Slashdot Mirror

All you need to do is to check how government manipulates the numbers... The numbers behind the lies

Given the news today, it sounds like "there" is about to be Iran. Cheney is warning of "meaningful consequences" for the Iranian government if they don't stop their nuclear program. I wonder if he's planning to shoot them in the face...

Nothing that is offically anounced, but it's been done already, with just some tweaking to make it better.

First up, A solar powered UAV that was tested 3 years ago to reach near 100k. Now, I'll grant that it wasn't a production model, but who's to say with a bit of black technology and a much larger budget this hasn't been duplicated?

There's also multiple models of blimp based technology, such as this or this. Now, granted, the blimps would be a bit harder to hide from, but then again, if it's there 24/7 for months, you can't exactly time when you move targets, like you can with sats.

Now, I am talking out of my ass here, but my guess is that IF they had this technology working, and in production, then that would make a strong case to stop an expensive manned vehicle that may have been designed to do essentially the same thing. Especially if one of those said drones were missle delivered, as the conncept plans from years ago indicated.

From MSNBC: After spending millions of dollars to rebrand AT&T Wireless Services Inc. stores as Cingular stores and hundreds of millions of dollars more on marketing the new Cingular after its $41 billion acquisition of AT&T Wireless in October 2004, Cingular will now become AT&T if the merger with BellSouth is completed.

So for all of those who at one time had AT&T Wireless as your cell provider and stuck with them through the Cingular Wireless purchase and are still with them, you'll now be moved back to the (new) AT&T brand. I would have been one of them had my compnay not switched to T-Mobile 3 weeks ago.

No, "Comic Book Guy" is "Everybody knows Wiggum wears his badge on his right, not his left." A lot of people know the names of the Simpsons.

(And no, I have no idea about whether the badge was correct. I just made that up.)

I would trust anything more the The Day After Tomorrow.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5058474
http://www.wunderground.com/education/thedayafter. asp
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/currenttopics/ abruptclimate_dayafter.html

San Francisco is doing something similar soon except it's not gasoline. Collecting dog waste to create methane gas.

Dog waste not, want not

Is the ice melt over This volcano ?

Caiuse Parts of Antartica have neen colder than normal in the past half decade.

Pastor killed during baptism.

Under the right situations, phantom power can kill.

Let me help you find it:

Look up "meth fire" or "methamphetamine fire" and see how many articles you find from across the country.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&client=safa ri&rls=en&q=Methamphetamine+Fire&btnG=Search
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8769919/site/newsweek/
http://www.rid-meth.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine

Thanks for being such a fucking smartass. This is a discussion board, and sometimes you have to go out and do a little bit of research.

What is your objection to having to take an extra 2 minutes to get cold medicine? Especially when that small step has made it harder for someone to kill themselves or others? You give me one good reason...

From what I read on MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11636942/ , the Origami project will be a paperbook sized tablet computer (i.e. a PDA on steroids) that will run regular Win-XP instead of the crippled CE or XP-embeded found on most PDAs. Basically the PDA will evolve from an embedded system with limited functionality into a more full-featured portable PC with full multi-media capability. This will could also be a threat to the iPod, since the Origami box would also be a portable player, but with other features included.

http://search.msn.com/ Looks pretty minimal to me.

Ironic search results: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=linux+vs+wi ndows The first few results are quite unbiased.
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=linux+vs+wind ows The first few results clearly favour Windows.
If Microsoft want their search to be more popular their results have to be unbiased to be taken seriously.
Just food for thought.

• Google recommends: Altavista
• MSN recommends: Search.com
• Yahoo recommends: Yahoo
• Ask.com recommends: Ask.com
• Altavista recommends: Search.com
• Search.com recommends: Dogpile
• Dogpile recommends: Lycos
• Lycos recommends: Ask.com

Nobody at all recommends Google. More proof that Google search is not as good.

MSN Search
Yahoo! search.

Microsoft has been showing the signs of being able to build a search engine to rival Google for some time now.

        * Bright people working for them
        * msnbot has been crawling as much as googlebot for well over a year

Put those two together: a good source of data and a bunch a bright people and you should be able to build a great search engine.

You've forgotten the (not so ) secret ingredient, that only Google bother implementing. On the internet, competition is massive. Every other site is only one click away. This means, if you want to suceed, the customer comes first.

Google make money because they give you a service, and you don't even realise they're trying to make money off you. Yahoo and MSN make less money because when you go to their homepages, you get spammed with advertisments and services, instead of just being able to search.

It doesn't matter how good the next MSN search is. If they decide to degrade the service in favour of trying to make more money, users will flee to another provider. It's that simple.

