Slashdot Mirror

The problem in this case is that they had to estimate temperatures in the artic going back as far as they want. So he can't be 100 percent sure.

According to another article on MSNBC, it didn't explode, as it was just a "myth." Yet TFA say's it did. Which was is it, did it or did it not explode?

• Application level audio control
• Application specific remoting
• Vastly improved networking stack (apparently superior to any other OS's)
• Support for user mode drivers
• New printer technology (way beyond postscript)
• Pluggable crypto system

Let's first remember that the author (Oberg) is a self-serving bureaucrat (NASA employee)
http://g.msn.com/0MN2ET7/2?http://www.msnbc.msn.co m/id/11031097/from/ET/&&CM=EmailThis&CE=1 /> Much criticsim from official circles of Feynmann's analysis has clouded the accuracy of his assessment. The Nobel Laureate Physicist looked at the safety statistics and concluded 1 out of 25 shuttle flights would end disasterously. NASA's official number was that the risk was "too small to measure" ie parts per million or less. Given that we have lost 2 ships in less than 200 flights it would seem that Feynmann was much closer to the truth than NASA (what a surprise).
As a former NASA prime contractor I am familiar with the mendacity of these bozos (it's a miracle we have not lost a lot more astronauts).

Speaking of Ballmer, I wonder if you can find the monkeyboy video on MSN search?

There has always been a push to get women in science, yet there is no similar push to get men in literature, social sciences, education, etc. It is extremely lopsided and the efforts are beginning to seriously affect how boys progress through the school system. The male/female ratio in college is now 44%/56%. Such numbers mean we need more pro-male programs, not more pro-female. Newsweek had a recent story about this and other factors, it's a good read.

• This JAMA study found over 27,000 errors due to hospital (not other medical care) negligence in one year, in New York state alone.
• This Institute of Medicine study found 44,000 to 98,000 deaths per year due to hospital errors alone. That makes it the 8th leading cause of death, ahead of car accidents, AIDS, and breast cancer.
• The more comprehensive HealthGrades study puts the number of deaths due to hospital error at 195,000. And the study's authors think that underestimates it. (Also reported here.)
• Just try a few Google searches and you'll easily find more information, like this study.

That's right, doctors' errors are at least the eighth leading cause of death in this country. And the problem is the lawyers?

The response of the medical industry is to continue their practices, blame lawyers, and lobby congress for protection from accountability. I remember when the IOM study came out, it was proposed that hospitals be legally required to report these errors -- think about that: There is no reporting mechanism for, and no regulation of, hospital errors!. The American Medical Assoc. (the doctors' lobby) resisted, saying the potential penalties would discourage doctors from complying. By that reasoning, I shouldn't have to report running that guy over the other day -- I might be held responsible!

It can be done better:

When anesthesiologists were facing high error rates and corresponding malpractice costs, they took a different approach: They systematically studied the problem and tried to reduce errors. As a result, deaths due to anesthesia dropped from 1 in 5,000 to 1 in 200,000-300,000. And insurance premiums dropped 37%. You can read about it here or pay for the full story here.

And most of the industrialized world countries manage to deliver better care for far less. According to a study reported here, Americans spend $5,267 per capita on health care every year, almost two and half times the industrialized world's median of $2,193; ... Americans have fewer doctors per capita than most Western countries. We go to the doctor less than people in other Western countries. We get admitted to the hospital less frequently than people in other Western countries. We are less

Wow, you really need to brush up on a few things here. The MISSION of the NSA/CSS is to gather Signals Intelligence from all sources outside the US. Bush didn't "grant them permission," it's in their charter (which btw, they've been around for a LOOOOng time). It is legal to monitor signals outside the US. It's idiots like you who make politics so frustrating, yet so interesting. Nothing like making comments without understanding the issues and basic definitions.

PS: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10549887/from/RL.1/ good example of capabilities...

You're right in that the best cellphone webpages are specifically designed for the purpose. This site makes it possible to view regular webpages on cellphones, however.

