Slashdot Mirror

oh noes! i thought only old men republicans were racist! oh noes!

also take note that this article was published sometime this morning. i had to go to no less than three msnbc menus to finally find it a whole 8 hours after it's last update. there is no media bias. no sir!

you're just a bunch of lemmings.

From this article: Pad 39B, meanwhile, is due to be turned over to NASA's Constellation program to be modified to launch the agency's new Ares 1 rockets. The launch vehicle is being designed to loft the agency's Orion shuttle successor into orbit by 2014 and on to the moon by 2020. The first Ares 1 test flight is set for June 2009.

This is in case there is a problem on launch that allows Atlantis to make it to orbit, but it is too damaged to safely return. They would launch Endeavour to join Atlantis in orbit, they would use the robotic arms to pull the two vehicles together and then transfer crew from one to the other.
 
  This msnbc article on it has some more details. I'd have linked that article for the submission - but I didn't see it until later, and the NASA site didn't have a permalink for their page on it at the time.

According to a new study published in Nature that compiles data from many previous studies, old growth (primary) forests are net carbon sinks.

MSNBC has an article about it here.

Actually he is. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Forbes/TheForbes400.aspx?GT1=10423

... he said, linking to the Richest Americans. Sorry, just because Warren Buffet lost > $10 billions in the last couple of months doesn't mean so has Carlos Slim Helu (& family).

Actually he is. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Forbes/TheForbes400.aspx?GT1=10423

Actually, you assume too much. I have moved unsourced material to the talk page, therefore it isn't actually removed entirely. If the material can be sourced, then people are free to put it back with the source - nothing should stop them. However, consider this: the definition of "trivia" is:

• matters or things that are very unimportant, inconsequential, or nonessential; trifles; trivialities.
• unimportant matters : trivial facts or details
• petty and unimportant things or details
• unimportant details or information
• a collection of insignificant or obscure items, details, or information

As you can see, I don't think the material that I am referring to actually relates to anything you talk about - clearly you don't think the material is unimportant, inconsequential, insignificant, obscure or petty! Therefore, I get annoyed when people feel that the information is not important, but should be in Wikipedia.

I should note that if information about a topic was cited from an external, reliable source, then I wouldn't have a problem with the material.

That's what you think. Last year some 8 year olds invented wedgie-proof underwear.

I think the Chippendales guys have had those for years.

That's what you think. Last year some 8 year olds invented wedgie-proof underwear.

Ok ... so you would then support breaking into Barack Obama's private Yahoo account as well?

Condoning something is different from supporting it. The difference may be subtle but it's there. I don't support break-ins of people's Yahoo accounts, but if they happen I'm not too worried about it. As in: It's still a breach of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and should prosecuted (see http://www.abanet.org/irr/hr/winter99_pivec.html). However I don't think that we should disregard what is found, and I don't think that prosecution should have a very high priority. That's called "condoning". It's different from "supporting" in the sense that I'm not taking the position that we should go out and do it.

So yes, I would condone breaking into Obama's Yahoo account as well. For no other reason than that he is a presidential candidate. When weighing his interest in having privacy against the public interest in seeing him as he is, I think that the public interest weighs more heavily.

Since we are innundated by carefully prepared propaganda from both candidates as to their personality and their ideas, it's important that we also see something that's not stage-managed.

If e.g. Senator Obama were secretly sympathising with a plan to halve the armed forces and use the proceeds to finance a national health insurance, we ought to know about that. Even if that means hacking his Yahoo account.

If Governor Palin were a mean-spirited, clueless mouthpiece of whatever her handlers tell her, we ought to know about that too.

Besides which, I still don't see why hacking someone's Yahoo account is different from Standard Operating Procedure in politics (see e.g. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19295680/, http://celestiniosity.com/2007/02/13/digging-dirt-on-obama/, http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal/index.ssf/2008/08/mayor_don_williamson_pleges_to.html, http://www.theherald-nc.com/opinion/story/8762.html) such as scouring the records, talking to former associates, dumpster diving, hiring private detectives to dig up dirt on sex lives.

I was just trying to be funny. But if you want to debate, here it goes:

I don't blame the Chinese people - China has a rich history and culture - I blame the government. I have been to Hong Kong and Taiwan.

