Slashdot Mirror

I try and drink 2 glasses of Tea a day. Also try blueberries. Boysenberries taste great but aren't listed.

Oh yeah , Vitamins may not work and make corporations rich.
http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2005/08/05/do_vi tamin_pills_really_work.php

List of most powerful antioxidant fruit and vegetable.
http://www.mdsupport.org/library/antiox.html

http://my.webmd.com/content/Article/104/107639.htm

http://altmedicine.about.com/cs/supplements/a/anti oxidants.htm

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5489179/

And it's not how we live our lives in America? It sure is how I live my life here today, in fear that I will not make it hoem to see my family. For whatever reason.
And last time I checked, we weren't talking about lives, we were talking about non-lethal weapons. What part of human life were we talking about?

We stayed above 'their' level for the last 1000 years, and look what it got us. just LOOK!!!!!!!!!! And last time I checked, we aren't using IED's or Suicide Bombers. We aren't strapping handicapped children in as suicide bombers. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6889106/ What planet do YOU live on?

And finally, when have you *ever* heard a speech where Bush has said, GOD HAS TOLD ME TO BOMB YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT CHRISTIAN? No, you haven't. And you won't. This IS a choice between evil and not, make no mistake about it. Anyone who would enslave women, children, and torture them back to the land before time is evil. Not those who would protect said women and children.

Jho

This is a link to a news report with a CLIP OF IT IN IT(ENDURE THE ADDS, I DIDN'T PUT THEM IN):
http://video.msn.com/video/p.htm?f=00%2F64&t=1&p=S ource_Nightly%20News&i=f2223721-

With the rapid increases in solar and wind and geothermal and hot fractured rock and wave/water energy anyone searching for fusion as a way to provide power is just searching for a solution without a problem.

Really? Have you done the equations for how powerful those methods are? Geothermal is probably the most promising, but the others simply don't generate that much juice. For example, the most powerful windmill in existence can climb to about 10 megawatts. In comparison, we've got quite a few nuclear plants up in the Gigawatt range.

Basically, none of these "alternate energy technologies" has sufficient power density to be a replacement for existing powerplant technologies. I realize that many people are wowed by the impressive size of some of the solar and wind farms, but it's very important to put them into perspective. As power density goes, they suck in comparison to a real powerplant. As power production goes, they simply don't have enough power generation area to produce an output similar to that of existing plants.

Why in Bush's name are we cutting fuding to nasa?

Erm, where did you get that info from? Bush does many shitty things, but cutting NASA funding isn't one of them. In fact, NASA is one of the few non-defense government agencies which has actually seen funding increases. Bush even threatened to veto a huge appropriations bill unless legislators increased NASA's funding by a billion dollars.

The official info on NASA's budget can be seen here.

You must be going out of your way to avoid the massive amounts of information.

First hit of the first search:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2115868/

There are pleanty of others. Virtually every licensing organization globally has said that they are not licensed to distribute the music at all, much less internationally.

Its illegal. Deal with it. If you're paying for the service for ease of access to the music, great. If you're doing it out of some misguided sense of morality, you ought to rethink it.

That's why I always make sure to forward my boss links like this.

--MarkusQ

It's a hypothetical statement to make a point, though it is also a statement about a payment option I may opt for in the future if the MPAA continues on their current path. Or, did you not read "almost". Nor did you make the connection, probably obvious to everyone else, about how movie/library records can be used in criminal investigations, and a CC receipt would give your name, whereas cash wouldn't.

Ever since they made it a federal crime to video tape in theaters, how long before the MPAA starts pushing for a database of movie goers to connect to the IP numbers (and subpoena'd names) they see in P2P programs. They won't sue anymore. If you are caught sharing the same movie you went to go see, well, then, you had to have been the video taper, and thus, you'll go to federal prison. But, why stop there, if you support P2P and don't download movies, I'm sure they can get the Piracy Czar on your ass anyways.

I don't have a credit card, I have a debit card, which can act as a credit card. Last movie I saw at the theater was Batman Begins. The last DVD I saw was A Walk to Remember (not by choice). The next movie I plan on seeing on DVD is Constantine. My sign is Gemini, and I like long walks on the beach. You asking me out, or you trolling me?

Public face on Slashdot? This is my public face everywhere on the Internet. I am the Ikioi. This is the same me that is on my personal site I8-D. This is also me, and this, and this, and this. Your slashdot face is the top result on a search for your name, and you have no real info in your profile.

