Slashdot Mirror

Know how many people get viruses or malware on their iPhone (without jailbreaking) ... 0.

Looks like you don't know enough people. It has been done, without jailbreaking, and we only know because the developers publicized that fact themselves.. If you want to keep the same answer, perhaps you could rephrase the question as "How many times that Apple admit that they served up viruses or malware in their App Store?"

So you think its better to run extra software, waste more ram, cpu and storage space ... so that you don't get something that iOS users just aren't going to get in the first place?

But what if I don't _want_ a misplaced sense of security based on faulty assumptions?

You utterly fucking fail at understanding security. [...] The only known threats on iOS devices have come to jailbroken phones and the jailbreaks themselves.

It ain't just a river in Egypt.

And that's not even considering threats that come from Apple itself, without any need to install apps or change settings. Something magical happens and things just work.

Until then [I] just make it obvious [I'm] nothing more than a fanboy.

No argument here.

Know how many people get viruses or malware on their iPhone (without jailbreaking) ... 0.

Looks like you don't know enough people. It has been done, without jailbreaking, and we only know because the developers publicized that fact themselves.. If you want to keep the same answer, perhaps you could rephrase the question as "How many times that Apple admit that they served up viruses or malware in their App Store?"

So you think its better to run extra software, waste more ram, cpu and storage space ... so that you don't get something that iOS users just aren't going to get in the first place?

But what if I don't _want_ a misplaced sense of security based on faulty assumptions?

You utterly fucking fail at understanding security. [...] The only known threats on iOS devices have come to jailbroken phones and the jailbreaks themselves.

It ain't just a river in Egypt.

And that's not even considering threats that come from Apple itself, without any need to install apps or change settings. Something magical happens and things just work.

Until then [I] just make it obvious [I'm] nothing more than a fanboy.

No argument here.

What about people who don't have bank accounts?

The oligarchs have accounted for this, which is why many large corporations are now replacing non-direct-deposit paychecks with what are essentially pre-paid VISA cards.

See:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/01/business/as-pay-cards-replace-paychecks-bank-fees-hurt-workers.html?_r=0
http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2013/07/23/are-hourly-workers-being-short-changed-the-truth-about-payroll-cards/
http://consumerist.com/2013/07/01/here-is-why-employers-and-banks-love-putting-wages-on-prepaid-debit-cards-and-why-employees-are-keeping-their-money-in-shoeboxes/

You might not be able to get blood from a turnip, but that little fact won't stop those in power from trying.

If you're making jokes about your hiring practices -- particularly after you just did not hire somebody -- you're setting yourself up for a lawsuit.

By the books: of course you're right.

By reality: I'm walking to coffee with my coworker and saying outside the earshot of anyone else. People tell inappropriate jokes under these circumstances. And often times those jokes are self-deprecating, like "ewww, she went to a state school" (just like I did) or "what kind of nerd wears [same kind of glasses he and I both have]?" They're jokes, they're intended as jokes, and everyone does this.

These days, unless you're using the cones of silence, you're *never* out of earshot or someone that may post your "private" comment to the world:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/03/22/was-it-appropriate-for-adria-richards-to-tweet-a-photo-of-two-men-at-pycon-and-accuse-them-of-being-sexist/

And be careful even around coworkers, one of them may notice that you made the same "perl" joke about the last 3 female candidates, but you didn't make the same observation about the male candidates. Whether you meant it or not, your words may come back to bite you some day.

The great thing about science is that it corrects itself when it's wrong

Unless there are government grants to be had for not correcting oneself. Hence the infamous "hide the decline".

In any case, the sole measure of science quality is the reliability of its predictions, and in the case of Global Warming, err., pardon me, Climate Change the passionately-made predictions stubbornly fail to materialize: icebergs fail to melt, waters fail to rise, etc.

hence why the global cooling theories were overturned and replaced with the more accurate global warming

This one sentence (or part of it) is so hilarious, it made my day!

The labels may vary, but the proposed action is the same - citizens are urged to change to cleaner energy sources.

Urged? That would've been fine. How about coerced — and outright forced? No, you silly, you can't have a toilet, that flushes in one go — it uses too much water. You must buy one with a smaller tank — and be forced to flush twice. Sure, sure, unlike those evil KKKonservatives, we are going to keep the government out of bedrooms — as long as you are using an approved light-bulb in the room. And never you mind the mercury in it — if your child needs special education after exposure to the toxin, we'll take care of him.

The ones that get hurt are the poor little guy strip-mining a mountain or running a factory.