Go to MSN search right now. It's clear whoever is in charge needs to be fired. I can't get a search without first selecting where I want to search in an irritating popup menu. It's substandard. Users flock to better offerings.

Yahoo are better by comparision, but again, when I go to their main page, again, they too drop the ball.

Google still haven't lost the plot. You go to Google, and you get search. No mess, no fuss, no distractions, just the results. The sponsored links in no way distract you from the main goal. Google want you to be happy with the service, because the more happy people they get, the more happy people will use their other services.

That's how you make money on the internet. You please the customer. If you're shoving ads down peoples throats or bugging them to upgrade, or basically in any way throwing up and artifical barrier, you're wasting your time.

If you read the Penny Arcade Bacon Robot's book, Tycho really hits the nail on the head. If you're just sitting in front of the internet with your arms crossed, waiting for people to give you money, you're not going to get a dime. Pay per view content might as well not exist, and sites that push products and services on their users are basically just line noise.

If Microsoft, or anyone wants to succeed on the internet, they have to realise this; On the net, nice guys finish first.

Anyone remember the "Google killer" rumors from Microsoft, and when they later unveiled it, it was this earth shattering masterpiece?

Since that fiasco*, I'll be a pessimist about these news.

* = it's not really that terrible for a modern engine IMHO, but when Google exist and is at least as good, why switch? It seems most ended up using that logic.

Developing new antibiotics is very costly and can be dangerous. Recently, courts have punished drugs manufacturers with incredibly high damage awards. Take for instance the COX-2 inhibitors Vioxx. Granted, there were two (2) victims, but there is no proof that the drug actually killed them. It was simply an added risk.

A lot of antibiotics have the potential to expose their manufacturers to that kind of 8-figure lawsuits. Some of them can create kidney or liver damage and are used as "last chance" drugs. Hospitals and doctors cover their arses by requesting waivers to be signed when this kind of dangerous treatment has to be attempted, but the waivers don't include drug manufacturers, which then become the logical target.

I am the first one to think that drug companies are business, not humanitarian angels, but this is getting ridiculous. There are currently almost 10,000 (10^4) lawsuits against Merck alone. If only 10% of these lead to the multimillion damage payola that's becoming the norm, the company will default and its research labs will be closed down. One less avenue for new drugs, at a time where new diseases are propagating fast and old one are reappearing. Good going.

On top of that, antibiotics are extremely expensive to develop, because of the test protocols involved. There were 10 new molecules brought to the market last year. Ten. The development cost for each was several billions.

So you have a product that has ruinous R&D and makes ambulance chasers drool so much they trip over their own tongue. Is it worth it?

The answer is clear: drug companies now prefer to devote their resources to creating new lawsuit-free products such as dinosaur-shaped kid vitamins. The margins are high, the risks are low, and the lawyers are kept at bay.

So next time you hear someone diss drug companies, remind them that thanks to this kind of attitude, the next generation will have to fight deadly infections with grapefruit flavored, T-rex shaped multivitamins. That ought to cure them all right.

Disclaimer: I don't work for a drug company. But I am not getting younger, and I'd like my generation not to have to back to chewing tree bark when we're sick.

Ugh- I just realized how rude my above comment sounded. Sorry...
Anyhow- check this out:
D'oh! More know Simpsons than Constitution
It is almost funny that people think the right to own a pet is a first ammendment right...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11611015/from/RSS/

For the man who likes things linkey:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569842/site/newsweek /

OH sure the fine-art market is the having the most lucritive long-term earnings streak in history. But MEH and FEH! What do they know. Sotherby's MEH. Whitney - a pittance. Nothing but bums. Galleries in SF? Give me a break. And to hell with LA and New York. Cow towns the lot of em. Galleries there don't know SQUAT. And the new museums in the Bay Area? The one's that attracted the Royals from England? A total ruse. Don't be fooled.

MEH!

But please - keep the stereotypes flying. The less competition for me the better.

soy bean oil??cant it be cheaper(and easy to get any where around the globe?)?? sumthin like ...urine?..check this out..http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/ 08/0818_050818_urinebattery.html and this..http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8973626/.

Against who, exactly?

Al Qaeda and its affiliates. Maybe you've heard of one or two of their many outrages? If you're well informed there are another three, or four, or five or six other commonly known ones. (Actually, there are many more.) And this is not counting just one or two of the many widely known foiled plots.

They even need close scrutiny in prison.

How did this escape your attention?

You'll eventually have to buy one because soon http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11409391/ you won't have a Radio Shack to run out to. Besides, the headphone jack signal is not line level.

