rbarooah

16 ms·

121.
by rbarooah 15y ago
The least I can say is that you come across as someone who disagrees with your interlocutor's opinion. If you are not willing to admit that, I will call this conversation over. I don't think that the relatively emotive statement that the
122.
by rbarooah 15y ago
and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy. Why isn't protectionism just part of the terms that nations negotiate when they trade?
123.
by rbarooah 15y ago
So basically war.
124.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Agreed, it's not just Maoism, it's the broader history of China's economic development. Also, if protectionism, which is notably bidirectional, isn't the root cause of rural poverty in China, do we have any reason for believing that unilate
125.
by rbarooah 15y ago
That's the second time you've failed to comprehend the use of a negative. I suggest you reread what you've written. The rest of the thread doesn't show me attempting to win any argument. I suggest rereading that too. Whichever way my interl
126.
by rbarooah 15y ago
No, not a word of what you said holds. You're flat out wrong, and it's clear that you don't understand what a strawman is. It is more than just 'misrepresenting' your opponent's argument, which in any case I didn't do. A straw man is where
127.
by rbarooah 15y ago
True, as long as you mean 'instinctive' in the sense of default, rather than in the sense of innate.
128.
by rbarooah 15y ago
By asking a question in the negative form ("don't you think...") you are implicitly asserting what follows is your interlocutor's opinion. This is where you are wrong. By phrasing it in the negative form I am implicitly asserting that I
129.
by rbarooah 15y ago
This is not quite correct. It's not a binary. The existence of one weak alternative network wouldn't be enough. We need an actual plurality of active networks. These issues are real when you have large organizations like Google and Faceb
130.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Nowhere did I assert that this was the parent's arguement. I didn't represent his position at all. My question adds context that changes the weight of the parent's assertions. What I wrote isn't even an argument, so it can't be a straw man
131.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Most of that seems to be aimed at ChromeOS - which is predictable. I'm more interested in what he thinks of Google as a service.
132.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Wanting to know his opinion doesn't make him the High Judge. I'm curious because slthough I'm critical of Google for various reasons, I think it's hard to make a case against the value that Google search has brought to the world. In the par
133.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Many of Stallman's complaints about Facebook ( http://stallman.org/facebook.html ) apply equally to Google. Does anyone know whether he regards them in the same light?
134.
by rbarooah 15y ago
That OS they have 'already coded', is hardly designed for this kind of device. But yes, I'll agree they have done a lot of work on key facilities that would be needed for this. Media coverage doesn't mean anything. Look at the media cover
135.
by rbarooah 15y ago
"But head mounted displays made by Google haven't been available for years." Sure, but this makes your point into a circular argument. In your first comment you indicate that the fact that these glasses have been spotted shows that Google i
136.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Head mounted displays have been available for years. The fact that Sergey Brin is able to test a prototype demonstrates nothing. Admittedly, if they do have the hardware nailed, then these would be cool.
137.
by rbarooah 15y ago
How so?
138.
by rbarooah 15y ago
It may not be worth stating to people round here who are essentially experts in the field, but to the vast majority of everyday PC users it's not at all obvious and very much worth stating.
139.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Not really - in context it's perfectly clear what they meant.
140.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Good grief. Downvoted multiple times without explanation? The original top-level article that this thread is about made what seemed to be a reasoned point at the end about the bailout of the auto-industry, and I am simply asking mseebach wh
141.
by rbarooah 15y ago
One russian security firm that makes money selling OSX antivirus software has made this claim without producing any evidence or even explaining how the estimate was produced.
142.
by rbarooah 15y ago
So, do you disagree with the point in the original article about the bail-out of the auto industry preventing a much wider loss?
143.
by rbarooah 15y ago
By talking about how the US and Britain had grown rich through trade and 'imperialist' protectionism and mentioning racism, the GP seemed to be implying that the poverty in China was somehow created by these western countries. Aren't those
144.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Don't you think that decades of isolationist Maoism had more influence on the rural poverty in China than US and British protectionism?
145.
by rbarooah 15y ago
The midwest has some great manufacturing industries, but the idea that it is anywhere near ready to replicate Shenzhen on any reasonable timeframe or cost basis is simply not credible. The expertise, density and investment levels are totall
146.
by rbarooah 15y ago
How is it that you accept that 'colocation theory' explains Silicon Valley, but you dismiss it as explaining Shenzhen without explaining why one is different from the other?
147.
by rbarooah 15y ago
I'm guessing you didn't read the piece. Wages are not the primary issue.
148.
by rbarooah 15y ago
No, they are stating that Macs are not susceptible to PC viruses, which is true. They are implying that viruses are a severe problem on PCs that Mac users do not face. This was undoubtedly true when they were running those adverts.
149.
by rbarooah 15y ago
Too steep for a next generation programming app, but not too steep for a coffee and a muffin.
150.
by rbarooah 15y ago
You still have the choice. You can always sell your Android tablet.

More ›