You're right in that the best cellphone webpages are specifically designed for the purpose. This site makes it possible to view regular webpages on cellphones, however.

"Each of the pair of solid-fuel boosters was made from four separate segments that bolted end-to-end-to-end together, and flame escaping from one of the interfaces was what destroyed the shuttle"

"Although the obvious solution of making the boosters of one long segment (instead of four short ones) was later suggested, long solid fuel boosters have problems with safe propellant loading, with transport"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11031097/

The decision to make the boosters in segments was a political one and not a technological one. The fact is that the booster rockets had to be made in the home state of the 'powerful Republican senator` in order to get approval for the budget. At the time there was a lot of complaint about the excessive spending on space flight. The managers at NASA were told to come up with a cost effective solution that would allow cheaper routine missions with a reusable vehicle. With hindsight it is easy to see that the technology could not deliver.

Regarding 'the obvious solution .. was later suggested` this is incorrect. The engineers repeatedly reported problems with the infamous O-rings. Their objections were repeatedly ignored by the management. Why Oberg would propagate this distortion at this time is curious to say the least. After all he is a reporter at the prestigious MSNBC.

The facts are that Roger Boisjoly, the engineer with Morton Thiokol protested against the launch. Here is an extract from a memo he wrote in July 1985 *seven* months before the disaster. Later on Roger was forced out of MTI. No one at NASA or Morton Thiokol has ever been heald accountable for the shuttle disaster and the loss of seven lives.

"This letter is written to insure that management is fully aware of the seriousness of the current O-ring erosion problem in the SRM joints from an engineering standpoint"

"It is my honest and very real fear that if we do not take immediate action to dedicate a team to solve the problem with the field joint having the number one priority, then we stand in jeopardy of losing a flight along with all the launch pad facilities"

http://onlineethics.org/moral/boisjoly/MTImemo1.ht ml

'Don't launch.' .. 'Don't launch.' Roger Boisjoly,

"I felt I really did all I could to stop the launch." Roger Boisjoly,

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/5.78.html

"Approximately one month after my testimony to the House Committee, I could no longer endure the hostile environment at MTI,"

http://onlineethics.org/essays/shuttle/post-dis.ht ml

Anyone who takes this article or any other mainstream writing seriously to review the link at the bottom of the page to another article this cheeseball wrote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6872105/

This "NBC News Space Analyst" is merely amusing himself with alliterations rather than writing with any substance. As an armchair quarterback attempting to draw conclusions in an extremely complicated and ongoing area of science spanning decades, his writings do nothing more than cater to the overall knee-jerk hand-waving that has become the mainstay of mainstream "news".

I invite those of you who are more technical, more inquisitive, and deeper than the target audience of this "Space Analyst" to skip the gyst of the article. It's simply inflammatory garbage.

There more insightful detail on his view and the problems are described. The author accepts that space flight is inherent dangerous -- he works or worked at NASA and seems to know what he's writing about. Therefore this engineering area calls for special attention to safety. And the managers routinely scoffed off engineers who brought up avoidable risks: "The engineers were challenged to prove it was NOT safe to launch, and they had no data to do so." (page 3 of the article above.) The same was said for the Columbia disaster.

So the default at NASA is to err on the dangerous side, and not on the safe side. The default is to override engineer's concerns, to "put off the engineering hat and put on the management hat". That's what the story is about, and that's what should be of relevance for the /. audience.

Everyone involved in engineering work that matters should study this disaster and burn the lessons into their souls.

Last year at this time, Halo 2 was selling like hot cakes. US$125 million in sales within the first 24 hours when it launched Nov. 9, 2004. By January, it had sold 6.4 million copies (* US$50 = US$320 million). No doubt this also spurred sales of the Xbox Live online service. Last year was an exceptionally profitable time for MS's gaming division.