Neither of these two activities has anything to do with global warming directly. I think, you messed up your "climate change" talking points with the more general anti-Capitalism ones...

Then the big government has to come in and tell them that it's not OK to be killing everything

Yep, exactly, what I'm talking about — coercion and forcing. Meanwhile, that same government is causing exactly that — "killing everything" — to happen, while still pretending, it "knows better". Oh, those silly Libertarians!

a) Have actually proven that this is not some 'cook something up to to get our ultra conservative readers their daily dose of outrage over their morning coffee' type story made up by a right wing rag.

I can't speak to the specific case, but if you think civil forfeiture is a figment of the right-wing imagination, you're dangerously ignorant about how the government operates.

It's been going on for decades, under both Democratic and Republican leadership. Basically, the state or federal government uses an obscure legal doctrine under which it accuses your property of a crime. Your property doesn't have the same due process and presumption of innocence rights you do, so it usually lose the case. You have to sue the government to get it back. You can guess how well that usually goes.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/easy-money-civil-asset-forfeiture-abuse-police

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/civil-asset-forfeiture

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2010/02/take_the_money_and_run.html

http://fear.org/victimindex.html

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/08/12/130812fa_fact_stillman

http://www.forbes.com/2011/06/08/property-civil-forfeiture.html

Yikes that is high, but fair enough...

Just for comparison, I pay just under 11 cents per kwh, which is good, because last month my house used 1812 kwh, it would be expensive at 35 cents.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/10/04/should-other-nations-follow-germanys-lead-on-promoting-solar-power/

Try that link for some info on Germany, at least from the American perspective.

I did misquote one number, the German Environment minister said it would be one trillion euros over two decades, not one decade, if you follow your current plan. Still a lot of money, but not as bad as I feared.

The 35 cents per kwh is the real problem, a lot of poor people won't be able to afford to keep the lights on at that rate.

Did you know that 38% of your "biomass" is actually coming from wood? You're not only chopping down your own trees, you're importing trees from other countries to try and meet your targets?

Anyway, take the time to read that, it is well sourced with citations at the bottom of the article. Let me know if you think any of it is outright wrong, old, or in error. If you find something new that you didn't know, please let me know as well.

The thing is, the goals are good, if they are reasonable and sustainable, then I'm all for them. If they are just pretty paint on an ugly house of cards, then we should all be honest about that as well.

Allegedly, evidence taken from his computer (example) includes a diary while building and operating SR.

Women outnumber men in college nationally by 43.6–56.4% despite the national male-female ratio for 18-24 year olds is 51-49%
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-ratio-in-college/

Where's the effort to get that closer to parity?

Maybe, maybe not.

US, Japan agree to revise mutual defense treaty for first time in 16 years

Is the U.S. Committed to Defend the Senkakus? Text of Article 5 of the U.S.-Japan Treaty

I was referring to the following sentence we so very often on Slashdot:

"I only buy games during Steam sales... I paid $5 $X game."

Yes, there are full price games on Steam, just like there are $5 games on PSN....but it seems most steam aficionados on Slashdot are the "wait till it's 5 bucks" consumers....who then wonder why developers treat the PC as an after thought.

And did I hit a little close to home on the Euro-pirate thing?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2013/05/15/finally-some-objective-figures-on-games-piracy/

http://chartsbin.com/view/1188

It's been that way for decades.

Perhaps Skyrim is a bad example, but how is it losing when we see the following sentence so often on Slashdot:

"I only buy games during Steam sales... I paid $5 $X game."

For being cheap - check out games like Skyrim, still 40-30â (not cheap dollars lol) and still consistently in the top 10 best selling.

I strike a little too close to the target, Euro-gamer? We all know that Europe, especially Eastern Europe is a pirate haven.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2013/05/15/finally-some-objective-figures-on-games-piracy/

http://chartsbin.com/view/1188

The problem with psychopathy is that the very definition came from selection bias.

We took a bunch of people who exhibited aberrant behaviour (socially unacceptable behaviour) and looked for common attributes. Then we invented a name for these attributes ("psychopathic") and the name became associated with the behaviour, but not the attributes.

There is abundant evidence that psychopathic tendencies are a spectrum. It's not a binary label, there's levels and shades of grey.

There is also abundant evidence that psychopathic tendencies are common.

There is also the evolutionary model, which proposes that leadership requires vision that isn't swayed by other people. The tribe will occasionally need leaders, so it's an advantage to have some psychopaths in the population. They are the ones who can step back and analyze a situation rationally, who aren't helpless against the flow of public opinion, and are immune to groupthink and mob psychology.