It's usually more cost-effective to install an IDS and kill the worms and viruses at their source than to let them rage unchecked through your infrastructure. That being said, you should also have a secure firewalled subnet in your tech room where new systems can be configured and updated (from Microsoft update, apt-get, Red Hat network, or whatever) before being allowed onto any other net.

If you are under HIPAA, SOX, or FDA regulation you are legally obligated to perform "due diligence" and "accepted industry practices". That means most companies in the USA are legally required to track down and eliminate any sources of malware on their internal networks!!!

If you can't make your employer understand this, start floating that resume. If anything ever happens that gets your company in trouble with the feds, the top brass will throw the IS staff to the wolves without a second thought. That means there is a (tiny, but real) risk you could do time in a federal prison because your bosses are incompetent to run a modern computerized business... do you remember when E.F.Hutton was found to be a front for organized crime? Did the top brass go to jail? NO - some hapless little people went to jail. "I vas chust following orders" doesn't fly, but "I am a rich and connected corporate leader" sure does! Don't risk it, get a new job.

MSNBC ran a story on this the other day....

An intersting aside is that apparently Alistair Cooke, the host of "Masterpiece Theatre" was one of the deceased who's organs were harvested by these people.

It's stock already dropped in price from it http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.as p?Feed=AP&Date=20060224&ID=5532454&Symbol=US:HRB

According to H&R Block's website;
http://www.hrblock.com/
"Fast Money
Walk into an office with your taxes, and walk out with an Instant Money Refund Anticipation loan check. Up to $9,999 based on your refund amount. Money in your hands fast."

People, don't ever EVER get your tax refund this way. You may be in a financial jam or just impatient to get your money, but this is sure way to loose your money in a blink of an eye, and possibly the most stupidist thing you can ever do. The % you loose due to interest rate for loan in this case is highly unregulated and its easy to get scammed.

Here is a quick article on pending lawsuit against H&R Block in California, posted on MSNBC.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11373754/

Just wait 3 weeks and get your full refund (if you don't owe that is), or ready to get charged 500% on that refund.

My guess is they are about to release a network search agent, possibly coupled to a mobile wireless device. I'm imagining a handheld (Palm pilot-ish) coupled to a wireless Windows CE coupled with a Microsoft Terranova or similar map program for getting information while out in the field, coupled with Microsoft Search for finding information on the fly.

The star design (nodes radiating from a central node) implies a network configuration, where there is a central location that is retrieving data from external servers. The first portion "do you know what I can do" with pictures of circuitry also implies a hardware device capable of networking, but the multiple images (arrows) suggests a query. The "and where I can go" with pictures of cities and beaches implies a mobile device. "or how I can change your life" could really mean anything.

Of course, Origami is basically "folding paper", so the hardware itself could be a Digital Paper device coupled to a wireless 802.11g" device for on the go searches...

If that's not it, maybe I can patent the idea for a device like that before they get around to building one.

My guess is they are about to release a network search agent, possibly coupled to a mobile wireless device. I'm imagining a handheld (Palm pilot-ish) coupled to a wireless Windows CE coupled with a Microsoft Terranova or similar map program for getting information while out in the field, coupled with Microsoft Search for finding information on the fly.

The star design (nodes radiating from a central node) implies a network configuration, where there is a central location that is retrieving data from external servers. The first portion "do you know what I can do" with pictures of circuitry also implies a hardware device capable of networking, but the multiple images (arrows) suggests a query. The "and where I can go" with pictures of cities and beaches implies a mobile device. "or how I can change your life" could really mean anything.

Of course, Origami is basically "folding paper", so the hardware itself could be a Digital Paper device coupled to a wireless 802.11g" device for on the go searches...

If that's not it, maybe I can patent the idea for a device like that before they get around to building one.

hich can be hacked by Howard Dean on a TV show

http://groups.msn.com/votefraudusa/3.msnw

Surely this isn't for real? The county supervisor has access to this? No encryption no nothing?

--MarkusQ

Before ccd there were tubes.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559903_2/Te levision.html

Kind of ironic, coming from somebody that is objecting to the contents of a speech he didn't hear and can't find a transcript of, isn't it? But I'll bite.

My claim, which you are objecting to:

This is now known to be false; the treatment was in fact authorized (by redefining torture) and Bush has yet to recant his position. It looked for a minute as if McCain had cornered him into showing some sense, but his signing statement makes it clear that he still endorses torture. The only thing that clearly wasn't authorized (and what the Bush administration has actually objected to) is taking pictures of the torture and leaking it to the media. The "perps" who have so far been charged are (last I heard) only the low level grunts who got caught.