Let me guess, because you have a low UID and I have a high UID you thought that'd I'd make a good newb target to troll on. Sorry to disappoint you, but my online presence, and recent mod history, is better than your's pal. Try trolling the 900,000's.

Some birds do, after a quick google:

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761552516/Bird .html#p191

Also remember that insectiverous bats, ie the small ones, evolved* there ability to ecolocate seperately from the unrelated mega bats, mostly fruitbats.

I can't be the first one to point this out, I'm sure:

http://www.altavista.com/

http://search.msn.com/

http://www.yahoo.com/

Before we were blacklisted, we made 0 outgoing phone sales calls. Everyone found us, contacted us, and made us money. Now, we could have some problems; we could go under if we can't afford to hire a sales team.

Your complaint is not with Google but with the company that made false accusations against you. You have perhaps considered legal recourse against them? So far as I can see Google did the proper thing suspended you until they could check the facts and then reinstated you post haste.

You have a legitimate complaint, but it ain't with google.

This is modded as "funny", but it's actually real.A first case of drugdealing in south america with cash euro bills was recently reported in "Die Zeit", a german newspaper, and apparently also elsewhere: http://slate.msn.com/id/2111504

I live in NY City, and for the past few weeks there have been cops in many subway stations doing random searches. According to this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8660152/

This is costing the city $2 million per week.

If you look at this page (New York MTA):
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mta/ind-perform/per-nyct. htm

You'll see that the subway system sees about 120 million riders per month with 3 customer accidents and injuries per million per month. That's 40 injuries per month from accidents. Sometimes these are things like fatalities caused from someone getting bumped off of an over-crowded subway platform during rush hour onto the tracks...

So the city spends $2 million per week to "fight terrorism on the subway" and $212 million for security cameras on the subway rather than actually making a difference a difference by improving the system. Go to some G-train subway stations in brooklyn. The structural steel girders are rusting out and the stations are in dire need of maintenance.

And how much money has our government spent starting wars in the middle east (first gulf war, troops in Saudi Arabia, current Iraq occupation)... hundreds of billions of dollars

And then people over there get pissed off and want to set off subway bombs, and then we pay for it again by dealing with an army of cops checking our bags on the subway.

If they want to make subway riders safer, spend money on safety and infrastructure -- not cops -- to reduce accidents. If the government wants to eradicate terrorism, stop spending money on killing people in the Middle East. But of course getting rid of terrorism isn't the issue -- the issue is control of the dwindling global reserves of oil and new business opportunities in the middle east for American companies.

And we as taxpayers have to pay for it, and I have to let cops search my bag if I want to ride the subway to work and pay for that too.

While the various conceptual problems with large-scale surveillance have been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, I wonder if it will be as bad as the other attempts at large-scale surveillance in the U.S.

The Bush neoconservatives believe that their destiny is to mold the world as they see fit, and they don't care what they have to do or say to fulfill that goal. If that means lying about WMD, killing civilians, or sacrificing military personnel, then so be it. It is all for the greater good.

So don't expect them to give a crap about the cost to science by doing what the religous right demands, cause they need them to be in power in the first place.

Now if they could find a way to launder money out of R&D, like the defense, pharma, or oil industries, then you might get somewhere.

Maybe some R&D project managers need to take
Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay out for a few rounds of golf...

uhhhhh.. yo

ritalin is NOT an amphetamine last i checked... and is not really too similar to meth at all!!! Well, of course it is similar, but you know what i mean... Last i checked it was actually very similar in action to.. cocaine...

So yes

Ritalin=similar to coke
Adderall=a mix of 4 amphetamine salts designed to be the smoothest acting (seriously, and you wonder why it gets abused)...

but since no one has bothered to link to any reputable sites, lemme just go

http://slate.msn.com/id/2076413/

"The pro-embryonic research crew is 1, telling sick people that George Bush is killing them, when in fact they have a death sentence and stem cell research may cure FUTURE patents, but not likely the current ones."

"I expect the pro-choice crowd to be EXTREMELY upset at this research, that manages to create research lines WITHOUT destroying life ... {snip} ... The pro-choice crowd was EXTREMELY excited about the ability to destroy more embryos as part of their "proof" that embryos aren't life."

"Bush was the first President to approve ANY funding, and allowed it for pre-existing lines."

