Slashdot Mirror

For whatever reason, somebody was shameless enough to start talking about 'environmentally friendly'(because if there is anything that war isn't...); but the fact that some of the more forward-thinking DoD types might want to be able to still move if their supply of diesel gets cut off isn't a huge surprise.

Incidents like this one, make the effective price per gallon look substantially higher than domestic pump rate...

Gallup and a few others have consistently gotten numbers between 40-48% for this data, but for reasons I don't fully understand, CBS polls on the same issue get slightly higher results. They get routinely in the 50-55% range http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965223.html. I'm not sure why this discrepancy exists, but it isn't a single yearly issue and it doesn't seem to be connected to how the questions are phrased, which suggests there's some more subtle issue going on.

The data for both this years Gallup poll and previous years does show some fairly predictable patterns. For example, by most of the previous polls, around 60% of Republicans are Young Earth Creationists while a little under 40% of Democrats are Young Earth Creationists. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx. This should not however be taken as general evidence that Republicans or conservatives are dumb or uneducated. The GSS as part of their regular survey does a set about general science knowledge, and that data suggests that when not asking questions about evolution or age of the Earth, progressives and conservatives look very similar, and there's some evidence that the people with the least science knowledge are self-identified moderates http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/03/the-republican-fluency-with-science/ although exactly what is going on is not clear. http://religionsetspolitics.blogspot.com/2011/04/political-affiliation-and-scientific.html. This is part of a general trend which suggests that moderates in the US are often not very well informed.

Also, while Gallup says that the fraction of people who reject evolution has stayed roughly constant, there's a potentially more interesting trend in the data, over the last 30 years there's been a steady increase in people who say that evolution occurred with God taking no part in the process. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx. Most of that is movement not from the strict creationists but from a reduction in the size of the group that thinks that evolution happened with God guiding it. This may reflect the general decline of the moderately religious, especially so called "mainline Protestants" or it may be due to other effects such as general increases in partisanship.

Amazons profits in 2012 are not applicable. Those are its profits under the Agency model.
2008 Amazon's profit doubles, shares decline http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004155275_amazon31.html
2009 Amazon profit surges 69% http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/22/technology/Amazon_earnings/index.htm
2010 Amazon Profits Climb 71% http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-205_162-6151729.html

Elbert Dallas Thomason

http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Monsanto-Beats-LA-Farmer.htm

Why would a mysterious agriculture department sprout up months after Monsanto threatens a local farmer and illegally takes samples of his crops?

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-4048288.html

Or going after the infrastructure that non-Monsanto farmers require to make a living:

http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-videos/6-must-see-videos/12161-monsanto-vs-seed-cleaner-moe-parr

Are you defending Monsanto, or just pointing out that the 400+ patent violation cases instigated by Monsanto that are in the judicial system (as of 1999) and are NOT public record don't count as "monsanto up and suing people"? We can't tell if they are cross-pollenation cases becasue they aren't public record due to uncertain influence of Monsanto at the local level:

http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/cfsmonsantovsfarmerreport1.13.05.pdf

I agree that contract violation is illegal (saving seed and all that). Have you stopped to consider why they sign these contracts that don't allow them to save seed, and force them to buy more each year at increasing prices? Jeez, I'd have to have a gun pointed to my head to sign something so ludicrous. /sarcasm

I also agree that it should be illegal to extort people into having no choice but to buy from Monsanto or go broke. Because I'm sure you can google, and I'm sure you can find limitless cases where Monsanto bullies and threatens farmers.

And if your Orange tree is pollinated by one of Monsanto's Frankin Seeds, you get to pay for it. But does Monsanto pay the neighbor if one of Monsanto's Frankin trees is pollinated by a regular seed?

The generation may be, but the rock' and rollers themselves certainly aren't. If they were, He wouldn't still be trying to get people to listen to what he's saying.

> I see, so you'll only pay for it if you get something out of it? What is it you don't understand about how the other rich kids feel, again?

I'll only pay for it if I see society as a whole get something out of it.

