Reminds me of http://xkcd.com/605/
164 karma · joined May 22, 2011
Population can not grow forever on a planet with a limited amount of resorces. So people either stop having children, or begin killing each other.
Do this experiment: go to a newspaper stand and look for magazines about weddings. Look for books about marriage. I have never ever seen one addressed to men (there are ones which seem to be, but on a quick glance I actually think they were written to feed the women's ego), which means IMHO that men wouldn't spend money on subjects like these. Meanwhile you sholdn't be surprised to find at least half a dozen for women. So I really really doubt that men are more willing to marry EITHER.
I would actually dare to say that men were (and still are) the ones who don't really care about marriage.
When it comes for child support, it's even worse. If in a family the husband begins to get a lower salary due to the state of the economy, then everybody should/will spend less. But if a divorced father gets a lower salary, "the child's standard of living must not change". Did you earn $200,000 per year pre-divorce, and now you barely can find work for $50,000? Too bad for you, you'll have to get an extra job to be able to pay the same amount of child support. If you fail to pay, you get to jail, but the support payments accumulate, so when you get out you'll be in even more debt, which will land you back in jail, and so on. And of course, this whole time, you will be considered a "deadbeat dad".
BTW, I was shocked to find out that, in some states, men* have to pay lifetime alimony. With all due respect, guys who get married on these terms are insane.
I know it's not about Asia, but: http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/05/us-work-couples-pr...
"London School of Economics sociologist Catherine Hakim's research shows that when both paid work and unpaid duties such as housework, care and voluntary work are taken into account, men do pull their own weight."
For example, how many people really do use desktop widgets on a PC? I'm willing to bet you that the majority of users spend most of their time in a web browser and some kind of a text editor (IDE/Office/...). IMHO the KDE project is going in a wrong direction by putting so much emphasis on the desktop. Just let me quickly start my favourite applications, then go away, until I call you back. I think that Ubuntu's Unity is much more closer to this goal.
PS: last time I tried KDE was with Kubuntu 11.04. I just played around adding and removing widgets, until I dragged the clock from the bottom bar to the desktop. Then I had an incredible frustrating experience when it took me almost half an hour to figure out how to add the clock back on the bottom bar. It just kept going under it.
PPS: The second issue was a show stopper: it didn't remember the settings for my dual-monitor setup. The only fix I could find was to edit configuration files... I mean, be serious, it's 2011, not 1999. So I returned to Ubuntu with Unity, which worked just fine.
I also find the "Reading List" from my Blogger account homepage to be useless. If I want to subscribe to a feed, Google Reader is a much better option.
Internet access wasn't a priority (most users wanted it for IRC, and there were very few local websites/services anyway). As long as we could share movies and play games, everything was fine.
Today things changed. I think that most users want 100 mbps internet access instead of 10 mbps internet + 1000 mbps LAN. But I'm confident that, if the ISPs fail, people could build their own networks as long as the State doesn't interfere.
The problem with US seems to be that the Government is bullying (through all kinds of regulation) small ISPs in order to protect the big guys.
---------- EDIT: I have to admit that (in 2003 or so) it felt good when a big telco, with a budget of millions, could barely provide 128 kbps, while the small ISP which I joined was providing 512 kbps internet access + 100 mbps LAN. Today I'm a subscriber of that big telco, because they managed to pull their stuff together and now provide a really good service (at least in my area). But Gov regulation had noting to do with it. It was the competition: improve your service or die. Plain and simple.
----------------- 2000 - 2002
There was NO regulation. We just threw UTP cables from building to building, and bought external connectivity from bulk sellers. We didn't pay any taxes. We didn't have any signed agreements with "customers". We didn't have any permits from the city council either. There were no employees... heck, we weren't even registered as a business.
We just threw UTP cables through the city like it was in our own backyard. The only problem was after thunderstorms, when there was a shortage of switches to replace the burned ones :) Oh, and from time to time I had to call some customer's mom to ask her to reset the stuck switch hosted by her kid, because half the network couldn't connect to the internet.
Users paid about $10 for 100 mbps connectivity with other users (multiplayer games and movie/mp3 sharing) and 64 kbps internet access.
Basically we were just some highscool/college kids building a LAN, and every user paid a share of the costs. My network had about 200 subscribers and covered a 2x2 km area. Several networks like this one were scattered throughout the city. Every month a couple of new networks appeared, while others bit the dust (including my own).
----------------- 2003 - 2004
(By this time me and my friends lost interest in being a "pseudo-ISP", so I can only speak from the POV of a customer)
Networks with 100-300 users began joining together forming networks of 1000+ subscribers. Companies were formed, real sys-admins were hired. Some backbones were now built with fiber optics.
Big companies noticed this and started to complain in the mass-media, calling such networks "illegal". Well, they were partly right (nobody gave a f#ck about building permits and taxes).
Now users paid $10 for 100 mbps connectivity with hundreds and even thousands of other people, and 256 kbps internet access. Big telcos were barely able to offer 128 kbps with a monthly traffic limit.
----------------- 2005 - 2008
Big telcos stopped complaining and began building their networks. Then increased their networks speeds, removed the FUP, offered subscriber packages (phoneline + cable + internet access). For $10 you could get a landline and 5 mbps internet.
A lot of city "LANs" couldn't keep up with the big guys and crumbled. Others joined forces and became real ISPs (with tech support, tax payments, ...) and some even managed to obtain money from investment funds. They could still compete with the main ISPs because they offered much better tech support, and the 100 mbps LAN speed was still of huge interest, even if the internet access was limited to 1-10 mbps.
----------------- 2009 - 2010
Small ISPs begin implementing Fiber to the Building. Hello Gigabit (well, 1000 mbps with others subscribers only... the internet connection is limited to 20-30 mbps).
Big telcos buy more and more small ISPs, but also continue to improve their infrastructure. Some drop the old cable (with its DOCSIS modems) and begin implementing Fiber to the Building too.
----------------- Today
For $10 per month you can get 100 mbps internet access + 5GB of mobile 3G connection. My ISP started installing Fiber Optics to the home (GPON technology) for houses and continues installing Fiber to the Builing (and UTP from there to your apartment) for high buildings. They also began installing WiFi access points through the cities (free access for all subscribers).
-----------------
IN THE END, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE ROMANIAN GOVERMENT FOR NOT INTERFERING. And if the large companies will try to form monopolies, I'm sure new ISPs will appear. I don't care about regulations. Thank you.
The ATMs don't seem to have any problems with them (but most ATMs were installed after 1999 anyway). The notes seem to be much more resistant compared to the paper ones, and when they get damaged beyond repair, they are pulled out of circulation and recycled into plastic items like garbage bins.