It should come as no surprise that lots of people are closet psychopaths, to any specific degree. The problem isn't that they are psychopaths, it's that they somehow feel that that they are damaged, dangerous, or somehow unacceptable. (Viz: gay people).

Relax, it's all right. We've identified a set of genes, you have a subset, and life is what you make of it.

Except most of those who are wealthy don't have a parent's trust fund.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybuilder/2012/04/20/most-wealthy-individuals-earned-not-inherited-their-wealth-2/

And when I heard in the media that oil companies are subsidized, I went looking for oil subsidies, in order to fight them. But I didn't find any.

Happy to help. Percentage depletion is not, as the Forbes article implies, the same thing as depreciation. In true depreciation, you are amortizing the amount you pay for something over the effective income-producing lifespan of the item in question. You're basically taking an expense, but just spreading it out over time. In cost depletion, a similar thing happens: the amount you spend to acquire and begin producing from a mine or oil well is then spread out over the estimated reasonable lifespan of the production site. So if you think, reasonably, that you have a million barrels of oil in a well and you pay a million dollars to open that well up, if you suck out 200,000 barrels this year you'd write off $200,000 of that initial cost to open the well. Eventually, you'd write off all million dollars. In Percentage depletion, you're allowed to just write off a percentage of your revenue from the sale of that oil - 15% in this case. Theoretically speaking, and in a practical sense this always happens (because if it didn't the producer would switch to cost depletion as more advantageous) you can write off more than you even spent to open that well. Why? Because the tax code enshrines a principle that is designed to make it more cost-effective to operate otherwise marginal production sites. The idea is that some production sites are "rich" and easy to tap, some are poorer and harder to tap. All things being equal, its hard for marginal sources to compete with rich ones because the rich ones are cheaper to operate. But if you close a site as it gets depleted and ceases to be cost effective, you can find yourself going for all the easy stuff and leaving behind perfectly usable but just less cost effective sources, which could be seen as a waste of natural resources. And furthermore it can be far more expensive to reopen a site when prices warrant than it is to keep it open all the time: by the time it becomes cost-effective to use a more marginal source, if its closed it could still be not worth it to reopen. To encourage producers to "use up" marginal sources more, Congress in effect gives marginal producers a tax break to make it cheaper for them to produce relative to more rich sources.

It may be good overall production policy, but it is in fact a subsidy whether Forbes wants to call it one or not, and it does in fact try to give an advantage to one group over another. From a purely abstract perspective, wanting to try to more efficiently tap natural resources before abandoning them is a laudable ideal, but it is a form of government intervention over the free market system.

Percentage depletion isn't an oil-only subsidy per se, but it is a subsidy the oil industry benefits from significantly. Not so much the really big integrated oil companies (who are generally barred from taking the credit), but generally smaller producers. The question is, do you want to fight an oil subsidy that benefits smaller rather than larger oil companies and is designed to make more efficient use of marginal oil sources? And for the most part, separate from the ideological principle of subsidies themselves, it comes down to whether you want to spend tax dollars to maximize total oil production efficiency, or spend that money developing alternate energy sources, or not spend it at all.

Eve Online is the only MMO that has been able to keep me interested in playing for more than a few months at a time. It doesn't have any elves or dragons. It's not built around a film franchise or a beloved series of books. It is unique in that the content created by the game developers plays second fiddle to the content created by the players themselves. It has vibrant player corporations (guilds) based around third-party websites like Something Awful and Reddit (see also: Fweddit and Brave Newbies); which leads to in-game drama aka content creation. It offers high-stakes PvP, in that when you die; your ship explodes and the winning player loots your wreck (corpse) taking whatever valuables survived the explosions. It also allows you to scam your fellow players; which is fairly unique among games. It regularly makes mainstream news for it's large fleet fights and huge losses. And, you're allowed to use your money to buy in-game currency if you are so inclined. I should note that your characters do not level and you don't earn XP or experience points for killing stuff in-game. Instead, your characters earn points that apply to in-game skills in real-time whether you are logged in or not. Eve Online, because spaceships.

but it's abundantly clear that the GOP is not seriously opposed to government intervention in energy markets.

This member of the GOP -- and all the others I know -- are seriously opposed to government intervention in energy markets.