This year, not only have Halo 2 sales slowed down, but they also went through the expense of launching a new console, which includes not just the cost of the console itself being sold at a loss, but also the costs in marketing, distribution, etc.

Couple those two things together and it's no surprise that the games division is down from last year.

They report though that the XBOX 360 is a large part of their increased revenue. MSNBC Article Now this doesnt make sense one bit since they lowered the prediction on unit sales for 360 and they loose over $100 per unit. I am slightly confused by their numbers.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10478202

The very fact that the time of the event is chosen by the criminal and not you is what makes the difference. He knows that trouble is about to happen, because he is the one initiating it. You don't. And in the absence of "safer targets"--which is what you will have if everyone is armed--the criminals will gear up, as they do in L.A. when they fight each other.

I wouldn't brag about the crime rates in Texas, by the way. Violent crime in Texas is one of the highest of any State (6th), and in fact, one of the highest in the Western World. Drops in the crime rate have happened in all states, due to changes in demographics, as the number of young males ages 17 to 30 have declined as a percentage of the population. This is not because of gun policy, which has not really changed in Texas. The consistently high rate of violent crime is more indicative of the results of the gun policy there.

If everyone worked together, certain countries wouldn't be able to exercise their power over other countries.

Huhu. Whoever makes it work first - where it is fusion, ethanol, whatever the Next Big Step turns out to be in energy production - is the new Middle East. That's why as their economy was collapsing around them, the post-Soviet Russians continued to dump more and more money into programs like the Tokamak reactor. That's why though they're having a hard time paying for basic infrastructure for food, they're looking at mining the moon.

For instance, the USA wouldn't be able to keep their dollar overvalued by maintaining control over a scarce energy commodity (oil).

We haven't been an exporter of oil since Houston was considered oil central. The overvaluation you're thinking of is occurring right now in Dubai, not Washington. We are absolutely hemmorraging money into the Middle East, to the tune of 12.6 million barrels a year, at a January 20 price of $68.35, which comes to a rough estimate of $861 billion annually; being free of oil would make our economy much stronger, not weaker. Our annual oil costs would have paid for both major hurricane reconstructions and the war in Iraq, beginning to end, twice over.

We haven't had control of oil since Nigeria was in our pocket and Syria/Lebanon were at war. Also, hippies aren't the dominant social group anymore. Get some new data.

and would never recover since, with a devalued dollar (in relation to foreign currencies), it wouldn't be able to import necessities like food.

Uh, the only food we import is luxury food, like citrus or Kobe beef. We have an annual food export of $1.6 billion, and an annual food import of $200 million. Please remember that comparatively few people buy food from the US because we price it so high, and even then it's an 8:1 export favor. We let almost three quarters of our arable fields lie fallow on Government subsidy to keep the prices of grain depressed; even if we had 85% of our fields wiped out and our borders nailed down, we'd be fat as pigs. The United States is in fact the single most agriculturally productive nation on Earth, and is the most agriculturally productive nation per square foot if you chop tiny island nations off of the list.

Of course, since food is such a drastically small cost compared to other things (less than 1% GDP), and since the #3 agricultural power (Mexico) is to our south, disasterously economically depressed and desperate for trade, it's pretty much a non-issue. We put more money into video games than food. Try to keep perspective.

It couldn't keep its economy afloat with its two main professions: lawyers and real estate agents.

Well, it's cute to say things like that and all, but in fact almost 20% of our economy comes from industrial and manufacturing sectors, where again we're the dominant export power by a factor of nearly three. Lawyers aren't in fact that big of a drain on society; there aren't enough of them. You should probably stop learning about your economic structures from TV dramas; they're on every show because they seem powerful and add an air of legitimacy to business aspects of shows. By comparison, in the fifteen years I've been in industry, I've only ever had to deal with them once - and then, it was a patent lawyer, who's actually generating new things for society (give all the parasite yammering you want, but what I made couldn't have been made without the temporary economic protections afforded by that person.)

Real estate agents don't generate wealth at all. They redistribute it.

