Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment They do have a point (Score 2) 47

I've been very critical of Canonical in the recent years (the whole Unity+Mir fiasco) but this time I think they're right. You cannot fundamentally modify their product and still call it Ubuntu. If they took Ubuntu, disabled AppArmor, removed all the trademarks and marketed it as TotallyUnsafe linux whatever, that would have been acceptable, but I can see why Ubuntu feels damaged by this "European cloud provider" behavior.

Comment Re:profit margins, and protectionism (Score 1) 472

So, let me get this straight. You start by saying that wealth is essentially production, but then you have people like Warren Buffet whose wealth comes entirely from stock options and dividends, therefore not production (at least, not his own).
Again, you claim that by spending it all, it would only cause inflation, and no sustainable increase in demand. I agree. You know what would though? A $640/year raise to all Ford workers (that not including all dividends that Ford pays to shareholders, which I'm not able to quantify right now). Because that's money that won't sit in bank accounts, but will re-enter economy almost immediately. Of course, that won't cause an immediate increase in market demand, but a slow, but sustainable growth driven by diffuse consumes in the long term.

Comment Re:profit margins, and protectionism (Score 1) 472

Well, once a Western worker is put in direct competition with someone willing to do his job at 1/10th of the salary, worker's rights are the first thing to compromise on. That is, if he's not just "reorganized" out of employment. Because yes, rights are expensive. Only a relatively wealthy society can afford them, one that has a meaningful redistribution of such wealth.
The paragon you make with Asia is not entirely valid. In the '80s Asia was still a mostly rural society (apart from the Soviet block), the increase of living standards they saw was due to industrialization's more efficient production of wealth. Also, don't confuse rights with wealth. It's true that there's some sort of equalization of wealth between the West and East, but is it also true for worker's rights? See the point I made about authoritarian regimes.

Comment Re:profit margins, and protectionism (Score 2) 472

Except history demonstrated the opposite. Most of the socio-economical conquests of the working class happened in the 20th century well before the Reagan/Thatcher era that imposed ultra-liberism as worldwide dominant doctrine. The fact that corporations could not move production elsewhere at whim, but were forced to keep it where the goods were consumed, was actually a major contributing factor to the success of these struggles. Once international free-trade deals took place, a slow but constant erosion of the working class rights started. To the point where blue-collar America ends up voting Trump (misguided, I agree, but they do have a point in supporting protectionism).

Comment Re:profit margins, and protectionism (Score 1) 472

The picture you paint is a bit too rosy, to say the least.
Wages are low because there's a different definition on what constitutes "minimum living standard". It's true that generally speaking industrialization leads to class awareness, and subsequent social strife. That's how it worked in the Western world. However production is now mostly in countries with authoritarian regimes which don't see well things like unions, strikes and salary demands. Those countries already attract foreign corporations by offering tax-free zones that won't enforce the already poor local regulations, if wages were to rise too much, corporations would just move production elsewhere, because if there's something that is never in short supply, is exploitable poor masses.
The only way to effectively contrast this phenomenon is to build trade barriers between countries with too big wage gap. Because remember: Apple cannot survive without selling iPhones in the US.

Comment Re:profit margins, and protectionism (Score 1) 472

What I think is not up to you to state, Or even guess.
I just prefer a fair redistribution of wealth. Right now much of the world's wealth is removed from active economy by few super-rich, who use it to either gamble in the financial markets, or simply sit on it like freakin' Smaug, On the other end, those who produce the products or services where the wealth comes from are denied the right to a dignified life.

Slashdot Top Deals

Pascal is not a high-level language. -- Steven Feiner