If they were, they would be fighting against oil and ethanol subsidies

I fight against ethanol subsidies. And when I heard in the media that oil companies are subsidized, I went looking for oil subsidies, in order to fight them. But I didn't find any.

would propose winding down the national petroleum reserve (used to manipulate prices)

President Obama has released oil from the reserve to hold down prices, during a time when it would have been particularly politically damaging for oil prices to continue rising. But that was a misuse of the reserve. Its official name is the "Strategic Petroleum Reserve" and it's an invaluable enabling asset for the DoD, whose need for oil would skyrocket at the exact time supplies cannot be assured: during a major conflict.

and would never actively fight against particular forms of energy (as described in summary and TFA).

TFA and the summary are full of it, right from the very first sentence, "Clean energy technology has always been an easy punching bag for conservatives." Wrong. When a new power plant is built, conservatives want to use the energy source that will deliver the highest return on investment, because that in turn will cause the most economic growth and create the most jobs. Conservatives like me will be thrilled if and when the day arrives that solar plants deliver a higher return on investment than older energy sources.

If you want to assert that oil companies are subsidized, you must first offer some valid and specific criticism of this article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/01/02/oil-gas-tax-provisions-are-not-subsidies-for-big-oil

So far, nobody has been able to tell me where David Blackmon got his facts wrong.

Every time I do my taxes I have to stumble over all the loopholes for oil companies that complicate my calculations. Worse, some of my investments are in energy-industry companies and I not only have to stumble around them, but though them. Even with tax software, I no longer can really be sure I've done my taxes right - credits and deductions pop up in nooks and crannies all over the place.

If you want to assert that oil companies are subsidized, you must first offer some valid and specific criticism of this article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/01/02/oil-gas-tax-provisions-are-not-subsidies-for-big-oil

So far, nobody has been able to tell me where David Blackmon got his facts wrong.

Ridiculous. US is dead last of 17 major developed countries in recent study.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/new-health-rankings-of-17-nations-us-is-dead-last/267045/

1. US health care cost is 2x that of other developed nations.
2. Despite this cost it has 10's of millions uninsured.
3. Results are worse than lower cost systems. Look at life expectancy for US v. Canada for example.
4. Medical tourism (people leaving US) for foreign destinations is booming. 100 times more US citizens go to other countries than people come here. 1.6 million US citizens traveled abroad last year for medical care.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/luizaoleszczuk/2013/10/22/central-europe-becoming-a-big-destination-for-medical-tourism/

5. Illegal immigrants come here from UNDEVELOPED countries, not from developed countries. And the care they get here is shit. Walk into a hospital emergency room with diabetes or any other chronic disease and see what kind of care you get.
6. ALL medical systems have patients die needlessly from care problems. My mother died from a misdiagnoses. People get stuck with the wrong drug. Coma patients don't get fed. Fact of life. In fact the US Medical System is the leading cause of death in the US.

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/medicine/usamed.htm

Fuck, these days they probably aren't even 50%

Most figure it's even lower than that. M$ market share is only around 20%, old numbers did not include phones. When you count phones, tablets, servers, super computers, and so on, M$ is well on its way to becoming irrelevant. It's only the nasty mess and the legacy of dirty business practices that they leave behind for us.

I read a story early this morning talking about Musk's posting, and the author described the three car fires as "engulfed in flames". Similar language was used in early October; engulfed, erupted, etc.

In one case, the car provided dashboard cautions immediately after collision with road debris, then warnings, then the driver pulled over a couple of minutes later, the pack was smoking, he was able to get his belongings, etc. The interior of the car remained accessible and intact.

Meanwhile, I've witnessed, fought, and heard from friends who had car fires. It typically goes something like this: smoke from somewhere. Seconds, maybe 30 if you're lucky, there are flames. Within a minute or two the car is unsalvageable. In a crash in a gasoline car, the car can be on fire within seconds, and it can be a massive fire; rear collisions break up the fuel systems, front crashes cause both oil and gasoline to leak all over hot engine exhaust parts.

Firefighters generally don't rush to car fires because by the time they got the dispatch call, the car was already gone anyway; they're there mostly to put it out so the wrecker can collect it. Seriously, go look on youtube at car fires. Within the space of a minute or two, the car is well past the point of no return.

The hyperbolization here is amazing. Years ago Bose had a little problem with their car audio systems; the electrolytic capacitors would leak the electrolyte, which would then drip down the circuit board. In some cars, the amplifier board was positioned such that this would cause a short that would at the least cause smoking, and caused several fires.