My proof (or at least a sampling thereof--there's lots more):

• The Bush administration redefined 'torture' to permit techniques such as used at Abu Grabe
• The Bush administration defends the need for torture
• The Bush administration has a system of secret prisons in which such torture is conducted
• McCain pushes to have torture outlawed
• Bush dodges with a "signing statement" saying he isn't bound by the ban
• The Bush administration primarily objects to the fact that pictures were taken
• ...and blames the leakers
• Only the low-level grunts who got caught have been nailed, and they got slaps on the wrist

There is, of course, a lot more where that came from.

Now, can you please back up your claim that Gore told the Arabs to attack us?

--MarkusQ

Kind of ironic, coming from somebody that is objecting to the contents of a speech he didn't hear and can't find a transcript of, isn't it? But I'll bite.

My claim, which you are objecting to:

This is now known to be false; the treatment was in fact authorized (by redefining torture) and Bush has yet to recant his position. It looked for a minute as if McCain had cornered him into showing some sense, but his signing statement makes it clear that he still endorses torture. The only thing that clearly wasn't authorized (and what the Bush administration has actually objected to) is taking pictures of the torture and leaking it to the media. The "perps" who have so far been charged are (last I heard) only the low level grunts who got caught.

My proof (or at least a sampling thereof--there's lots more):

• The Bush administration redefined 'torture' to permit techniques such as used at Abu Grabe
• The Bush administration defends the need for torture
• The Bush administration has a system of secret prisons in which such torture is conducted
• McCain pushes to have torture outlawed
• Bush dodges with a "signing statement" saying he isn't bound by the ban
• The Bush administration primarily objects to the fact that pictures were taken
• ...and blames the leakers
• Only the low-level grunts who got caught have been nailed, and they got slaps on the wrist

There is, of course, a lot more where that came from.

Now, can you please back up your claim that Gore told the Arabs to attack us?

--MarkusQ

It doesn't mention this in the article submission, but it should be noted that this $2 million prize is an Alliance Challenge in NASA's Centennial Challenges program. Basically, NASA provides the prize money if there's a winning vehicle, while the X Prize Foundation is responsible for actually organizing the event. NASA has stated that they'd like to offer larger-scale competitions and prizes in the future, but they're trying out these smaller ones first.

Also, there's already a couple of groups which look like they'll have a decent chance of winning the lunar lander competition, including John Carmack's Armadillo Aerospace (Carmack is the co-founder and lead programmer for id Software). Here's a quote from an article about last year's X Prize Cup Expo, where the ideas for a lunar lander challenge were first being discussed:

John Carmack, who makes his money as a video-game developer and spends some of it as the leader of Texas-based Armadillo Aerospace, said the lunar-lander challenge "certainly sounds like something up our alley." Armadillo is developing a vertical-takeoff-and-landing rocket capable of bringing passengers to the edge of outer space.

California-based Masten Space Systems is also working on a vertical-launch craft, and Michael Mealling, vice president of business development, said Masten was interested in both challenges. "It just so happens that the flight plan [for the competitions] matches our development cycle exactly," he told MSNBC.com.

If all of America was powered by breeder reactors, we could fulfill current energy demands for over a hundred years by running them off the nuclear waste we have in storage right now. Isn't nuclear power cool?

Power too cheap to meter and conservation! What's not to like?

From Encarta:

At the end of the 20th century, no reprocessing of fuel occurred in the United States because of environmental, health, and safety concerns, and the concern that plutonium-239 could be used illegally for the manufacture of weapons.

woah woah woah there.... a dozen movies a month? Manuel Villanueva of Netflix say good luck!

Agreed. Given that Google is now 24% down and dropping from their peak several weeks ago, I (as a Google Shareholder) don't want to see the stock slide any more.

First they miss their earnings forecast this last quarter, which limits the amount of new investment from banks (which only means they should take care of their existing cash), mostly due to competition in advertising.

They are already under attack for providing content blocking for China, now may have to scale back their image searches, are under governmental requests for search records on providing pornography to minors... meanwhile, there're competing search engines, and their tricks in google maps are being duplicated.

When you put all the pieces together, Google needs real intelligence to weather the next few months, or they are going to lose the short-term trader's confidence... and with that, their value drops.

I saw this article from msn earlier.

From that article: "We're doing this because a majority of AOL members will be able to get high-speed connections and access the AOL service for this new price," spokeswoman Anne Bentley said Tuesday. "Hopefully it's an encouragement for them to get high-speed connections."

Although AOL has been shifting its focus to providing free articles, video and other materials on its ad-supported Web sites, the company sees paid broadband accounts as key to making that strategy work.

