibility, that is the chinese government alone. Fixation on apple when everything else is made in china kind of says it all, this isnt really about principles. Furthermore when 45 million americans are on food stamps and many are jobless...it reeks a bit of hypocrisy. You won't help your own when you can worry about people over seas? How about the folks who cry over chinese workers fight for living wage for american mcdonalds and walmart workers first, then you'd have something to stand on. As it is this reeks of yuppie guilt, diversion of said guilt to something far away you can do little about to avoid even thinking about the problems you have at home. Never mind the fact that it also reeks of paternalism in the way of the old colonialist attitude, the natives need to be taken care of, they don't know any better. The reality is china is so rich now they spent 4 billion on art alone last year.... so who needs to spread the wealth to these workers? We need to give charity to them when we don't even pay walmart workers a decent wage? What kind of sick priorities are these?

And you fail to mention, china is not poor. 3 Trillion in dollar reserves 4 billion spent on art by their rich just last year alone. You folks want charity for chinese workers? Lets see you enact living wage for mcdonalds workers in the USA before you talk!! 45 million americans on food stamps, and this is what yuppies waste their time on?

Again, that is your distorted cartoonish view of the situation. They are workers who left poverty on farms to work there, they aren't forced to, and they have the chance to better themselves, many saving enough to buildhomes in their villages when they return. What mcjobbers in america have even that dream. Much of this criticism is just based on ignorance, and perhaps a need to distract from your own problems. As I said, 45 million americans are on food stamps, and yuppies cry about the chinese, who have 3 trillion in reserves and spent 4 billion on art just last year. The semi racist view of chinese as all poor is a massive distortion, they have plenty of rich there, and if they won't take care of their own people, that is their own fault. You want to demand charity for chinese workers? How about we stop the hypocrisy first, demand living wage for mcdonalds workers ...then maybe the chinese will listen to you. Lets see how that goes.

It is the governments responsibility. This is left out of most of the recent fad of criticism against apple.

Chinas government has absolute power, thus they have absolute responsibility. They have rigged the system so any business that wants to stay in business has to make their stuff there, apple isn't calling the shots, the chinese are.

Furthermore there is some inherent racism in the criticism. Its as if they are holding the chinese to a lower standard, with the ignorant assumption that the chinese are just 3rd world bumpkins who can't handle responsibility. The facts are this, china sits on 3 trillion dollars in reserve money, their rich have bought 4 billion dollars in art just last year alone, that is the real china. So when lefty yuppies in the west try to assuage their consumerist guilt by crying over the chinese as if they were all poor it gets a bit insulting. There are plenty of rich in china, they do not need our charity, In fact if we look at how we have 45 million americans on food stamps, we maybe the ones that require charity. But I guess that is what it comes down to, people who buy luxury products in western country feel guilty, they play with their toys while their countrymen are jobless, so they distract themselves by fixating on issues like this.

this i've long been surprised at how removed such benchmarks are from real world use. chrome bogs down horribly many tabs open. its "ability" to save memory seems to mean it pages out rather eagerly or whatever and if i leave it minimized for a while it just gets awful slow to restore anything back on screen when brought back up. firefox doesn't have this issue. plus with all my no script and such extensions, managing many tabs open at once is a breeze, and runs quickly. chrome just loses all functionality after a dozen tabs are open. but of course in benchmarks its faster!!! load of bs.

griefers aren't conservative, they go against the system for crisake. calling people on bullsh*t is hardly conservative.

bingo, the falseness of the avatar puts a wall in all interactions. even facial motion capture wouldn't be enough really, they would need to webcam capture your face and map it to the avatar for it to not be completely lame. and even then there are limits to what that achieves...probably mostly a remote creepiness. simple webcam stream gets around all this. adding interactive white boards and a system for controlled chat etc is frankly all you need. sometimes all this fuss over vr is simply an incredibly horribly complicated way of doing something simple. like how in films where computer interfaces are horribly complicated and 3d, most memorable example was the 3d gui in jurassic park where the little girl had to slowly move from building to building in a 3d world when frankly a couple clicks on a well made gui page would have been so much more efficient. google doesn't dominate because it spends its efforts on 3d interactive webpages. most things are better done simply getting to the point. seeing furry avatars around you is simply not anything of value in a teaching environment. sure some educational institutions jumped on the band wagon, but thats how it is with bandwagons eh? popularity has nothing to do with validity.