There are thousands if not millions of toys and products that have been recalled from Chinese Manufacturers:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/02/business/02toy.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_export_recalls

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSPEK15755920070813

Do a google on: china lead recall - only 337,000 hits are returned!

And China is considered one of the biggest havens for piracy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13617619/

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2006/07/71300

I even "visited" markets in both Taiwan and China where I saw pirated versions of almost every Microsoft and PC software package for sale for a fraction of what they are supposed to retail for. I saw CD's, Movies, everything for sale for a fraction of what the real product costs.

And before you suggest that the products were not pirated, may I add that the manuals with the software were cheesy xeroxed copies. And the CD's and DVD's didn't come in standard cases....

Any place like this would be busted in a few days in the US.

Granted, I haven't been to the mainland, but most of the products probably come from there....

These are facts... The only "people" hurt by denying them are the Chinese people, because as their products get a worse reputation, their economy will suffer.

Recognize also that due to the "firewall" the chinese government has on internet access, that few chinese are probably even aware of the criticism of the Chinese Government or the product recalls or the piracy...

Yeah, the US government kind of sucks. But at least I can read about it and talk about it, without my news or speech being "censured"...

And I can go to a coffee shop, get drunk on Caffine, or go to a bar, and get drunk on beer, and bitch about the US and living here without fear of being thrown in prison because I don't "agree" with my government...

Many people say that the expectation of US drilling domestically will drive down the oil future prices. While theorerically true, the size of the impact depends greatly on the amount of increased supply.

Bush's own energy department has this to say: "if Congress gave the go-ahead to pump oil from Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the crude could begin flowing by 2013 and reach a peak of 876,000 barrels a day by 2025." "...would only slightly reduce America's dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel."
'James Kendell, one of the authors of the study, said the refuge would add to domestic production, but "when you're talking of a world oil market of over 75 million barrels a day, adding 900,000 barrels by 2025 is a drop in the bucket."'

as reported here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/

In other words, add 1% of world wide production in 20 years is NOT going to drop crude oil prices by $40 a barrel. A MUCH MORE realistic reason for the oil price drop is the expectation of global economic slow-down/recession which leads to less oil consumption starting NOW.

Furthermore, people consistently conflate the gasoline price at the pump with the crude oil price. There is a long supply/production line between the oil rig to your gas pump. Local gas prices are much more influenced by taxes and refinery capacity (hence the dependence on hurricane impacts).

It's fine to argue for drilling in Alaska, but please stick to facts and logic and avoid ungrounded speculations.

Well, there's no real need to flame - all you have to do is look at the chorus of indignation from artists that had their songs ripped off by the Republicans and used ("pirated"?) without permission. Starting with John Hall sending a cease and desist, Van Halen having to say Permission was not sought or granted and the latest spat with Heart That should tell you right away how much commitment there is to protecting intellectual property.

I don't think a pipe on the bottom of the ocean is your biggest concern when you put hundreds of thousands of computers on a man made island, exposed to possible tsunamis and hurricanes.

Usually tsunamis are not a problem for vessels in deep open water. Rogue waves, on the other hand, have been known to severely damage large cruise ships.

And while we're at it, have they thought of the possibility of terrorist attacks

Excellent point, I think there is this potential and even more potential for pirates to attack. Pirates are a serious problem nowadays, especially off the coast of Africa.

The arguments about abuse by governments are fundamentally flawed:

So CointelPro wasn't real? Neither was Watergate. And J Edgar Hoover never had secret files? That's just recently in the US never mind other tymes and places.

Falcon

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/02/england.plea/index.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22598582/

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2007/02/2008525135351125887.html

anything else i can help you with?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26641652/ We're not *all* still alive. There is that Indian girl who committed suicide because of fear of doomsday from the LHC.

A comparison of news outfits in and out of the US, all of them top stories:

US (MSNBC):
Discovery or doom? Collider stirs debate

UK (BBC):
'Big Bang' experiment starts well (from today, since I neglected to grab their story yesterday)

Canada (CTV):
Scientists hope to find 'God particle' in mini Big Bang

I also caught a teaser for a news program on a US channel (not sure which network) yesterday: "Will the world end tonight? More at 11!"