No normal country, on

Not just that, but the fact that financial institutions really don't help you once you get your ID stolen...
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/Better banking/P142361.asp
Banks hang fraud victims high and dry
If a thief uses a stolen ATM card or checks to pilfer your accounts, you may not get much sympathy from your bank -- or any of your money back.
By Liz Pulliam Weston
Lesa Henderson of San Diego was shocked when her husband's paycheck suddenly disappeared from their checking account. But their troubles were just beginning.
An acquaintance who stole both Henderson's debit card and checks from her checkbook had drained every penny from the account. The Henderson's bank initially restored some of the lost money, which the thief promptly stole. The bank then decided the thefts were Lesa's fault because she had allowed the thief into her home. The bank demanded the Hendersons pay back the restored funds, plus all the fees from bounced checks. Furthermore, it refused to let the Hendersons close the compromised account because it was overdrawn.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/Better banking/P142361.asp

Not just that, but the fact that financial institutions really don't help you once you get your ID stolen...
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/Better banking/P142361.asp
Banks hang fraud victims high and dry
If a thief uses a stolen ATM card or checks to pilfer your accounts, you may not get much sympathy from your bank -- or any of your money back.
By Liz Pulliam Weston
Lesa Henderson of San Diego was shocked when her husband's paycheck suddenly disappeared from their checking account. But their troubles were just beginning.
An acquaintance who stole both Henderson's debit card and checks from her checkbook had drained every penny from the account. The Henderson's bank initially restored some of the lost money, which the thief promptly stole. The bank then decided the thefts were Lesa's fault because she had allowed the thief into her home. The bank demanded the Hendersons pay back the restored funds, plus all the fees from bounced checks. Furthermore, it refused to let the Hendersons close the compromised account because it was overdrawn.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/Better banking/P142361.asp

market value of $281.3 Billion USD http://moneycentral.msn.com/detail/stock_quote?Sym bol=msft

Even if you go with $200m, you're still forgetting a few things:

(a) you're talking about US box office numbers, not international [see the box office breakdown here]. International BO numbers will bring that figure way up.

(b) DVD sales, licensed merchandise (plush, books, lunchboxes, tshirts, etc), and theme park attractions will all contribute to the bottom line on top of the BO numbers.

(c) Pixar was sitting on $1b in cash themselves, so the stock swap actually netted Disney a little bit of cash, making the quoted $7.4b number a bit of a misnomer.

Granted, they are making boatloads of money, but the POINT is that their "salaries" are determined by company performance. So if in fact they started doing evil and the market punished them for it by selling off google, then guess what? Their incomes are directly affected. The main difference is that most company execs make a disproportionately huge salary AND get as many stock options as these guys do. How many CEOs lately have been tanking the company while reaping huge salaries and then taking off in a golden parachute deal after everything goes to hell? Without a guaranteed $XX million per year shielding them from company troubles they are much more inclined to run the company well. The only reason that these dollar figures are so outrageously large is not because they're evil and robbing the company blind, it's because google stock is through the roof. If google were priced closer to others in its sector we'd be talking about maybe 200 million in income instead of over a billion.

Also, getting stock is no guarantee of salary, I'm not sure the details of their contracts but if it's in the form of options then they must be purchased and vest first, plus you can't just dump every sahre you own at once or that action itself will kill the share price (when we're talking about millions of shares). They started a company that has grown to practically represent the internet for some folks and certainly have redefined search and web business models for most others, I think a handy billion profit from a company they created that's doing so well is ok in a capitalist economy. Read about what some other CEOs are doing right now, especially at companies cutting pensions, I think you'll find that the guys at google are far from evil with their current pay deals.

from the who-needs-checks-and-balances dept.

That's every bit as factless as Diane Feinstein claiming that there are 2 branches of government.

"Checks and balances" are not between the political parties. They're between the branches of government. (That's Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, Ms. Feinstein.)