> You want more services? Start paying more in, you can certainly afford it, Richie Rich. Household median is around 45k. Guess what - you're not going to be given more services, you're going to be ASKED TO PAY for more services.

Don't get all high and fucking mighty. I DID pay into it for 6 years. I then decided I wanted to complete my masters. So I went back to college. Long story short I got screwed out of a TA position and found myself without health insurance. So I've progressively developed a hole in one tooth because of a cavity and have a wrist injury that limits me to around 50% mobility because I can't afford to go to a doctor. I've been to the ER ONCE without health insurance. The visit, them to look me over and splint something was over a grand. Then you get 2 bills. You get a bill for $400 from the Hospital for 'renting' a room and all the overhead. And then you get billed from the service that provides the doctor.

That '70k' a year job doesn't start for another month and in the mean time I get to deal with the pain of my tooth because our country has decided as a whole that providing for its citizens isn't worth it.

Second, Fuck You. I'm watching my father die of cancer right now because of this mentality. He has always responded very well to chemo when he comes out of remission. Except 3 years ago his company decided that at 58 he was 'redundant'. So he used almost all the rest of his severance to pay for COBRA for one year for him and my mom. And since that ran out he's been with nothing. He's paid into the system since he was 18 and now he's sitting at the house I grew up in wasting away. He's always been around 220-240 stocky Rugby player. (He still plays at 61 when he gets the chance). The last time I saw him his clothes were hanging off of him and he was considerably thinner. He's also got a chronic cough that is most likely related to the cancer. Do you want to guess what oncology appointment costs? I'm not talking about any blood work or even treatment. Last I heard one bag of chemo was something around $10k.

  Until I start working full time again I can't provide for myself, let alone him. I'm hoping and praying that the SCOTUS doesn't deny preexisting conditions. Because at that point I can do what ever I can to make him my dependent in the IRS's eyes and

Meanwhile, what have we spent on the F22 project? How much has Afghanistan and Iraq cost us since 2001? Everyone is going broke but I'd rather live in a country where they go broke taking care of their citizens rather than going broke blowing up someone elses.

I never want my children to be punished for going back to school. I never want my kids to see me wasting away dying of some easily treatable disease because because I lost my job.

So yes. I'll pay into it if I see that it is doing society something. Other than that, fuck off.

Looks like it actually got down to -12% within an hour of opening. From the sounds of it, NASDAQ royally screwed up this IPO and there's probably unexecuted orders lying around which is likely going to result in some very hilarious realized losses. Look, if Goldman Sachs is securing hundreds of millions of dollars in shares ahead of time and cashing out during a tech IPO, you as an individual are probably already too late the party. Of course, that's investment advice from an anonymous idiot on Slashdot but it looks like they will be one of the few parties laughing all the way to the bank (as usual).

You're right. Bush didn't ask congress. Instead, he created Gitmo, Abu Graib and CIA black sites without asking Congress. Oh, and when Obama tried to shut down Gitmo, the Republicans in Congress blocked him.

First, they have you on camera? So? Only a problem if you do something illegal.

Eh? Did you really just make the "if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to be worried about" argument?

Second, if people wear masks they're going to feel like they can get away with things. It encourages violence and mob behavior.

And if people are allowed to own handguns, it will just encourage violence and mob behavior. Sorry, but this seems to be a bit of a tautology.

Third, you see people wearing masks at protests in third world countries where they worry about a secret police tracking them. This is not a reasonable concern in the first world.

The first world that has FBI files on nonviolent actresses and civil rights activists?
The first world where undercover agents go so far as to impregnate the nonviolent activists they are spying on?
The first world that constantly uses entrapment to prosecute "terror" cases?
The first world which has recently passed both laws allowing military detentions of citizens and criminalizing "disrupting events" where someone is under Secret Service protection?

Lets say you decide to protest a Bank of America shareholder meeting at a convention center. You're peacefully protesting in the street and the parking lot, but totally unknown to you, Jill Biden was quietly on her way to meet some Democratic donors in another room at the convention center.