The key to the difference in their foreign policies is the "(eventually)": For Obama, it's very clear that "eventually" means "within 16 months of taking office", whereas with McCain it appears that "eventually" means "as long as it takes for us to get what we want" (unclear what we're trying to get at this point). Obama's goal in Iraq is to get the troops out, McCain's goal in Iraq is to stay as long as necessary. That's a significant difference.

You are letting Obama mislead you with laywer speak. I'll translate Obama's official page for you.

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.

Translation: He'll remove some troops 4-6k troops per month. The 50,000+ left will not be called "combat troops." They'll be in the permanent bases or the embassy. Don't forget the 100k+ private contractors.

Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq.

Translation: The permanent bases are already being built by Bush. Why build more?

He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats;

Translation: Our embassy in Iraq is the biggest embassy anywhere else in the world. It is larger than the Vatican.

if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda."

Translation: Any Iraqi who doesn't like its oil being stolen, or hates being occupied by a country from half way around the world will be called al Qaeda and summarily be killed.

Meanwhile Obama was working with the NATO countries to see what he could do to get more of a NATO presence in Afghanistan and less of our troops there. Sounds to me like Obama wants to get out of Iraq and reduce the number of our troops in Afghanistan - not move from one to the other as you stated. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/25/obama.trip/index.html)

And to be quite frank (my apologies to those named Frank), had we stayed out of Iraq and focused on the issue at hand in Afghanistan we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.

I had never heard about Obama's stance towards Iran - do you have a source I can look at to see what he envisions there? The same goes for Georgia.

Georgia:
Biden Calls For $1 Billion In Emergency Aid To Georgia, By Daniel ...
Cheney Backs Membership in NATO for Georgia - NYTimes.com

Buried in this article you'll find that "The current fighting began four days ago (August 6) when Georgian forces launched a surprise attack to regain control of South Ossetia, which has had de facto independence since the end of a civil war in 1992."

YouTube - Saakashvili eats a tie

Iran:
Obama: Nuclear Iran 'unacceptable'

'Iran a major threat; I would never hesitate to use our military force in order to protect homeland, US interests, Democratic presidential candidate tells FOX's 'The Oâ(TM)Reilly Factor'

Afghanistan:
Maybe we wouldn't be in this situation if we didn't fly out hundreds of Taliban on C-130's into Pakistan.

Simply research the Airlift of Evil

Funny thing is, I looked this up and the very first link led me one of those "controlled media" websites. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23415028/

There are no nuclear power plants because a few people have been able to block the technology and growth since the 1970s.

Wrong. You're getting taken in by anti-environmentalist culture warrior zealots. Financially, building new plants just hasn't been worth it.

Parent is referring to Michael Richards' embarrassing tirade from awhile back. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15816126/

Hey, accepting Global Warming takes money from the anti-global warming industry. Just think of all those poor lobbyists and report writers, un-able to buy new suits. Because of you, a hard working tailor will now go hungry. I hope you can live with your self.

The U.S. exports to China as well. Buick has a very strong presence with GM Reintroducing cars into China after they have halted production in the U.S.

Hardly balanced but China needs the U.S. as bad as the U.S. needs China. This alone will probably keep the peace.

Your point would be fair if the Kyoto treaty was actually being met by member nations. Most every nation is improving but they are falling far short of their goals which is the stated reason why the U.S. didn't get involved because they knew the standards were too high and could not be reasonably met without serious compromises to profitability.

Your first statement is incorrect, see http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Image:Kyoto36-2005.png

And if that was why the US didn't get involved, where is the alternative Washington treaty with realistic goals?

That also said, cars in the U.S. have stricter regulations than in Europe in terms of emissions which is why all the people with truly fast cars have to import them. Of course America has a lot more cars so that is probably why you feel the way you do about our output.

Are you saying that each individual car in the US pollute less than cars in Europe? From a fuel-efficiency stand point this article would disagree: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17344368/ In fact, on average, your cars burn twice the fuel per mile. So you would need to have some pretty fantastic emissions standards to compensate for this.

The editors note that is now attached to the Register article that you link to really does not help to support your position. Incidentally I remember having read earlier that year that the warming trend will be put on hold this year because of a severe La Nina effect - apparently the National Geographic guys didn't get the memo.

