Ok Form 300 Year 2013: Fill & Download for Free

Not very strong I’m afraid.Aristotle said that a flourishing middle-class is the foundation of (western style) democracy. And it is well agreed that the middle-class people demand (western style) democracy more than others.But it isn’t true in China.My teacher in Chinese politics, Dr. Chen had a book published in 2013 study the political preferences of Chinese middle-class, trying to find out whether they support the western style democracy (WSD). And it turns out that they don’t. Not as much as (some) people expected.Some numbers from his study:67% think there is no need for any kind of political reform in ChinaThe rights consciousness percentages are all very high (even the non-middle class people) mostly go over 90%/95% show that people are not brainwashed in anyway, they are clear minded and aware of their individual rights.only about 23% willing to accept public demonstration as a form of political expression because that would damage the harmony of communityonly about 20% think multi-party election is acceptableA good average of 70%-80% think the party is doing well and happy about their life under the one-party rule systemDr. Chen’s conclusion was rather simple. The middle-class people having stronger tie with the current political system than the other classes and overall, all classes have positive impression towards the current system and the party. There are unhappy ones for sure, but no one is really interested in changing the system in a bottom-up way because no one wants to go through social instabilities or even civil wars just for a worthless voting ticket. The study aren’t very new but from where I have observed, there’s not many differences nowadays. Do people have negative views towards the CCP? Yes, there’re always flaws and there’re always victims. But how far do people want to go for a change? Not very far.If you’re happy with the numbers now you can stop reading cuz I’m going to talk about some personal opinion and experience.As for Liu, the guy your article’s talking about.You’ll find thousands of people grieving for him of course, but at the same time you’ll find millions celebrating his death, and millions of millions don’t know who he was or don’t give a sh*t about it.He was a very talkative guy as you know and he did say lots of good things, but at the same time he also said lots of terrible things such as how the Chinese should be enslaved for another 300 years to learn how to be civil. Some agree with him, so they think he didn’t really mean it, but to the most ordinary people this kind of speech is intolerable.(btw my family literally knew the guy so don’t try to tell me I don’t understand him)No one likes to be controlled.Liu and others like him are telling people that ‘you’re controlled by the CCP’ which is ok to me it sounds that you’re trying to wake the people, and meanwhile, they’re saying like ‘you have no idea what’s good, let me tell you, this (the so-called freedom) is good, that (anything related to the CCP) is bad’.You know what, to me it looks like they’re not really fighting for the ‘freedom’ of the people. They’re ‘fighting’ for themselves. This is typical Chinese intellectuals doing, like for thousands of years, they haven’t change at all. They think they know better than the ones that actually work with their hands and walked all over the land; they think by reading books and numbers they can be kings and queens and rule the ignorant stupid workers and farmers. When they’re ‘fighting’, they almost never say ‘the Chinese people should have the right to choose’ and instead, they say ‘the Western democracy is good and others are all sh*t’.It sounds no difference to me if compare with what the Cultural Revolution did, just the other way around.And the WSD supporters on social media, are, to be honest, really stupid. I mean, if I want to win popularities, then I play nice, as nice as possible and try to make everyone love me. But most WSD supporters are like, ‘you don’t support WSD? you’re brainwashed loser!!shame on you!! go fu*k your mom!!’ …. I mean, really? I don’t agree with your ideology and I got this? And the very same people are talking about freedom of speech??(The extreme nationalists do the same though so both team got really horrible players on the stage)I am actually quite happy with the current situation in China, really. What I’ve learned from the Cultural Revolution is that one-sided stories are always dangerous, and the loudest voice aren’t always right. Now we have both sides keep shouting at each other and I think it’s good. John Mill wrote in his On Liberty that social debates are good because we can find truth through the exchange of ideas and rational arguments. While the extreme nationalists and WSD fighters cursing each other there are people doing really good job comparing the two system, their advantages and disadvantages. The WSD do have disadvantages and the Chinese system happen to have loads of advantages, you have to admit it. So, many like me prefer to keep things the way it is right now.