But she was a few minutes late getting past the crowd, so you and your fellow protesters "disrupted an event" where the Secret Service was protecting someone. That spiffy new spy center in Nevada runs CCTV footage through their facial recognition software, and not only picks you out of a crowd, but is able to cross-reverence your location with a warrantless wiretap on your cell phone. Presto, you receive a summons in the mail a few weeks later.

It'll be the new speed camera fine-by-mail.

I wouldn't be so sure. Social networking is based almost entirely on Metcalf's law. The reason Facebook has value is that people use Facebook. But social networks are trend-based. And people hate Facebook. They only use it because their friends use it and vice versa; again, Metcalf's law.

You know the only difference between Facebook on the web today and Microsoft on the desktop in the 90s is that businesses (and sometimes the government) required Windows/Office and familiarity with it. Given adequate ubiquity, there's a large possibility [1] that this [2] could occur [3]... once it becomes de-facto standard, good luck getting rid of it.

[1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/240646/spotify_adds_facebook_requirement_angering_users.html
[2] http://www.slashgear.com/facebook-access-becoming-mandatory-part-of-job-college-applications-06217136/
[3] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20027837-501465.html

Do we really have agents out there selling weapons to boost their street cred to some upset guy who takes it and kills 5 family members? When they could have got the guy some help to not commit ANY crime?

Why yes... Yes, we do!. And note that stories like these only refer to the ones we acci-fucking-dentally got back, not to all of what we sent South of the Border in some bizarre parody of law enforcement efforts.

So not only do these pieces of shit pretend to stop crime, they actually really cause more than they pretend to stop!


/ And people call me cynical...

You seem to have "found" the wrong poll - the one in question is the one in question is referenced here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06 and here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-399352/Almost-quarter-Muslims-believe-7-7-justified.html

Even small countries like Ireland and Iceland--who tried lowering taxes and deregulating businesses exactly as you're talking about--couldn't sustain it.

That's not true, when Ireland lowered their corporate tax rate, they saw HUGE economic boom as many businesses decided to move their operations over there.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-256404.html

The only reason they are having problems now is because their banking system collapsed a few years later due to unrelated issues.

If Ireland raised their tax rates to what they were before, they'd only stand to lose revenue. In other words, there's no question that their tax rate is sustainable.

Besides, if you pay attention, corporations don't pay taxes anyways. They just pass those tax expenses on to their customers. If you raise their taxes, they'll simply raise their prices on goods and services. Eventually it would get to the point that it is simply no longer profitable to run a business here, and you'll end up in a situation France is in.

The notion that people join the military because they're bloodthirsty savages is completely out of touch with reality.

You cannot defend a sweeping generalization with another one. Stereotypes exist for a reason and there are certainly some wacko, blood-thirsty savages that do join the military SPECIFICALLY so they can legally shoot people. Some of them have been immorally and gruesomely pictured with their kills. Sorry, anyone who takes trophies or pleasure in killing is a blood thirsty savage. That's not to say every soldier is one, but it doesn't deny that they are there.

The most I can see them doing is build a mockup that looks like it, showing it flying, and then the entire world concluding, "OMG, they copied the US drone!!!111" — except that it won't contain any of the systems and technology aboard the RQ-170.

Would be a great propaganda victory for Iran, though. Which is exactly the sort of thing they're looking for. Iran's playing up the drone story again, this week saying that Russia and China are aggressively seeking information about it, and then two days later making this "announcement"? With Iran claiming it used a force field and "advanced space technology" to down the drone (and no, this isn't simply a failure of the translation), nothing is too surprising.

Of course, US drones have been flying over Iran for years, and drones are still flying over Iran after the RQ-170 incident.

Interestingly, as the Western press and pundits hyperventilated over the loss of the drone, Iran's state-controlled media and spokesmen repeatedly changed and finessed their story to fit with the most panicked narratives of "what might have happened".

Logic would dictate that the drone simply malfunctioned and crashed, or at absolute MOST had its control link jammed — a known vulnerability of UAS — and was not brought down in a controlled fashion, nor has been "reverse-engineered".