thats what people like to say though, but if you think about it, it really doesn't add up either. there is no advantage to meeting in a fake room to watch a fake stone faced "teacher" polygon doll try to teach you. it would be so much better done in some kind of interactive real time private teleconferencing web page where the teacher was on a webcam and the students could chat back as needed. fundamentally most interaction is done teacher to student, not student to teacher esp during lectures. any personal feed back can be easily done on interactive white boards and such. second life is just an additional layer of fluff that would add nothing to such interactions.

unless its a place where everyone else is already in uniform it only screams that the it staff are of low social position within the company and are basically on the level of janitorial staff or the cable guy:P its a visual separation from the "normal" workers which is simply unnecessary. unless its a specific service business like a store or restaurant uniforms only are there to differentiate the help from everyone else. lunch ladies and janitors wear uniforms, not the teachers.

basically yes, control is fundamentally too limited for this idea to work. it requires full virtual control which is lacking. the only way i see any possible value is if they match the users actual face movements to the avatars face. aka emotional capture project natal style i guess. still avatars are a creepy false face for the most part and their actual purpose and result is to distance/protect. its just no good if that hot poly babe you are talking to might be some fat slob, it just ruins everything. anything where real interaction is required is better done in teleconference solutions really.

its not simply about disparaging sl folk as losers. it was the simply unreality aka bubble mentality of those pushing it as the next coming, pushing all kinds of patently ridiculous nonsense trying to justify its existence. not a bit of rational skepticism over the years for the vast majority of the stores. it took quite a while before a decently mainstream publication like wired did a story on the marketing sham that was second life. before that it was mostly a few blogs knocking holes in its false population figures. the fundamental issue is that it was pushed as a virtual reality. when in fact it was a very poorly implemented video game universe comprised of degenerates and lonely people puppeteering stone faced dolls. the most artificial and limiting controls kept you from any real interaction. the fundamental false face of avatars meant social interaction was simply creepy and impossible and so it was limited to the most base activities like virtual sex where such limitations were tolerated. there could be no virtual social interaction worth having, it fundamentally lacked the technology to allow for this. it was nothing more than a bad chat room with a polygon figure for "walking around". and all the claimed uses were false on their face. as if people would want to hang around mcdonalds headquarters in second life. why? the bubble years and the stupid lack of any skepticism allowed for this, whether bernie madoff or second life. no one called bullsh*t when they should have. any claimed use was inferior in second life. its like asking why people wouldn't want to go into second life to use a search engine when google.com was so bare. sometimes the simple is best already. shopping in second life? why? amazon works so much better. teaching? video conferencing and other techs like that work so much better than trying play around with polygon puppets to "teach". chat is better done in chat and forums. beyond its technical limitations it was simply a poor solution to most anything you could think of.

i don't care about how far i can jump. i hate jump puzzle games. empathize? i don't care either. the reality is you play a game for the game mechanic, if it doesn't have a fun one the story can't save it. as for wii type controllers, those all fail at immersion. there is no force feedback, no real interaction with the environment, you are waving your arm in space, no resistance, no impact. so it has no connection with the reality in the game, that you have to make such extreme motions only emphasises how NOT immersed you are. its not like button pushing where you can disconnect from your controller, it becoming the unconscious connection. the motion controllers "motion" being so disconnected from reality becomes nothing more than gesture control, which is not immersive at all, but just a chore, and a rather phony one at that. perhaps gimmicks like wii controls bring in the casual gaming punters for a go before they let the dust cover the console, but that short term gain in market/sales has no meaning on the deeper understanding of making games immersive.

simply said, douchbaggery shouldnt be a crime. telling someone to go f**king jump off a bridge shouldn't mean you are responsible for it if they do. you cannot go around assuming everyone is mentally delicate. esp in a country that values free speech. i don't care if shes' 12, if she had murdered someone she would still be responsible. and in any case, it was a ridiculous waste of tax money processing this case. what should happen is the prosecutors involved should be fired for wasting public money.