$40m is a pittance.You're making a common mistake, made by many who haven't actually attempted such a thing. Wikipedia is - in your words - "just text". You can run "just text" on any old computer. Sure, all you need is a bit of money for hosting and OH MY GOD YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW WRONG YOU ARE.*deep breath*Ok, let's assume you're now in charge of Wikipedia. How might you get it in the hands of 500 million people each month?First, you're going to need hosting. This isn't a service you can pick up from GoDaddy (this pic is 3 years old but you get the idea):Notice you have hundreds if not thousands of computers. They're interconnected in complex and novel ways - ways that require teams of experts to design and build.Now imagine that all the above parts are constantly changing, breaking and under attack. All. The. Time.All your computers will eventually die. All will need patching to stay secure. This isn't your home laptop. You can't just take down all of Wikipedia to run Windows Update every night.Have you got a plan for that? To create and maintain one you'll need a team of experts around the world, and such people usually don't work for llama beans.Now think of your software. Your software has to work in three hundred languages. Have you ever tried changing a program that has to work in three hundred languages? It goes a little like this:"I'll just add this checkbox to our software. It'll only take 5 minutes!"5 minutes of coding."That was easy!"Except now that feature needs testing in 27 different browsers, where you'll learn it doesn't work on Windows 7 Coal-Powered Edition, and you forgot to support pink Blackberry phones and oh, yeah, it needs a team of people to translate into 300 different languages.Testing is a feat in itself. Something that seems to work fine when 5 people test it can obliterate your infrastructure when 5 million people are using it. Scaling technology is hard. That's why every big site from Twitter to Quora to Facebook experienced constant downtime in their early years, because the best brains in the business still agonise over how to make websites work when they get that popular.Of course, we haven't actually dealt with the business of running Wikipedia itself. A community used by half a billion people needs constant policing. It needs quality control, PR, HR, accounts, policies, and hard working people to raise the paltry $40m a year it costs to run from cynical folk who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.For about 0.05% of the US education budget, running as a non-profit, Wikipedia educates HALF A BILLION PEOPLE EACH MONTH. Think about that.Frankly, we should be petitioning Jimmy Wales to run Planet Earth, because I'm pretty sure he'd do a better job than the rest of us.Jimmy for President, anyone?

Has the reporting on “Chinese spy chips” permanently damaged Bloomberg’s credibility among people in the tech industry?Bloomberg does financial reporting, not tech reporting. I don’t know of any semi-serious technologist read Bloomberg for tech news. Worrying about Bloomberg’s credibility among the techies is the wrong direction.The really funny thing is, what Bloomberg accused the Chinese of, Bloomberg itself did it, not with a chip, but with their own Bloomberg Terminal, in 2013.The Bloomberg Terminal is what the real money for Bloomberg comes from. 85% of it. It’s sold for about $24,000 per seat per year. Basically it’s a terminal to log into the Bloomberg intranet of financial data and aggregated financial news, plus the “financial social functions” such as Bloomberg Chat so you can do deals with other traders over it. The Bloomberg terminal is actually clunky and heavy with an awful UI, but you pay a lot of money to use it because it was started in the 80’s, when nobody else was there, and so now all your trading partners are on it. The Facebook of the financial/trading world. It looks like this.Mind you that Bloomberg makes this item themselves, with specialized keyboard and everything. (Actually you can map all the special keys to the f function on a regular keyboard, but then everybody wants “exclusive features” to prevent others from benefiting from it in any possible way.) The hardware, the software, the network admin, the social environment. Totally, completely, under their control. So…!Bloomberg reporters accused of 'spying' on Goldman Sachs trading terminalsBloomberg Admits Terminal SnoopingIn 2013, the Bloomberg reporters were caught watching who/when/how was logging on to the Bloomberg terminals, and what information they are calling the Bloomberg Help desk for. Now you know big investment banks like Goldman Sachs have their own proprietary trading, and their own books of deals, and all of them are supposed to be highly confidential, and here it is, the Bloomberg reporters were asking who was doing what, “front-running” Goldman’s deals!OK, so you pay this nose-bleeding price for this over-priced terminal, and you get the spies (who are trying to ruin your deals!) with it in one package, and you happen to be Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. So what do you do? You go fund a “Bloomberg killer” to get better pricing and the assurance that either you are not getting spied on, or if you are, at least you’ll get a cut of the profit. Wall Street made an ambitious, $300 million bet to build a challenger to Bloomberg — here's how it's getting onSo it’s just too funny for me to see Bloomberg, whose own adventure on spying were promptly caught when it had the unimaginable advantage of controlling the hardware, the software, the intranet, and the network help desk, now is coming up with spying stories where the offender CAN NOT POSSIBLY control the hardware, the software, the internet, the network admin, and the destination for all that expensive “chip” is some random guy out of 7 billion people, most likely a 15-year-old kid, covered in pimples, and trying to find someone to hook-up with!There’s no money there, dude.PS: Actually, in 2013, the big banks were a lot cleaner than the media. After the 2003 Dot Com crash, the banks reached a $1.4 billion settlement with the SEC to keep a “Chinese Wall” between the equity analysts and the investment bankers, so the guy whose job is to recommend stocks could no longer ride in the same car with the guy who’s trying to get a deal and get paid from the stock-owner. WALL STREET SETTLEMENT: THE OVERVIEW; 10 WALL ST. FIRMS REACH SETTLEMENT IN ANALYST INQUIRY But Bloomberg reporters were still riding with Bloomberg Terminal sales guy to their pitch meetings until the hissing fight in 2013.