Do your research. Obama didn't want to get out.

President Obama pulled the plug Friday on negotiations that would have kept American troops in Iraq past the end of this year. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports the president's demand for immunity for U.S. troops stationed there was the dealbreaker.

It's not about Bush vs Obama, it's' about being represented and Obama does not represent the people who voted for him because his policies go the opposite way from his candidate promises.

It's not about R vs D. It's about trying to not get fucked for once.

PS: And it would be awesome if you cared a bit about the effects his policies inflict upon the rest of the world. Drone indiscriminate murders of innocent people are not only ignored but actively hidden against any accountability.

Actually the army core of Engineers...blows them to save Illinois towns. http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-20059083.html Not sure why any one would want to save anything in that bankrupt shit hole state.

Two things - if everything were the same quality, then even the cheapest Acer or Asus laptop would be the top sellers. Or hell, HP computers for that matter - they'd all last forever.

I guess it depends on your definition of quality. Consumer Reports surveyed their reads about laptop reliability a few issues back and the results surprised me. Macs did fair better in that they had fewer problems. But the gap was 1% point between Macs and almost all other laptop makers. I did some googling but couldn't find this year's results but this article citing CR actually lists Apple as worse than Asus or Toshiba by 2% for 2011.

Going off the top of my head, I seem to remember the respondents were > 30K in number. And I didn't read more into how they defined "problems" but there you go.

And to match your anecdote with mine, I handed down my 8 y.o. Compaq laptop to my parents and they're still using it daily to surf the web and do email

That depends where you draw the line. I personally draw it somewhere around "believes in ghosts", but let me pick a less controversial goalpost, which I think all the reasonable people I know would agree with, particularly including the religious ones: most Americans thought evolution is false in 2009. (Good news! Percentage down since 2004.)

That does not include those who believe evolution was guided by God. It only includes those who believe God created humans in their present form, i.e., we didn't evolve. However, it does include those who believe we didn't actually evolve, but God created the universe to appear in every way as if we did. That's not a scientifically testable hypothesis, so is compatible with all the evidence for evolution. As far as I know, there aren't many people that believe this without also claiming literal truth of the bible (which is testable and appears to be false, absent the God-faked-the-physical-world escape clause). However, I'm not an expert in the demography of American Christian fundamentalists.

Other different sources, with different phrasings of the question, include: just below 40% in 2006; 39% in 2009; 40% in 2010; 41% in 2011. So the CBS numbers are higher than most, but you would have a hard time arguing that it's much less than 40%.

Now, most churchgoing folks are indeed nice, sane, civilized people. But fundamentalism is not a "big media" invention; there is a real, serious problem with people believing, and therefor potentially acting, counter-factually.

Now, I am an atheist. I recognize that faith and science are compatible. Make any untestable statement you want, as long as you recognize that it's an article of faith. Science only deals with testable claims and the physical world. We may have more nuanced disagreements about morality, rationality of faith, etc. However, the argument above doesn't enter into metaphysics or moral philosophy. It just says: if a religious fundamentalist is someone who denies scientific facts on a religious basis, then we have a lot of them in the US, not a tiny minority.

That depends where you draw the line. I personally draw it somewhere around "believes in ghosts", but let me pick a less controversial goalpost, which I think all the reasonable people I know would agree with, particularly including the religious ones: most Americans thought evolution is false in 2009. (Good news! Percentage down since 2004.)

That does not include those who believe evolution was guided by God. It only includes those who believe God created humans in their present form, i.e., we didn't evolve. However, it does include those who believe we didn't actually evolve, but God created the universe to appear in every way as if we did. That's not a scientifically testable hypothesis, so is compatible with all the evidence for evolution. As far as I know, there aren't many people that believe this without also claiming literal truth of the bible (which is testable and appears to be false, absent the God-faked-the-physical-world escape clause). However, I'm not an expert in the demography of American Christian fundamentalists.