Pay a bunch of scientists as consultants to sit around and think about what might become, and use lawyers as scribes who write up the conversations and patent the results. He's not even going to bother buying the company that went through the proof-of-concept phase.

If this is what we're selecting for (as an evolving culture), we're in big trouble.

It's the same estimate they've been repeating since the console was launched: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9968123/from/RL.5/

From a newsweek article article
After his keynote, Apple CEO Steve Jobs spoke to Newsweek's Steven Levy

Levy: How is battery life with the MacBook?

Jobs: About the same--this with a dual processor! Each processor is as fast as a G5, and the battery life will be the same as [the previous PowerBook's] G4.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10853916/site/newsweek /

For what its worth, digital camera companies send out "review" copies pre-production cameras. Usually close to the final production version with some problems that usually get ironed out.

Consider speech codes on campus, for example.

Or, consider that professors are human beings, and human beings are prone to abuse of power. I've had students who have been targeted for beliefs *not relevant* to the class material. There are professors (right and left, but statistically left) whose entire mission is to force a particular worldview.

Case in point: The professor of logic at UMBC (University of MD, Baltimore College) taught a course in Critical Reasoning. Turned out this particular professor had a "thing" against Christians. So several of the examples in his text ... which he wrote ... pulled random quotes out of the Bible, out of context, and used them as examples of X, Y, and Z logical fallacies. Without exception, each of his "examples" could be shown on further scrutiny to be instances of irony, rhetoric, or what have you. One would think that a brilliant professor capable of teaching at the college level would (a) be able to find clearer examples, (b) be conscious of his own biases, and (c) have a desire to teach his students the actual subject instead of distracting them with his polemic. And, I believe that he *was* capable of those things, but chose not to do them.

Another case in point: here.

That said, I think "outing" liberal professors is silly. The students know, and they can generally avoid the obnoxious ones.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10931608/
You answered 100% of questions correctly.
Pfft, they should have made those questions a bit harder than that...

Strange, because this MSNBC article says Google[s] stand could be good for business. I guess you can spin this story any way you want.

FairPlay -- you can burn up to 10 CDs containing the files without changing the track setup

MSN Music (using PlaysForSure) -- you can burn up to 7 CDs without changing the track setup

you can authorize up to three different computers to play the track simultaneously

Others have pointed out it's actually five. MSN Music also allows five authorized computers.

you can copy and backup the files as you like; you own the files...

And this is different from MSN Music - how? The point of this reply is that usage rules for PlaysForSure files are set by the music store and the record companies, not the DRM format. MSN Music's usage rules are similar to iTMS, but is limited to Windows computers. I think they both suck, but I can understand other people finding the terms reasonable.

PlaysForSure -- doesn't play AT ALL on the most popular music player on the market.

Now, that sounds Orwellian to me.

Apple can acquire a license) just like everybody else, but they don't. Apparently, nobody else is allowed to acquire a FairPlay license. I guess Apple is, and will always be, the only company that makes good portable music players.

FairPlay -- you can burn up to 10 CDs containing the files without changing the track setup

MSN Music (using PlaysForSure) -- you can burn up to 7 CDs without changing the track setup

you can authorize up to three different computers to play the track simultaneously

Others have pointed out it's actually five. MSN Music also allows five authorized computers.

you can copy and backup the files as you like; you own the files...

And this is different from MSN Music - how? The point of this reply is that usage rules for PlaysForSure files are set by the music store and the record companies, not the DRM format. MSN Music's usage rules are similar to iTMS, but is limited to Windows computers. I think they both suck, but I can understand other people finding the terms reasonable.

PlaysForSure -- doesn't play AT ALL on the most popular music player on the market.

Now, that sounds Orwellian to me.

Apple can acquire a license) just like everybody else, but they don't. Apparently, nobody else is allowed to acquire a FairPlay license. I guess Apple is, and will always be, the only company that makes good portable music players.