One owner described driving down the highway, hearing the stereo crackle and drop out, looking in the back window and seeing smoke, racing over to the breakdown lane and getting out and the back shelf was already in flames; he barely had time to stop the car and escape an INTERIOR PASSENGER COMPARTMENT FIRE. In a less-than-a-year-old Audi. Reportedly Audi's regional rep inspected the burned-to-the-ground car and the customer got a replacement car.

Audi, Infiniti, Corvette, and a couple of other companies were affected; recalls were made for everyone except Audi; a bunch of Audi owners banded together when Audi refused to fix the damaged speakers, and kept selling defective units to replace failed ones. nhtsa refused to discuss with us whether they had reports of other fires or failures and refused to allow owners to speak to the person handling the investigation; Audi USA repeatedly claimed they hadn't ever heard of any malfunctions or fires, when we knew they'd paid for replacement vehicles a decade prior, and continued to claim as such even after other owners had sent in registered mail complaints and received confirmation.

Lo and behold, nhtsa finally got interested and Audi revised the amp board and did a voluntary recall. Presto, no more failures. They spent years milking owners (the amps would last a few years at most before failure.)

Then there's all the exotic cars that go up in flames; car enthusiast sites cover them routinely. Funny how Ferrari and Lambo never seems to get mentioned in the press as having a lot of car fires, huh? That's what the best money in PR gets you: shit swept under the rug fast.

The vast majority of gun deaths are suicides - mass shootings are the rarest form of gun deaths... by a huge margin.

By focusing on the rarest form of gun deaths (mass shootings) we are ensuring that any proposed changes would have the least effect on reducing the number of gun deaths per year. It could, I feel, be reasonably argued that if guns were suddenly no longer commonly available the death by gunshot rate would drop, but the suicide rate would remain mostly unchanged - the suicidal among us would simply find other ways to "shave off this mortal coil...

if you like your insurance, you can keep it... PERIOD

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/31/obama-officials-in-2010-93-million-americans-will-be-unable-to-keep-their-health-plans-under-obamacare/

Is this the same federal govt that developed movies and campaigns saying that smoking pot would cause you to go insane...

Why Pot Makes Some People Psychotic

People who smoke pot may be at increased risk for psychosis if they have a certain genetic marker, a new study finds.

The results show people with this genetic marker who use cannabis are twice as likely to experience psychosis compared with those who use the drug but do not have the genetic marker.

Among people who use the drug every day, the risk for psychosis increases sevenfold for those who have the genetic marker.

The Marijuana-Psychosis Connection Goes Both Ways In Teens

Snapchat have the most important revenus in the world these days - user's personal information that they share with others and whom they normally wouldn't..

You just don't see that everything's not all green backs. It's more nuanced.

pics aint completely gone..at all?

Yes, they would have. Maybe not in the same fashion, but Blockbuster was one of the companies that was in bed with Enron when Enron was getting into the broadband bandwidth trading business. Interesting that both are now history.

http://www.forbes.com/2000/07/20/mu4.html

Not really.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2010/11/24/the-epas-electric-vehicle-mileage-fraud/

So I did a little math. I know, a bad habit, but I can't help myself.
In any case, I was curious as to the numbers behind the recent Tesla vehicle fires and how that compares to the rest of the vehicles on the road.

So last year 21,500* Tesla vehicles where sold. To date there have been 3 fires. That makes 21500/3 equals roughly 1 fire out of 7167 vehicles. That looks pretty bad, wow. Tesla vehicles must be terrible. Right?

For comparison, there were 194,000** vehicle fires between 2008 to 2010 or to oversimplify things 97,000 per year. And in 2008 there were roughly 256 million*** vehicles on the road.
256000000/97000 equals about 1 fire out every 2639 roadable automobiles. Doh!

It appears that it is almost three times as likely that any random vehicle on the road will catch fire than any random Tesla. That bears repeating. You are just about 3 times safer from dying by fire in a Tesla.

And yet another sensationalist story that the media is getting wrong.

* http://www.forbes.com/sites/hannahelliott/2013/11/05/tesla-up-9-as-production-hinders-growth/
** http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v13i11.pdf
***http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_11.html

In the private sector, the stolen pension funds don't even get replaced with an IOU: http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilylambert/2011/10/03/has-your-retirement-been-stolen/

So this new iPhone will be exactly like the Samsung Galaxy Round then?