Other different sources, with different phrasings of the question, include: just below 40% in 2006; 39% in 2009; 40% in 2010; 41% in 2011. So the CBS numbers are higher than most, but you would have a hard time arguing that it's much less than 40%.

Now, most churchgoing folks are indeed nice, sane, civilized people. But fundamentalism is not a "big media" invention; there is a real, serious problem with people believing, and therefor potentially acting, counter-factually.

Now, I am an atheist. I recognize that faith and science are compatible. Make any untestable statement you want, as long as you recognize that it's an article of faith. Science only deals with testable claims and the physical world. We may have more nuanced disagreements about morality, rationality of faith, etc. However, the argument above doesn't enter into metaphysics or moral philosophy. It just says: if a religious fundamentalist is someone who denies scientific facts on a religious basis, then we have a lot of them in the US, not a tiny minority.

How many countries has NK invaded in the last 100 years?

One (South Korea). There was this minor scuffle called the Korean War back in the fifties. Perhaps you might have heard of it.

How many people have they killed?

Lots.

If anything, they are much more peaceful

You tell that to the people who were kidnapped from Japan to train North Korean spies.

It's a small, poor country, they are not a real threat.

A small, poor country with nuclear weapons, spends over 30% of its GDP on the military, has a history of threats to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire,", not to mention torpedoing South Korean ships and shelling South Korea (only a few miles from Incheon International Airport, mind you) Just the kind of small, poor, safe neighbor you want to have in your backyard.

If need be NK could be crushed in a few days.

If it were that easy, it'd have been done already. Even if all of their missiles fail (leaving them unable to attack Japan), they can still easily decimate Seoul, as it's within artillery range of the North Korean border. NK also happens to have an unholy relationship to China, which is fed up with NK's antics, but is still geopolitically wedded to that nation. China will most likely be forced to intervene against any Western efforts to dislodge the Dear Leader.

Last time I checked launching satellites doesn't goes against any treaty signed by NK

They broke their agreement over nuclear development. That's why no one trusts them.

no nation has the right to tell another sovereign nation it can't research rocketry or launch rockets into the ground.

When that same nation comes begging for food which it can't buy because it spent all of its lunch money on rockets, we sure as hell do have the right to tell them how not to spend their money! And that is true even if the same nation doesn't keep threatening to take military action against the very same people offering aid.

You can do that right now. For example, at my previous company, inside the local intranet I could type 'bugzilla' in the URL bar and it would resolve to the bugzilla of our company. It's really convenient. And now this sort of system will be impossible because it might conflict with the .wiki domain name space. Brilliant, way to break the internet.

I came here to post only one thing, and I'm going to post it. I hate ICANN. Starting with .xxx extortion scheme, now this.

harassing people based on their suspicious blackness

Bullshit.

Shenanigans on your Bullshit.

Zimmerman obviously knew "he looks black" before the 911 Operator asked the question. It's completely irrelevant that he was even asked that question.

harassing people based on their suspicious blackness

Bullshit.

I never had health problems when I was traveling in Eastern or Western Europe but I'm sure their hospitals have emergency rooms and I'm pretty sure they won't turn you away if you have a problem. Especially if you're a citizen of a country that has socialized medicine.

It also allows criminals to fraudulently bill Medicaid for services, prescriptions, and equipment that were never delivered. See news stories like this and this.

"America, take note"

WTF, Santorum ends his bid for GOP nomination.

He must have read what you wrote. Scary stuff :|

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57411949-503544/rick-santorum-ends-bid-for-gop-nomination/

agreed. Remember, SpaceX is only going after the re-supply business right now; and they haven't actually done this yet. Even the Russians messed this up -- twice. There's a big difference deliverying supplies and launching an astronaut and bringing him safely to earth. The Russians knew this. That's why they raised their prices when the US announced the end of the Shuttle program.

Hey, and there are smugglers at The Smuggler's Inn... who'dve thunk it? You think the authorities would be grateful that idiot criminals make themselves easier to find.