FairPlay -- you can burn up to 10 CDs containing the files without changing the track setup

MSN Music (using PlaysForSure) -- you can burn up to 7 CDs without changing the track setup

you can authorize up to three different computers to play the track simultaneously

Others have pointed out it's actually five. MSN Music also allows five authorized computers.

you can copy and backup the files as you like; you own the files...

And this is different from MSN Music - how? The point of this reply is that usage rules for PlaysForSure files are set by the music store and the record companies, not the DRM format. MSN Music's usage rules are similar to iTMS, but is limited to Windows computers. I think they both suck, but I can understand other people finding the terms reasonable.

PlaysForSure -- doesn't play AT ALL on the most popular music player on the market.

Now, that sounds Orwellian to me.

Apple can acquire a license) just like everybody else, but they don't. Apparently, nobody else is allowed to acquire a FairPlay license. I guess Apple is, and will always be, the only company that makes good portable music players.

FairPlay -- you can burn up to 10 CDs containing the files without changing the track setup

MSN Music (using PlaysForSure) -- you can burn up to 7 CDs without changing the track setup

you can authorize up to three different computers to play the track simultaneously

Others have pointed out it's actually five. MSN Music also allows five authorized computers.

you can copy and backup the files as you like; you own the files...

And this is different from MSN Music - how? The point of this reply is that usage rules for PlaysForSure files are set by the music store and the record companies, not the DRM format. MSN Music's usage rules are similar to iTMS, but is limited to Windows computers. I think they both suck, but I can understand other people finding the terms reasonable.

PlaysForSure -- doesn't play AT ALL on the most popular music player on the market.

Now, that sounds Orwellian to me.

Apple can acquire a license) just like everybody else, but they don't. Apparently, nobody else is allowed to acquire a FairPlay license. I guess Apple is, and will always be, the only company that makes good portable music players.

FairPlay -- you can burn up to 10 CDs containing the files without changing the track setup

MSN Music (using PlaysForSure) -- you can burn up to 7 CDs without changing the track setup

you can authorize up to three different computers to play the track simultaneously

Others have pointed out it's actually five. MSN Music also allows five authorized computers.

you can copy and backup the files as you like; you own the files...

And this is different from MSN Music - how? The point of this reply is that usage rules for PlaysForSure files are set by the music store and the record companies, not the DRM format. MSN Music's usage rules are similar to iTMS, but is limited to Windows computers. I think they both suck, but I can understand other people finding the terms reasonable.

PlaysForSure -- doesn't play AT ALL on the most popular music player on the market.

Now, that sounds Orwellian to me.

Apple can acquire a license) just like everybody else, but they don't. Apparently, nobody else is allowed to acquire a FairPlay license. I guess Apple is, and will always be, the only company that makes good portable music players.

George Bush Rapes America Porn

How little does the American public care about this launch? So little that we've got to look to British news outlets to find decent coverage!

As a matter of fact - this list from Google news shows a pretty even balance between US and the rest of the world in coverage. Blame the Slashdot editor, not the media on this one.

Crow tastes pretty good with Tabasco.

cute.

Apple shipped 1.2M CPUs in Q4 vs. 7.52M CPUs for HP. But does HP really use AMD for more than 16% of its boxes? After HP, the next largest PC vendor is Dell. Dell certainly isn't presently shipping 1M AMD chips per quarter. (Granted, they may in the future.) AMD may have outsold Intel this past financial quarter, but how many of the folks shipping AMD chips are top ten PC vendors like Apple?

Newsweek: How is battery life with the MacBook?
Steve Jobs: About the same--this with a dual processor [chip]! Each processor is as fast as a G5, and the battery life will be the same as [the previous PowerBook's] G4.

You can also find Steve's interview here where he made the statement that battery life is about the same: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10853916/site/newsweek /

Google has a near monopoly (AFAIK), which allows it to extract (close to) the full consumer surplus for the ads it sells

Google has no monopoly in the traditional sense. They are the market leader, but don't control even as much of the search market as Microsoft does the desktop market. There is *very* little barrier to switching away from them, and there are a number of competitors. The only reason Google can keep making money from day to day is because they are consistently better than their competitors.