AOL believes broadband will help boost usage and hence advertising. According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, those with broadband at home are 52 percent more likely than dial-up subscribers to use the Internet on a given day, and the typical broadband user spends about 23 percent more time online daily.

They're basically trying to get more people using high speed connections to get more people online and using their services where they get more money for their services and for advertising. It's just a shift to more of an ad-based revenue stream. Makes sense.

Or Myspace

And lets not forget the domestic programs like secret spying by the FBI using it's COINTELPRO program against people we regard as heroes now like Dr. Martin Luther King and John Lennon. See:

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.h tm

And for recent abuses of the governments shroud of secrecy see:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10965509/site/newsweek /

and

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spyfiles/index.html

Still think government secrecy is a good idea? Or perhaps world peace and protecting the bill of rights is a little more important than being an apologist for the governments cover ups of it's abuses both here and abroad?

As usual, the /. article is very low on relevant links. Here is the article about this fucktard admiting lying.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11388447/

He is paid >1.4M$ per year, and will probably get that as its package.

Bastard.

Don't forget the grandpappy of the genre, Stowaway to the Moon! {Prof. Jonathan}

I'll pick the Lancet article you pointed to. Here is an excerpt:

Findings
The risk of death was estimated to be 25-fold (95% CI 16-42) higher after the invasion when compared with the preinvasion period. Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in one cluster in the city of Falluja. If we exclude the Falluja data, the risk of death is 15-fold (11-23) higher after the invasion. We estimate that 98000 more deaths than expected (8000-194000) happened after the invasion outside of Falluja and far more if the outlier Falluja cluster is included. The major causes of death before the invasion were myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and other chronic disorders whereas after the invasion violence was the primary cause of death. Violent deaths were widespread, reported in 15 of 33 clusters, and were mainly attributed to coalition forces. Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children. The risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher (95% CI 81-419) than in the period before the war.

Please note the sentence in boldface. Hiding in the parentheses, you will find the information that the "98000 excess deaths" figure is, within a 95 percent confidence interval, really somewhere between 8 and 194000. With a 95% CI supporting some value between 8 and 194000, how does one then conclude that the answer is "98000"? The average of the range of values supported by the chosen confidence interval is not the answer.

Here is an article that, in part, discusses the Lancet article; you may find it illuminating:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8679662/site/newsweek/

Aside from every major Islamic organization condemning terrorism and violence, what more do you want? Sheikh Hamza Yusuf said, "Terrorists are mass murderers, not martyrs" but I guess he wasn't deemed newsworthy. Sheikh Qaradawi, a popular TV preacher, has always been against Al-Qaeda and even said it was legitimate for Muslims to join the US in attacking the Taliban.

If you search online, you'll find photos of Muslims in anti-terror rallies. Here's two Palestinian women at a 9/11 memorial, and another of some of the Palestinian students who all observed 5 minutes of silence to remember 9/11 victims. Bangladesh anti-terrorism rally and sympathy for 9/11 victims. Palestinians held a rally against suicide bombing, but I can't find coverage in english press.

What about the mass demonstrations in Indonesia against terrorism? Heck, they had a rally calling for the execution of the Bali bombers. Indonesian Muslims were so outraged at the terrorists that they tried to storm the prison to lynch the terrorists.

Go and visit any local mosque, and they will tell you how much they are opposed to terrorism of all forms. Heck, the mosque by my house keeps sending me emails condemning the latest violence, when I know it's obvious. Still, I can understand how jittery everyone is, since a few mosques have been burned down over the last few years, and someone smashed our window.

Or should we simply rely on saying the truth, including the ugly side?

In case you haven't been paying attention the western media can not afford to be honest about the feelings of westerners and still gain support in islamic circles. They hold different values and being honest with them makes little difference in the long run as far as winning hearts and minds.

Even if the west would leave them to their own devices how long do you think it would be until some other fanatic makes another push? They're already moving outside of their "holy land" and rioting when they don't get their own way in western countries. It's just another form of terrorism that's a bit kinder than suicide bombers.

In 2004, the US government launched Alhurra, a 24-hour propaganda news network that was created to counter Aljazeera.

Maybe Rumsfeld didn't get the memo, but that's not surprising considering that he doesn't even use e-mail.

It must modernise its methods to win the minds of Muslims in the "war on terror", as "enemies had skilfully adapted" to the media age, [Rumsfeld] said.

Are you using http://search.msn.com/ or something else? I see ads on the frontpage less than 10% of the time, and it is only a single text ad... And I've performed several searches to test. I can send a screenshot if you don't believe me...

I don't use adblock.. and when I search using http://search.msn.com/ I don't see /any/ ads. Ideas?