Dang. I forgot that search results are different for different people (or browsers). Here's the top link in my search, and if you dig further you can find dozens of articles written by Canadian doctors and government health bureucrats about the same problem:

LINK - http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-204_162-681801.html

LINK - http://www.canada.com/health/Patient+care+jeopardized+drug+shortage+crisis+doctor/6378698/story.html

And so on.

Dang. I forgot that search results are different for different people. Here's the top link in my search, and if you dig further you can find dozens of articles written by Canadian doctors and government health bureucrats about the same problem:

LINK - http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-204_162-681801.html

Citation please. Those are numbers pulled out of various nether regions. Yes, people can do much for themselves to decrease / delay morbidity (not mortality so much). And yes, we should encourage and teach people to watch their weight, not smoke, drink alcohol in vast moderation, do yoga, clean their rooms and brush their teeth twice daily (floss once) but health care still is going to cost quite a bit of money - maybe more as the number of frail elderly that need increasing care climbs dramatically.

Remember, one entertaining factoid in all of this - with all the 'bad things' we're doing (pollution / plastics / obesity / diabetes / whatever disease is popular this month) the average longevity of the population is slowly and steadily INCREASING. Now most of us think that's a good thing. Not many want to go back to the pre medical days of a 35 year average longevity, but it does have it's consequences....

The average life expectancy across the entire US is at an all-time high, yes, but in hundreds of mostly southern counties, it has fallen. In 702 of the 3100+ US counties (about 22%), women's life expectancy "fell significantly" between 2000 and 2007.

Also, "more than 80% of counties fell in standing against the average of the 10 nations with the best life expectancies in the world". Granted, the researchers attribute this to "obesity, tobacco use, and other preventable risk factors" instead of any issues providing health care.

This is an interesting step; in general countries are a lot more strict on entering their territory than leaving it. There are some circumstances where you'd want to control exit (if someone is fleeing law enforcement for some reason, avoiding child custody or the like), but I wonder if that's the intent of this policy shift or if it's something else.

These passengers are flying to the US, regardless of their final destination. As such they will likely be in a plane full of US citizens, over US cities. I suspect that in all these cases the plane will land in the US before continuing to their destination.

Direct flights that do not enter US Airspace would not be affected.

The intent of the policy is to prevent another World Trade Center. It may be a bit overwrought, especially in a plane full of jumpy American passengers who will even take down a aircraft crew member that acts up.

In most cases this happens automatically via your airline reservation, but late booking passengers always presented a challenge, and many times planes were wheels up before late arrivals proved to be on the no fly list, and in some cases planes had to be turned around.

(Note: Don't get me started on the No Fly List. If you've passed security, been searched, baggage searched, underwear and shoes searched, it seems that a permanent ban on flying is overkill. But that's for a different post).

what's going to keep a dedicated terrorist from using old fashioned C4 explosive hidden in an obvious body cavity. I've seen enough internet porn to know that with proper training and motivation, a quite sizeable chunk of explosives could be hidden within the body

Al Queda apparently also watches internet porn. They've already tried this attack against a saudi prince (head of counter terrorism in Saudi).

If the attacker in that case had had the sense to use a lavatory and extract the bomb (or turn the right way) the attack would most likely have been successful.

But you're right. Since there's no reasonable way to defend against this attack, we're all just ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist. The reason we haven't seen it used against an airliner is that there just aren't enough terrorists to be worth screening for. (Intelligence and god old fashioned police work, yes. Screening at air ports, not so much.

Guess who taxes and spend? Don't know? Ask your mamma.

for rhyme's sake, I'm gonna answer that - OBAMA.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

Sure part of the problem is Republicans who won't increase taxes in congress, but his spending is out of control too. This credit card economy is doomed to failure. Clinton also had a conservative congress and still managed it, so Obama can too.

Of course, if you look at US total obligation in addition to debt (Social Security, Medicare, etc), we are already up shit creek without a paddle.

conservatives oppose regulations

Pull the other one!

He was found guilty of inciting racial hatred by a jury of his peers.

And yes, we take that pretty seriously over here.

That's funny. Over here, we call it running for president.

