I'm gonna say 1:20, on the suspicion that you stopped to enjoy the view a few times.

I know lessismore badged this, but I had to badge it too. Thanks for this post.

My wife is Chinese, and we go to China every year or so. I'm not an expert on China, but I have family there, and I have been there several times, and have visited a number of places. We visit there every year or so. Several of our friends are from China.

China has real problems. Had Daisey visited coal mines, especially illegal ones, he probably wouldn't have had to embellish much to pull at American's heartstrings. However, he didn't do that. He visited Foxconn, and said that it was much worse than it was. I haven't been to Foxconn. However, my impression is that it is far from the worst example of working conditions in China. In fact, given what the workers are paid, and the scrutiny they have come under, I am willing to guess that Foxconn represents a general improvement in the manufacturing sector.

Having familiarity with China, I am aware of how the US media embraces anti-China bias. Some of the bias is deserved, however, much is not, and some is just plain wrong. My wife has had more than one person say to her (paraphrasing): "You must be so happy that you were able to come to the US". That ignorance is sickening for us. No one could say that if they visited a major Chinese city. In some ways, it is painfully obvious that China is ahead of the US in development. Not in all ways, but in some. China is a great place to be, and the country is rapidly moving to a better place. It has real problems, but they aren't always what we think they are.

What really bothers me about Daisey's piece, is that it plays into American's conceptions about China by telling lies. Some of these conceptions are close to truth, yet many are not. IMHO the real damage is creating a simplified caricature of a country that is far more complex than most Americans understand.

If Daisey did any good here, maybe his getting caught created a conversation that will make Americans more skeptical of what they are told about China.

i believe there are no bad children, just bad parents. to suggest that a child is "bad" is to suggest that small children are capable of malice; a trait we dont learn until much later in life. all behavior is learned, and poor behavior is likely betraying the ineptitude of their teachers/parents. but it is possible to convince them otherwise; youd be amazed at the progress that can be made by speaking/explaining to children, as oppossed to "BECAUSE I SAID SO!"

not all of the problem parents ive run into are are bad people, they just make the mistake of either assuming that children are capable of undesirable adult traits, or assuming that children are stupid. actually, our most difficult students are the ones with strict parents... most of the "bad" kids mimicking their parents bad behavior can be convinced to change their ways, but the kids with strict parents are usually so confused and nervous that its hard to get them to listen at all.

source: ive spent the last 10 years (often successfully) teaching 3-5 year olds to be nice, and then watching them watch their parents behave otherwise. im a kindergarten teacher.

edit: one more thing: regardless of your discipline technique, PLEASE make sure that your children understand WHY what they did was not ok. if they dont know WHY, then youre just a big person being inexplicably mean to them.

I think the fact that the focal point of content here is on the user and not something more broad like a subreddit helps each user get what he wants from hubski without imposing on anyone else. So while a subreddit might one day become flooded with subpar content, I don't expect someone who has consistently posted great content to suddenly start posting memes and image macros. The responsibility lies on each user instead of the community as a whole to generate likable content, so the scope of quality stuff coming in has a much narrower focus. At least, that's the theory.

"Monetary system" should not be confused with "Capitalism". This is a fundamental point. Banksters are not in the "capitalism" business, it is the "money" business.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires << Are these the "richest" people in the world?

A capitalist: http://heroesofcapitalism.blogspot.com/2008/12/henry-ford.ht...

A Bankster: http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/nathaniel-r...

Revenue generation is just one measure or worth, though. Not every good idea makes money or should. Android is brilliant for being exactly what it is: an affordable, ubiquitous and highly adaptable open source operating system for mobile devices. It fills a useful niche that iOS cannot.

I also disagree with the notion that Google's non-search related endeavors are not remarkable. Their work with Gmail, YouTube, eBooks and maps/navigation are much more far-reaching than any of the closed services available on iOS. Siri and iBooks are neat, but I can only use them on iDevices which is severely limiting.