The Register article DID help my position, however not as dramatically as I would have hoped :)

The Ice extent graph showed 10% more ice than last year, whereas the map showed 30% more pixels than last year. The two sets of data appeared to be contradictory, but they were not. Still, the 10% increase of ice from last year instead of their being almost no ice is a big difference.

Especially since it wasn't just national geographic reporting this, it was almost everyone!

Exclusive: Scientists warn that there may be no ice at North Pole ...
North Pole could be ice-free this summer, scientists say - CNN.com
North Pole could be ice free in 2008 - climate-change - 25 April ...
ABC News: North Pole Could Be Ice Free in 2008
FOXNews.com - Report: North Pole May Be Ice-Free This Summer ...
North Pole Could be Ice-Free This Summer | LiveScience
Summer may see first ice-free North Pole - Climate Change- msnbc.com
North Pole May Be Ice-Free This Year - AOL News
No North Pole ice for 1st time in human history?_English_Xinhua
An Ice-Free North Pole? - TIME

Just a simple google search for "north pole ice free" will give you 1000's of articles. Notice how every one of these articles has very little variation. Not even fox news challenged the claim.

So much for a free and independent press.

Here in the States, AMTRAK is in horrible shape due to mismanagement and a general public disuse of trains.

Amtrak sets fifth straight year of record ridership

Acela trains may expand to meet demand

More Frustrated Fliers Taking to the Rails

Trains over Planes and Automobiles

Uh-huh. Yup, nobody's riding those trains, yesirreebob.

---PCJ

On point 2, you need to look at the distribution of debt rather than the average debt. Most of the real problems are concentrated in about 40% of those households in the lowest 60% of household incomes (pdf). This means that the majority of Americans do not, in fact, have much of a debt problem. 55% of Americans have no credit card debt even though the average household CC debt is about $8500. The problem is that much of the safety net that either government or corporations used to provide has been dumped off on individuals. Most bankruptcies are caused by either a sudden and serious health problem (we used to have corporate sponsored health insurance plans that carried over into retirement) or a divorce. What was Obama's line: "In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is - you're on your own."

On point 3, you need to add that much of our outflows of dollars comes back to us in the form of direct foreign investment. Foreign companies don't need to buy U.S. companies. They can also choose to build factories directly in the U.S. BMW, Honda, and Toyota all have built their own factories in S. Carolina, Ohio, and Kentucky rather than buying U.S. auto manufactures a la Daimler's purchase of Chrysler. These companies have provided a lot of good manufacturing jobs for American workers. At the same time, the U.S. has a very, very large manufacturing presence in other nations. I'm a U.S. citizen, but I also own stock in Honda, Toyota, and Daimler. Much of this is just a side effect of the long term trends toward globalization rather than something we really need to worry about long term since trade imbalances tend to be self-correcting over time.

No, fuck the taxi drivers of MN who choose not to give rides if there's booze in the car. Oh, wait: McCain's crew, like the aforementioned crew, wants to chose what you shoud be allowed to think. I think there's a pattern there.

Let me remind you that there are locations in the Netherlands which are more than two times below sea level compared to that of New Orleans. New Orleans is of course much more prone to storms than the aforementioned place but I do not see why technology could not solve this [reinforcement] issue.

A couple differences: Parts (10-20%) of New Orleans are settling an inch a year, while parts of the Netherlands are settling a tenth or a quarter of an inch a year. 55% of the Netherlands is below sea level, so efforts to preserve it will have steady national support. Only a small section of the Mississippi river delta is below sea level. Still, towns in the Netherlands are in fact being told they can't build anything new. And there are mitigation efforts that work for river flooding that won't work for hurricane flooding, such as floating foundations. All in all, the Netherlands has good reason to take their situation much more seriously than New Orleans does, and it shows in what they have done.

I'd say obama's big support for ethanol has driven up food prices

Did ethanol push up food prices? Yes, some farmers that were growing other things stopped to grow corn. Is it responsible for all (or even a majority) of food price increase? No, the fact the cost of oil tripled in the past decade did that.