Issa is one of the richest congressman with over 400 million dollars to his name and yet there are still allegations that he has used his office to his own financial benefit http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20105655-503544.html. Instead of just tweeting at him, maybe even the score by donating a bit to his opponents in the upcoming election? Dick Eiden http://eiden4congress.net/ is running as a Democrat. Mike Paster has run as a libertarian before, but I can't tell if he is running this time. His old website http://www.mikepasterforyourcongress.org/. is down. Also, his official contact details http://vote-ca.org/intro.aspx?state=ca&id=capastermike list a fairly unprofessional looking hotmail address, which doesn't fill me with confidence. And without a website even up, donating to him is a bit tough. So the Democrat looks like the most viable option (libertarians when you complain about how people don't support you, this is very close to why...).

Who? The government. Senators love to solve problems created by the govnerment and putting the blame on private companies. The closest thing to a private firm alleged to have done this is a lobbying firm. A lobbying firm:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505244_162-57400585/job-seekers-getting-asked-for-facebook-passwords/

The others have been in corrections or public education (all government).

Government is asking for Facebook passwords. I have little doubt that private employers will generally understand the risk and stupidity of this.

Here's the 60 Minutes piece that everybody's mentioning but not linking to:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50121782

The seven-crew version of Dragon can be seen briefly in it. I believe it was the scene where Garrett Reisman was getting out of it. In a side note, it's too bad there wasn't more of Garrett, he's a real card.

This 60 Minutes piece on SpaceX from last weekend shows videos of Dragon capsules under construction at 4:50, video of the exterior of the capsule they returned from orbit at 10:08, and video of the interior at 10:50.

Made it sound like they were making good progress on both the commercial cargo and manned launch fronts. Even Obama has visited their facilities.

Lying to start a war is treason.

In a democracy, government secrecy is treason. Citizens cannot help run the government if they don't have any way to understand what the government is doing.

There is now an extensive public relations campaign in the U.S. to start a war with Iran, using money from U.S. taxpayers. These are some of the players:

1) Those who control the U.S. government want constant war. War creates numerous opportunities for easy profits that can be hidden from taxpayers.

The U.S. government has a long history of using violence. See the Timeline of United States military operations. See also the Military history of the United States. The Bush and Cheney families had, or have, investments in weapons companies. Those in control hid their involvement.

2) Jews want U.S. taxpayers to pay for Israeli security. A better, cheaper, less self-destructive method would be for Jews to be less arrogant and more caring toward their neighbors. The problems between the Jews and the Arabs have existed for more than 3,300 years. The Jews say that they are the "chosen people" of God. The Jews say that Arabs are descended from an illegitimate child of their tribal founder, Abraham, and a slave girl that he owned. Those ancient problems with relationships will not be solved by guys in Washington who often don't even have a good relationship with their wives.

It would be foolish to think that statement is anti-Jew. A war with Iran will likely mean further troubles for Israel because it is likely to escalate the violence in the area. I'm not the only person who thinks that. See the 60 Minutes episode, The Spymaster: Meir Dagan on Iran's threat. Lesley Stahl, 60 Minutes interviewer, does her disgusting "Oh wow, oh wow!" routine, but there is useful information. (The 60 Minutes program needs better editing.)

Quote: "You have said publicly that bombing Iran now is the stupidest idea you've ever heard. That's a direct quote." -- Lesley Stahl, quoting ex-chief of Mossad Meir Dagan. Mossad is an Israeli government agency that rivals the U.S. government for secret violence, as Jeremiah Cornelius said in the parent comment.

There are only 5,874,300 Jews in Israel. There are approximately 5,275,000 Jews in the United States. In some ways, the U.S. is as much of a Jewish country as Israel. It is amazing how much power that small group of 1.7% of has over U.S. government policy. The population of the U.S. is 313 million.

To many people, the idea of 6 million Jews encouraging violence against 1.6 billion Muslims is self-destructive.

