"Brand loyalty is a joke. Fan boi's are dillusional."

Hmm.. Interesting thought. However, I was bored so I decided to compile some of your more recent comments:


"Stop bashing meizu then bringing us almost obsessive updates about their progress every 5 minutes, face it you will all be buying an M8 when it comes out. Long live Meizu! the iphone has no chance in china! hahaha"

"Apple are the real criminals the way they rip off their customers under the guise of 'simplictity' which really means overpriced, extortionate contracts and lack of functions. Their profit margins should be criminal. Long live Meizu.....viva la revolucion! [..] F**k apple and f**k the germans."

"You dumb american f***s are so ignorant it amazes me. You f**kers are going to be sucking chinese dick when your oil runs out and your economy collapses. [..] Who makes all the clothes u fat fuckers wear? who makes all your tech crap and cheap shit plastic toys and bullshit you gorge yourself on? china. you would not have a computer or a mobile phone or a tv without china. [..] In 2O years or less China will have the biggest economy in the world. [..] None of you apple fan boi dick suckers would have 90% of the componenets that make up your overpriced piece of s**t phones without companies copying each others design."

"hahaha, what a bunch of C**K suckers, nothing like the smell of apple fan boy in the morning. [..] This weeks topic is 'how to brainwash the public with closed platform low specd overpriced phones and make them believe they are getting a great deal and that we are the gods of originality. hahahahahahahaha"

So.. yes. "Fan boi's" are indeed dillusional.

Hmm.. let's try this again and see if it places correctly. As I understand it, the reply button is really more of a suggestion for placement than anything else.. heh.

RV:

Though I do agree with the thrust of the argument, that quote is neither accurate nor attributed to the correct person.

IT should read "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Which we can all agree has vastly different implications. Also, that is believed to be written by Richard Jackson and often mistakenly attributed to Franklin.

Franklin did, however, come up with some thing similar: "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."

Anyway.. Yes, I agree with you, but I HATE the misuse and contraction of that specific quote, as it gives it an entirely different meaning than was intended.

RV:

Though I do agree with the thrust of the argument, that quote is neither accurate nor attributed to the correct person.

IT should read "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Which we can all agree has vastly different implications. Also, that is believed to be written by Richard Jackson and often mistakenly attributed to Franklin.

Franklin did, however, come up with some thing similar: "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."

Anyway.. Yes, I agree with you, but I HATE the misuse and contraction of that specific quote, as it gives it an entirely different meaning than was intended.

Doesn't this device appear to be begging for a steakpunk-style modification?

Upon reading over my previous comment, I feel that it may have potentially taken on a form more brash than indended. I should have formulated a more mature arguement so as to better avoid possible umbrage.

Do these articles really belong on bloggingstocks? I honestly fail to see effort to all but scarcely connect these political topics with the world of finance. They only serve to divide readership when written in such an inflammatory manner.

Of course, this is merely my own, possibly minority view of political topics in these settings, but even if one could argue it proper placement, wouldn't it be more appropriate to pass this topic onto an author with a less conspicuous bias towards one specific resolution?

There are two sides to every issue, to acknowledge and convey only one aspect can be seen as bad form for a writer.

Yes, and my 30" 1080p tv looks far better at 30 feet away than your 50" 720p tv from the same distance. Just look at that pixel density!

Lissa, honestly, how many countries in existence today were not at least partially built upon "stealing, lying, cheating, elitist, racist, classist, imperialist, Bull crap."

It might be time to break out a history book; You act as if all other countries were birthed fully formed and populated at the dawn of the universe.

"you people who get all upset about copying... your idiots."

- Let's talk, shall we?

"Copying is often good and brings improvement to the original work."

- I will not argue that it is one possible outcome. Through the deconstruction of a product, and subsequent analysis of its structure, function and operation, one can learn from others work and build upon it. This leaves the possibility of further development of the product, however, you are taking the research and development of another as your own. In most cases, these companies simply stuffing a cloned body of a competitor with lower cost parts to undercut their prices, then adding a poorly developed OS/UI layer on top.

"Copying and reverse engineering should not be confused with lacking ingenuity."

- That depends on your definition of ingenuity, of course. The "paint by numbers" approach of many chinese replicas would hardly be considered ingenious, novel, inventive, imaginative, or (to a lesser extent) clever.

"The Chinese companies are copying / reverse engineering because they lack financial resources, or they lack marketing skill, or both."

- You lump so much into the lack of financial resources category. They lack proper research and development teams, design skills, UI programming skills, proper testing and quality control (in some cases), branding (ok, that's marketing), etc.

"But they are very innovative. You have any idea how difficult...how much ingenuity goes into QUICKLY making knock-offs of phones and games?"

- Again, I believe you're mixing your definitions and giving credit where little is due. Many of these companies are not innovative; there work is neither the production of something like nothing done, experienced or created before nor is it a substantial change to an established line.

This all being said... Chinese companies (not individuals) tend to lack originality and marketing sense IMHO.

- That is a generalization. There are many companies in China who specialize in knocking off competitors products, but that is a reality of life in China. What I was referring to in my response was specifically those companies. There are many more products in china which are substantially original, though few which would cause want to outsource product design anytime to China soon, heh.

I just thought I would clip a portion of JET's post below for better perspective on this case. She clearly wasn't one of the "everyday people" you're speaking of, unless you share thousands of songs daily.

"Don't misunderstand what happened here: the RIAA wanted to go after her for 2000 songs but Media Sentry only had screen captures showing 24 songs. She irritated the judge by repeatedly stating she's never heard of Kazaa despite writing a researching paper on file sharing and despite her Kazaa name matching her online identity she'd used for over a decade. She was pretty obviously lying; the judge reminded her after one of her denials that she was under oath. He could have ruled the $9250/song penalty excessive, but I'm sure he wasn't motivated to."

While I don't agree with the amount, she was pretty clearly guilty (at least, in my mind). When you commit an illegal act, whether you agree with the law or not, you should ALWAYS be prepared and willing to pay the price of disobedience. It's a good rule to follow.

Also, when in court facing the possibility of several million dollars worth of fines, it's best to leave the judge with a truthful and honest impression of your testimony.