And if the fact that the cost of inputs (oil, fertilizer, etc) increased tremendously wasn't enough, we had a record breaking corn crop last year, with an (as of the time of that article) expected surplus of 1.4bln bushels. Now, all the farmers growing corn instead of wheat might explain why the price of wheat or barley or soy or whatever else went up, but the price of corn increased too, despite that glut, so I think it's fair to say that "ethanol" isn't entirely at fault.

are worth MORE today than they were 7 years ago

Only if they were better than the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq indexes. The Dow is the only index that is still up over 2001. Nasdaq is down to 1998 levels, S&P 500 is down to 1999 levels.

I'd say obama's big support for ethanol has driven up food prices

Did ethanol push up food prices? Yes, some farmers that were growing other things stopped to grow corn. Is it responsible for all (or even a majority) of food price increase? No, the fact the cost of oil tripled in the past decade did that.

And if the fact that the cost of inputs (oil, fertilizer, etc) increased tremendously wasn't enough, we had a record breaking corn crop last year, with an (as of the time of that article) expected surplus of 1.4bln bushels. Now, all the farmers growing corn instead of wheat might explain why the price of wheat or barley or soy or whatever else went up, but the price of corn increased too, despite that glut, so I think it's fair to say that "ethanol" isn't entirely at fault.

are worth MORE today than they were 7 years ago

Only if they were better than the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq indexes. The Dow is the only index that is still up over 2001. Nasdaq is down to 1998 levels, S&P 500 is down to 1999 levels.

I'd say obama's big support for ethanol has driven up food prices

Did ethanol push up food prices? Yes, some farmers that were growing other things stopped to grow corn. Is it responsible for all (or even a majority) of food price increase? No, the fact the cost of oil tripled in the past decade did that.

And if the fact that the cost of inputs (oil, fertilizer, etc) increased tremendously wasn't enough, we had a record breaking corn crop last year, with an (as of the time of that article) expected surplus of 1.4bln bushels. Now, all the farmers growing corn instead of wheat might explain why the price of wheat or barley or soy or whatever else went up, but the price of corn increased too, despite that glut, so I think it's fair to say that "ethanol" isn't entirely at fault.

are worth MORE today than they were 7 years ago

Only if they were better than the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq indexes. The Dow is the only index that is still up over 2001. Nasdaq is down to 1998 levels, S&P 500 is down to 1999 levels.

So I assume this isn't a real quote?

The state took much of that for other projects, and Palin on Friday said the Ketchikan project was $329 million short of full funding.

"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said.

"Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened," she said.

So she said no the the bridge only because Congress wasn't going to pay for it all. Hardly sounds like "she said no thanks to Sen. Ted "Internet Tubes" Steven's 100 million dollar "bridge to nowhere"" based on her principles.

When you say she "That would explain why she cancelled his infamous Bridge to Nowhere" - I take it you mean that she supported it until it was clear that Alaska would actually have to pay for some of it?

Oh yeah, and she still took the money.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20908207/

The state took much of that for other projects, and Palin on Friday said the Ketchikan project was $329 million short of full funding.

"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said.

"Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened," she said.

A bit ironic. But MSNBC is using a flash player. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22886841#22886841 Not sure if it works on Linux, though.

.
From CNN's transcript of the 9/11 Commission hearings:

GORTON: Now, since my yellow light is on, at this point my final question will be this: Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001, based on Delenda, based on Blue Sky, including aid to the Northern Alliance, which had been an agenda item at this point for two and a half years without any action, assuming that there had been more Predator reconnaissance missions, assuming that that had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?

CLARKE: No.

Simply put: the Clinton administration did not leave enough information NOR plans for the Bush administration to stop 9/11. It was a foregone conclusion by January 26th, 2001.

Now for your rant about "outing a CIA agent"? Maybe you need to read about who admitted the leak. Hint: his first name is Dick, and his last name is Armitage.

Sorry, but those ARE the facts.

>Again, see article and peaceful oriented groups have already been infiltrated. Okay, my source is Roger Moore so a grain of salt the size of Canada is needed.

Here's a MSM source about the military spying on Quakers. In the Pentagon's favor, they admitted it was a mistake and said they'd purged nonviolent protest groups from their database. On the other hand, that was after they got caught.