Look at MSN's main page and then Google's main page. MSN's page:

* Renders incorrectly in Firefox, with buttons lapping off the white main area.

* Is slower to load than Google

* Contains a huge amount of crap that I simply do not care about

* Contains numerous links that *nobody* would ever care about. Who needs a link to find microsoft.com? If they wanted to go to Microsoft, why would they go to msn.com and then look halfway down the page at the side?

* Has flashing, periodically changing images.

* Has ads embedded with the news, rather than clearly delineated, as Google does.

How about Yahoo: Let's take a look.

* Yahoo has a huge banner-sized ad for a Yahoo searchbar at the top of the page (which doesn't seem to actually *do* anything in Firefox when I click on it).

* Yahoo has masses of crap that I, once again, do not care about. I don't need to look at a newspaper thirty times a day (which is what Yahoo's front page seems to be trying to imitate). I do need to search for things thirty times a day. Actually, this single point amazes me. Google is stomping all the other people out there. Everyone else knows that portals were a stupid idea and flopped. *Why* is it that nobody (well, there are a few, like Teoma) is willing to just realize that people want simple and fast (and having powerful, unobtrusive features is frosting, if it can be managed), and not to look at a silly newspaper-like page each day?

* Yahoo has loads of ads embedded throughout the page, not clearly delinated from the rest of the text.

* Yahoo renders incorrectly in Firefox -- the "Advanced, My Web, Answers" text covers up part of the "Yahoo Search!" button and lap off the bottom of the blue box surrounding the "Search the Web" field.

* Yahoo has a lot of services, but they attempt to throw all of them at you. Compare Google's approach -- put only the very commonly used features on the main page, and stuff all the rest on a secondary page, with a brief description that anyone can understand. I'm *far* more likely to try out Google's other features over time after skimming their descriptions than I am to try to click on all of the 500 links on Yahoo's main page to try to find interesting features -- "Yahoo 360 degrees"? What on earth *is* it? Why would I blow my time figuring out what services I might be interested in using when Yahoo can't be bothered to even present them reasonably?

Now let's look at Google's main page.

* There isn't a single ad (if I do a search, I will see ads clearly labelled as such).

* There is a *single*, small image. Google provides more humor and information with this image than most media I read do throughout their entire bodies. They still probably haven't fully exploited that one image. Imagine how unbelivably wasteful of user attention span those competing sites are -- they have images galore, but most of them do nothing to actually aid the user.

* Google makes it easy to use all their primary services from the main page, using just six links, and a seventh for services that aren't used as much. Two other precious links are expended providing a way for people to easily find their other products. One more link is used to provide an *excellent*, easy-to-navigate help system (

Military needs discipline and rape/murder goes against discipline.

To play devil's advocate, attempted murder is a lesser charge than murder, so in that instance (at least) how bad off the victim is (regardless of your intent) is the deciding factor. Case in point.

Clearly a libelous entry. The Ostrich was clearly jealous over all the attention the Penguin was getting from geeks, so decided to start a FUD campaign on Wikipedia, claiming that penguins are flightless. That's the problem with letting anyone edit!

... but vista should http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10794396/from/RS.3/

It's funny how a copy becomes the original, somehow. Like Microsoft actually invents things themselves! HA!

So, even after this successful capsule recovery, this might not be the end.

Northern NY already has 130 turbines in place on Tug Hill. http://www.mapleridgewind.com/whytughill.htm
http://www.mapleridgewind.com/turbine.htm

The towers stand 268ft, and props are reaching 400ft.

http://www.acppubs.com/article/CA6283992.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10535094/from/RL.2/

I know farm families that are making enough money from having turbines but on their farm land to retire. Sounds good to me.

Not everybody is against wind energy.