No, according to Forbes it will probably be curved from top to bottom like the LG Flex, not curved from side to side like that Samsung device. That, IMHO, makes a bit more sense than curving it from side to side since (as the Forbes article points out) it addresses that little pain-point where either the phone is too far from your mouth, or not close enough to your ear. And I'm afraid that both Apple, LG and Samsung were all beaten to it on the curved mobile phones front by Motorola, the DynaTAC was shaped to bring the microphone closer to your mouth, a feature it inherited from much older conventional land-line phone designs.

No modern phone (should) have the need for you to have the microphone up close to your mouth. In fact, it is preferable not to, for the person on the other end.

Maybe, but a curved phone feels more natural, at least it does IMHO. Even so I still think this curved/flex display craze is a fad.

So this new iPhone will be exactly like the Samsung Galaxy Round then?

No, according to Forbes it will probably be curved from top to bottom like the LG Flex, not curved from side to side like that Samsung device. That, IMHO, makes a bit more sense than curving it from side to side since (as the Forbes article points out) it addresses that little pain-point where either the phone is too far from your mouth, or not close enough to your ear. And I'm afraid that both Apple, LG and Samsung were all beaten to it on the curved mobile phones front by Motorola, the DynaTAC was shaped to bring the microphone closer to your mouth, a feature it inherited from much older conventional land-line phone designs.

No modern phone (should) have the need for you to have the microphone up close to your mouth. In fact, it is preferable not to, for the person on the other end.

So this new iPhone will be exactly like the Samsung Galaxy Round then?

No, according to Forbes it will probably be curved from top to bottom like the LG Flex, not curved from side to side like that Samsung device. That, IMHO, makes a bit more sense than curving it from side to side since (as the Forbes article points out) it addresses that little pain-point where either the phone is too far from your mouth, or not close enough to your ear. And I'm afraid that both Apple, LG and Samsung were all beaten to it on the curved mobile phones front by Motorola, the DynaTAC was shaped to bring the microphone closer to your mouth, a feature it inherited from much older conventional land-line phone designs.

Yeah, and all these conservatives have college campuses where they can expel people for expressing themselves on and off campuses. Damn consevatives.

Student Expelled for Facebook Posts Sues 2-Year College in Minnesota

Court Rebukes Le Moyne College for Censorship

University of Cincinnati: Speech Code Litigation

Modesto Junior College (MJC) students were barred from passing out copies of the U.S. Constitution in celebration of Constitution Day

Big Brother’s Lawyers

College Republicans lobbying against open club membership

FAU College Student Who Didn't Want To Stomp On 'Jesus' Runs Afoul of Speech Code

...and the Chinese follow suit on speech with the support of US universities.

China’s Peking University fires professor who criticized government

Not Orwellian enough? How about this:

'US citizen has no right to free speech?' State Dept spokesperson grill

About nr 1: I don't know about this batteries. As there are sometimes flaws in them and for that same flaw they often burn mobile phones, laptops and such things. Batteries are improving with time, but it is going to take several more years until something new appears.

In regarding nr 2: While this is extremely difficult to trace due to shell within a shell holdings (and sometimes shell within a double shell in a tax haven) this is happening. As the oil industry did destroy the public transport in the U.S at the start of the 20th century. That is easy to look up.

Her is an interesting news report on what is taking place in big oil. It is all power and corruption.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/07/16/the-worlds-25-biggest-oil-companies/ (Warning! Has audio advertisement!)

Here is how big oil got Tesla cars banned in Texas by using side routes that they do have and are not afraid to use.

http://elitedaily.com/news/technology/big-oil-state-texas-bans-the-sale-of-teslas-electric-cars/
http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2013/09/10/why-tesla-lost-the-fight-to-sell-cars-in-texas/

Of course the real problem is that there simply isn't enough data available. Three times in as many months could be a fluke. Or it could be a pattern.

When you add in the other electric vehicles that suffered from battery fires, the problem is reasonably well understood. The fires occur WELL AFTER the crash event. You have a fairly long time to exit these vehicles.

No doubt Tesla and the other manufacturers will do something like Boeing did, and build thermal barriers into the battery and perhaps build in stronger penetration barriers. But I'm not sure you can protect against all fires when a car goes airborne and crashes into a concrete barrier. Nor does it even seem to be a priority in my view. That the driver walked away.

Except, it happened not 1 time, but 3 times, in a short period of time, to a car thats pretty unpopular simply because they can't produce that many at this point in time (not due to lack of buyers).

Wrong. Do your homework.

Only one was road debris.

The other one in mexico was a high speed crash into a concrete barrier after the car went airborne at over 100mph. The driver walked away.
The Tennessee incident was also a crash, not road debris. Nobody was injured there either.