It is a mistake to think that all Israeli Jews agree with Israeli or even Jewish policies. For example: Israeli ultra-Orthodox Jews 'harass' 8-year-old girl over dress. Quote: "... 50 people involved in the abuse of an 8-year-old." Also see Israel braced for protests against treatment of women after girl, 8, is spat on by Jewish extremists.

3) The nuclear power industry w

Or how Obama, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield will never face international war tribunals for authorizing the same tortures that we executed Japanese commanders for proscribing:
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-3554687.html

Fixed that for you.

When you have 1 in 3 students in the USA taking a major in law what did you think would happen ?

"Among those seeking a doctorate or professional degree, law was the No. 1 choice among men and women. There were nearly three times as many men and women becoming attorneys as there were earning a medical degree"
source

with all those lawyers itching to use their new found knowledge who are also in 6 digit debt to get their degree, and desperate does what desperate can, nothing clarifies the mind quite like a debt collector banging your door at 5am

well you end up with a society just like the one we see emerging, sue everybody for anything because you need to put food on your table AND pay the piper at the end of the month or he will take all you have.

so this Yahoo trial is just the tip of the iceberg, the best conclusion for any business is if you want to innovate, do it outside USA, do not sell/visit/talk to them, its safer that way.

I certainly agree that their current rate of growth isn't sustainable (an article a few weeks back pointed out that if they do sustain it, they'll pass the GDP of France and Spain in a few years), but to suggest that a bust is imminent in the near future seems foolish, though a plateauing seems likely.

Depending on which analyst you choose to believe and how you categorize devices, they have somewhere between 55% and 75% market share in the tablet market, which is quickly shaping up to displace a large portion of the PC market (last quarter Apple sold more iPads than the PCs sold by each of the major manufacturers). Their lead there, while it's sure to take a few hits in the coming years, will be strong enough to sustain them for quite some time to come, especially as that market grows and Apple's sales grow to match the market. Android has yet to prove itself credible competition in that space (the two leading Android tablets, the Nook Color and the Kindle Fire, are both still being sold at a loss), but Windows 8 might be able to disrupt things.

Smartphones are an area where there's much better competition, but they have a healthy market share there, and their profit share is over 75% for the entire cell phone industry (Source). Again, they seem to have set up a winning business model that will keep them running for years. Likely not at this growth rate, but at least at the current level of operation.

Even the Mac has been seeing growth. Apple has been the only major manufacturer posting sales growth in the PC market consistently for the last five years. Apple posted sales growth of over 20.7% for their Mac line last year, compared with a sales decline of 5.9% for the industry as a whole. If you pull Apple's growth from that -5.9% for the industry as a whole, the other manufacturers were collectively down 8.5%. (Source)

And really, while this might seem like a lot of new jobs, it's not atypical for Apple. In 2002 they had roughly 12,000 employees. By 2011 they had over 63,000, and they saw their revenue go from $5.7B to $108.2B in that time. Adding another 3600 is in line with what they've been doing, and it wouldn't make sense to consider it to be a case of over-hiring any more than it would make sense to consider their addition of roughly 5,000 employees a year over the last ten years that way. Clearly the stategy has been working for them so far. (Source)

Again, I don't doubt that their growth will slow in the coming years, but I think it's a bit early to say that a bust is coming. If anything, they're likely to stall out as they reach their full potential.

60 minutes - http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57394905/khan-academy-the-future-of-education/

I love conspiracy morons :) You always brighten up my day!

Tell me, were you this way BEFORE taking LSD? Or did this behavior only manifest afterwards?

Yeah, FDA corruption is a HUGE conspiracy. Nothing credible has EVER been released about the FDA and their shady practices. In fact, they are the most perfect government body ever formed for protecting the American consumer ever conceived of.

Thanks for pointing it all out to me. Now that you have enlightened me, I think I will go sulk in a corner and reflect on my views of the FDA, which are all obviously conspiracy theories.

They can send you to jail for not cooperating (or even citing the constitution at them), prevent you from traveling freely and deny you the right to exit the country. They can put you on watch lists that make the "more traditional" TLA's pay attention to you. And their influence is spreading.

So, yes, they are.