The issue is not just that the tires break loose and cause damage to natural reefs, although that's the major problem. Besides that, the tires themselves contain toxins that are damaging to sea life. Another learning from the Florida disaster is that marine life doesn't attach well to old tires anyway, even when they're filled with concrete so they don't wander.

You're right, I was talking about the Florida disaster, but if you go here and skip down to "South Asia mess", it's apparent that Indonesia is just now discovering that this is a bad idea. Florida got a decade head start and had an opportunity to see the consequences earlier.

I won't belabor the point. This is not really about man-made reefs, it's about our natural tendency to want to take action in a crisis, which is laudable, with expensive, inadequately tested solutions, which is not.

More info on Osborne Reef can be found here and here.

I see that Trent05 is another victim of Republican propaganda...

the IOC has ordered a formal investigation into this scandel after recent "evidence" has shown up.

MSNBC
Excerpt:
"BEIJING - The International Olympic Committee said Friday it had asked gymnastics officials to investigate whether the Chinese womenâ(TM)s gymnastics team that won the gold medal had underage athletes, saying âoemore information has come to light.â

âoeWeâ(TM)ve asked the gymnastics federation to look into it further,â IOC spokeswoman Giselle Davies said. âoeIf there is a question mark and we have a concern, which we do, we ask the governing body of any sport to look into it.â

The IOC, which also asked the Chinese gymnastics federation to investigate, would not give details on what new information prompted it to act now, three days after the gymnastics competition ended."

Attitude doesn't prevent lawsuits

As long as you follow it through with ample threats and occasional knee-cap breaking.

Oh, and look up your local Hells Angel chapter. I hear they provide excellent security.

I'm not sure nagging is much of a concern. Many (most?) of the cultures which allow polygamy also tend to turn a blind eye to domestic abuse.

Name one culture which allows polygamy and turns a blind eye to domestic abuse. Remember, polygamy not polygyny.

Falcon

And what if the wives felt they wanted to bring in an extra husband? i'd have less trouble with polygamy if it worked both ways.

Polygamy does work both ways, both men and women can have more than one spouse. It's polygyny, where a man can have more than one wife, and polyandry, where a woman can have more than one spouse, that might not go both ways. Polygamy itself, despite what the mass media keeps saying about the FDLS, allows both men and women to have multiple spouses.

why bother with marriage at all?

Because some want the piece of paper and or the ceremony.

Just live with whomever, breed with whomever and keep rituals and paperwork out of it.

Some do. However if you go through the first website you'll see they still do some. For instance what can be done about children, who has authority over them or who can take them to a doctor. Children are a big factor legally so paper work needs to be done for them. Actually it takes more work to get polygamy/polyamory relationships working smoothly than it does 1 man and 1 woman marriages.

Still, there is the matter of what do the unmarried men in such cultures do?

They can get married, polygamy allows women to have more than one spouse.

Falcon

in a polygamous society there are much, much fewer women to go around

In a polygamous society, because women would be able to have more than one husband, there would be plenty of women to go around. It is in a polygynist society, like the FDLS practices, where there are not enough women to go around.

Falcon

Imagine if every family held to about the same ratio of 1 husband to 4 wives. You now have 3 men who will never be able to find a wife, never be able to start a family

What you describe above is not polygamy. Under polygamy those 4 women could have 4 husbands each. It's only under polygyny that one man can have 4 wives but those wives can only have the one husband.

Falcon

Malak Hifni Nassef, as quoted in A Very Short Introduction to Islam, in the chapter on women, pp96.

This is by way of agreement, I thought it was one of the most harrowing descriptions of polygamy I've read, though I haven't read many.

I seriously doubt that that book describes polygamy. I bet what it describes is polygyny.

Falcon

There are people living polygamously

I seriously doubt these are people living polygamously, more likely they are living polygynyously. There's a quick way to tell, can a woman have more than one husband? If not then they aren't living polygamously.

Falcon

In Islamic countries, polygamy is allowed but usually on several conditions and is highly regulated.

No, polygamy is not allowed in Islamic countries, polygyny is allowed there. A man, even if highly regulated, is allowed more than one wife but a woman is not allowed more than one husband.

Falcon