Most if this is due to improper firefighting technique. Go look a the twitter pictures. Fire fighters are just going to have to learn how to fight battery fires, because the problem is not unique to Tesla, it has also occurred in Chevy Volts.

Found my own answer: 21,500. From later in the same Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2013/11/05/tesla-makes-record-delivery-of-model-s-promises-a-pioneering-approach-to-servicing-its-cars/

Bipartisan
Bipartisan
Conservative
Recent
Recent

You conservatives are so SMART!!!

In this day and age it's laughable to think that once your private photos/videos hit the Internet that you have any expectation of reigning them in or filtering the embarrassing parts out.

Why not? You psychotic assholes successfully removed Maureen O'Gara's articles about Pamela Jones from the web, why can't this pervert do the same?

1. While true, defence of others is just as good as defending oneself.

2. a. Torture is going to far in any case. I don't remember the torture part, that definitely isn't justified, will have to check the articles on that.
b. Yah that is a bit much for just running away with money, I thought there was blackmail involved there too

So, now that I said that.... I did some looking it up....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/10/02/feds-allege-silk-roads-boss-paid-for-murders-of-both-a-witness-and-a-blackmailer/

âoeIâ(TM)d like him beat up, then forced to send the bitcoins he stole back. like sit him down at his computer and make him do it,â reads a message from the Roberts account, included in the complaint.

In a followup message, however, prosecutors say that Ulbricht asked to âoechange the order to execute rather than torture,â fearing that because the employee had spent time in prison, he might act as an informant against the Silk Road rather than risk being charged himself. In the messages reproduced in the complaint, Ulbricht is said to have added that âoehe had never killed a man or had one killed before, but it is the right move in this case.â

so it wasn't torture and murder together. In fact, in slightly different circumstances, such actions would even be legal in some places like Texas where a person is authorized to use force to secure the reuturn of their property (some conditions apply, IANAL: http://www.policymic.com/articles/46995/ezekiel-gilbert-texas-man-who-killed-prostitute-not-going-to-jail - though I will note I disagree with the characterization of her as a prostitute, prostitutes have sex for money, she was a con artist if all stories in the case are taken as true)

So overall they reduce to about the same. I dunno they all were engaged in illegal business and when in an illegal business you know people can't sue you so the stakes are higher. Anyone stealing large amounts and posing a threat to others in the business should really expect that sort of retaliation.

I don't see why normal social mores and norms about murder should be considered to apply in such situations, everybody knew what they were getting into from the start.

He won't get a dime of your money, because much less than a dime will be available to give to him after Holywood accounting is done with it.

You know who else won't? The other producers, most of who run charities. Like the following:

List of charitable causes of Producers of Ender's Game:

Gigi Pritzker
http://www.forbes.com/profile/jean-gigi-pritzker/
Movie producer Jean "Gigi" Pritzker is one of 10 members of the extended Pritzker family on the Billionaires List. Gigi has been buying Hyatt shares from her cousins Linda and James. She owns the tiny (12 employees) film production company Odd Lot Entertainment, which backed the hit film "Drive" in 2011. The company is slated to release the film of Orson Scott Card's science fiction tale, "Ender's Game," starring Harrison Ford, in November 2013

Pritzker is president and a trustee of the Pritzker Pucker Family Foundation and the Chicago Children's Theatre.

PHILANTHROPY, VOLUNTARISM & GRANTMAKING FOUNDATION

Asset Amount: $37,832,052(37.8 million)
Income Amount: $7,737,864(7.7 million)

Additional charitable details:
http://foundation.luriechildrens.org/site/PageServer?pagename=oh_do_pritzker
The Pritzker family was one of the first of Chicago’s leading philanthropic families to join Heroes for Life: Campaign for Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.
Their $10 million leadership campaign gift through their family foundation allowed construction of Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago to begin on time in April 2008 for its projected opening in the summer of 2012.

Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman

http://philanthropytimes.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/science-fiction-inspires-philanthropy/
June 21, 2013
Chrysalis is a nonprofit foundation in Los Angeles that is backed by some high profile Hollywood stars, including Colin Farrell, Lea Michele and J.J. Abrams. The organization focuses on helping the homeless population of Los Angeles build skills and find jobs in order to work their way to self-sufficiency. This weekend Chrysalis held the annual Butterfly Ball to honor the top champions for the fight against homelessness. Among top honorees this year were Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, writers and producers of the latest Star Trek film “Star Trek: Into Darkness”.
Kurtzman and Orci were honored for their contribution to helping the homeless along with agent Josh Lieberman and entertainment executive Katherine Pope.

