Of course if you run a business and people randomly post crap about it for no reason it sucks; but it sucks in person too. If someone randomly tells me to never to shop at Sears, oh well.
How are you going to compete when some guy in China can do your job for less than the US poverty level?
True, trade tariffs are really the only tool against this - but at some point I think economically it makes more sense to give up.
If a country is willing to subsidize a product and keep their people in complete poverty to a level that even after a big tax still beats our prices, then I say move on, buy the product and forget about it.
Think about it - if China wants to sell their Hankook tires at a price far below American tires with similar quality by taxing their own people then you can't win that battle. Buy their tires or make advancements far beyond Chinese tires. Yes it can/will hurt American jobs at first, but the entire country will be able to afford better tires at a cheaper price. We'll get more jobs elsewhere and our standard of living will improve off their poverty. The cotton gin destroyed thousands of American jobs as well - but everyone could afford a shirt. Advancements play out to be a positive economic move.
There are many economic situations that there are not easy solutions; in fact I'd argue we chase better solutions for indefinitely (i.e. financial regulations). We need to stop spending so much time and effort on problems with no solutions. Financial regulation will never catch up to the market. Name a time when the regulations were ahead of the market. Solution: put people in jail that steal/commit fraud/etc... Don't bail those out that fail. Done - move on.
What a hypocrite
Ron Paul is not a hypocrite for this - and I'm shocked at the lack of intelligence of Slashdot on this one.
The site was setup to profit from his name from day one. It doesn't matter if they 'fought' for the guy. Without his name the site and merchandise had no value. This is a strong trademark - something that acquired secondary meaning but would otherwise be nondescript.
You can try to argue that there are other Ron Paul's - which is true for the domain name, but the domain name value is all tied directly to the Ron Paul. They aren't generating sales and traffic because of Ron Paul the plummer.
I doubt Ron Paul's views often - but anything you specifically disagree with, look deeper, normally you'll find you were misinformed or confused.
The big question is that given that cell phone bans don't make much statistical difference in accident rates, should we have them?
No we shouldn't have them. It is a fine line, but aggressive driving always effects other traffic by definition. Even if you are the best aggressive driver out there it doesn't mean the people you affect are not going to get in accidents because of your 'waves' of change. There is no way to inform them, "Hey, I'm Mario Andriette, keep driving like I'm not even here, you'll be fine."
Now, if someone is driving on the phone but is indistinguishable from other traffic that should not be banned. If you rear-end someone because the reaction time was slow, then you are at fault. If changing the radio station was the reason it doesn't mean we should ban that as well.
If you are txting while driving I think you're an idiot. If you drive without a seat belt you're an idiot too. Call me a librarian but neither should be illegal. Freedom limited to 'smart' decisions only is no freedom at all. Not taking a bath, eating nothing but Milky Ways and watching TV all day isn't a good decision either.
Come on. The headline is misleading. XP won't suddenly stop working - rather it will simply not be supported by Microsoft.
True, but in the Enterprise environment they are essentially equivalent. You can't afford to run an unsupported OS if users are allowed on the internet.
It will be a sad day. XP, for its time, and everything into consideration, is probably the best OS we've seen - which is why people are still running it. It works/worked with more devices and applications that anything out there. It is user-friendly, but still had the win2000 tech aspects behind it. I think it really raised the bar, and it took years for Linux or OS X to surpass it as most useful OS.
You scratch my tape, and I'll scratch yours.