Robert Chartoff
Robert Chartoff (born August 26, 1933) is an American film producer. He and fellow producer Irwin Winkler won an Academy Award for Best Picture for the 1976 film Rocky.
Chartoff established the RC Charitable Foundation in 1990 to award grants to international schools and other child agencies. He continues to serve as its President. The RC Charitable Foundation gives grants awards to the Buddha Educational Trust.

Both pill pushers and most diagnostician work is problematical. See my comment here: http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4407051&cid=45332611

The reason diagnosis is problematical is that most illness in our society comes from poor nutrition (and sometimes other lifestyle choices). The body may break down in endless different ways on a poor diet -- but the commonality of the poor diet. So why even bother in most cases to figure out specifically how the disease is cause by poor diet? Granted, some small amount of disease may not fit this model -- but most does. For stuff that does not fit, we are getting better computer tools for diagnosis every day.

Maybe of interest: http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/07/18/how-i-overcame-bipolar-ii/
"What came out of my year without sugar, coffee, or alcohol? I got my life back."

And look into Omega 3s, Vitamin D, light therapy, and eating more vegetables:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/adhd-bipolar-disorder-another-brick-in-the-wall.html
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/bulletin/December07_Whats_Cooking_Bulletin.html

Migraine are often triggered by food additives, especially sulfites.

Good luck!

Someone once described American liberalism as confusing wishes with facts.

Well said. To believe that, for the first time in history, we could impose a massive new bureacracy and 13,000+ pages of new regulations on an industry, and not see its costs shoot through the roof, is an extreme example of wishful thinking.

Neither article (OP or this response) seem to support the assertions made in the posts.

Also, is "amount of radiation" a good metric for harm done? Seems like that leaves out a lot of factors that would affect the real world impact.

One thing that seems clear is that (even ignoring climate change) fossil fuels cause a lot more deaths than nuclear.

Exactly.

For example: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/10/07/the-nsas-hugely-expensive-utah-data-center-has-major-electrical-problems-and-basically-isnt-working/

no single person has ever read the whole thing

Here's someone who has.

Here's a link so you can do it yourself.

Why the lies?

"If you like your healthcare, you can keep it"

Truth is they KNEW 93 million people would lose their healthcare plan back in 2010. It was PLANNED to fail the people from the start. When you have to lie to convince people your law is good, its probably not a good law.

The Democrats OWN this. They OWN the lie, the OWN the failure, the OWN the massive increases in prices for the middle class, they OWN the entire thing. All based on lies told to the American people that have been found out. This is Obama's legacy, lies and failures.

Rick Ungar = STUPID

"UhObama was never a Congressman. He did serve as a Senator."

Do you want to put any weight into an article written by such an ignorant man?

"The United States Congress is the bicameral legislature of the federal government of the United States consisting of two houses: the House of Representatives and the Senate."

- Wikipedia

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

***

Okay, what this article is really saying is that President Obama took office after the largest emergency budget expenditure in U.S. history. One that pushed the deficit up from President Bush's average of $305 billion to over $1.4 trillion. Largely due to a 1 time $1 trillion dollar bailout of the U.S. and global banking system.

Then he lauds President Obama for only having an average of $1.2 trillion dollar deficit. Exclaiming, see...see... President Obama lowered the deficit from $1.4. Reducing the deficit by almost 15%.

What Mr. Ungar fails to point out, is that President Obama kept spending at emergency levels. Take out that one time emergency expenditure and compare the average deficits.

What you see is President Bush's $305 billion versus President Obama's $1,225 billion a year deficit.

So how much did President Obama increase the deficit spending? 400%

Even factoring the 2009 fiscal year with the bank bailout. President Bush's average deficit was $443 billion vs $1,163 billion (and that's assuming the 2013 ends with the smaller estimated $0.9 trillion deficit - have my doubts).

Even then, it equates to a 2.5x increase in deficit spending over President Bush.

And, remember that half a trillion of that 2009 budget was the emergency stimulus bill that President Obama passed.

Those patents are a complete failure. There is nothing to watch out. Motorola even got sanctioned for patent trolling.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/09/06/apple-google-motorola-patent-troll/

Motorola continues to lose billions.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/04/30/motorola-googles-12-billion-road-to-nowhere/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/21/4853808/google-motorola-losses-moto-x