It's misleading to trumpet Bush for being the first president to approve funding when he was actually the first president to support restricting it. Clinton, on the other hand, was lambasted by anti-abortion groups for his support of the research while candidate Bush took a strong stance against the research before he softened his position:

"In 1996 and ever since, Congress has forbidden the use of federal funds for research involving the destruction of human embryos. The potential of embryonic stem cells became apparent in the late 1990s, and in 2000 the National Institutes of Health announced that it would fund stem-cell research as long as the actual extraction of cells from embryos was done by someone else. President Clinton strongly supported this policy. Presidential candidate George W. Bush opposed it. He opposed all federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research, no matter who extracted the cells.

{snip}

Bush's "first-ever" federal funding of embryo research was only first-ever because the forces on his side of the argument had managed to prevent it until then."

More info here.

Slate Magazine? http://slate.msn.com/

Re:Overhyped as always (Score:5, Insightful)
by justanyone (308934) on Saturday August 20, @12:52PM (#13362326)

All 4 basic forces: electromagnatism, gravity, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear (not Nukular; bite me, George)

Mixing politics with science; always a good idea (especially if you really really hate George Bush enough, which makes anything acceptable).

But seriously, if "nukular" was an acceptable pronounciation by Jimmy Carter -- who was one of the first nuclear engineers in the Navy (Academy class of 1946) -- and tens of millions of other Americans -- including Dwight Eisenhower and Bill Clinton -- why single out George Bush?

See

http://volokh.com/2002_09_15_volokh_archive.html#8 5468441

http://volokh.com/2002_09_15_volokh_archive.html#8 5473616

http://volokh.com/2002_09_15_volokh_archive.html#8 5473709

http://volokh.com/2002_09_15_volokh_archive.html#8 5473746

[Eugene Volokh, 9:53 AM] September 19, 2002

WHAT'S WRONG WITH "NUCULAR"? Today's Slate Explainer reminded me of this question, which I've thought about a bit in the past.

One common answer is that saying "nucular" is wrong because "nuclear" is spelled, well, "nuclear," and not "nucular." But the standard rebuttal (mentioned in the Slate piece) is: How do you pronounce "iron"? I actually remember pronouncing it "iron" as a kid (as in "irony" without the "y"), and being told that this is not the usual pronunciation -- "iern" is probably the best way of representing how you're really supposed to pronounce it. If this phenomenon (called "metathesis") is OK in "iern," why isn't it OK in "nucular"?

But this is just the tip of the objection -- the broader objection is that this is English we're talking about here. English, the language of "women," of "colonel," of "laughter" and "slaughter," of "get" and "gem." As reader Brian Dulisse points out, "forte" can be pronounced "fortay," "fort," or "fortee." "This pronunciation is wrong because it doesn't match the spelling" isn't much of an argument in English.

It seems to me that the only sensible answer to "What is wrong with 'nucular'?" is "This is not the standard way that high-class people say it," coupled with "This term is a shibboleth that high-class people, and those influenced by them, use to sort those they'll call 'high-class' from those they'll call 'low-class.'" That's all the "wrong" there is here. Yes, I know this sounds like a leftist cultural critic position; but sometimes, as here, the leftist cultural critics are right. One day, "nucular" might be treated the same as "ah" for "I" or "crick" for "creek" -- a regional accent that's not wrong, but just different. It might even become the "correct" pronunciation, with "nuclear" sounding archaic or affected. It won't flow from a change to logic or morality, only a change of attitude by enough people in the influential classes, or by a change of who counts as the influential class.

So what of it? Well, if you're teaching a child (or an adult) to speak, of course you should teach him to say "nuclear," simply as an instrumental matter -- sounding high-class is usually (not always, but usually) more profitable, especially where the shibboleths are concerned. If you're making a purely esthetic judgment, well of course you're free to say "'Nucular' sounds ugly to me," just like you can say "Picasso looks ugly to me" or "Broccoli tastes bad to me." And if you're tr

So true.
Especially considering the Median house price is 600k in SF!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8633039/

Indeed. They appear to have successfully Bought my senator

1. http://www.aaronsw.com/2002/rss30
2. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000574
3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss3/

1. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000574
2. http://www.aaronsw.com/2002/rss30
3. http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/02/04/inco mpatible-rss

1. http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000574
2. http://www.aaronsw.com/2002/rss30
3. http://www.rssbandit.org/

Just an FYI, but there is some outsourcing of medical care happening. Here's a brief article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6199772/site/newsweek/ .

I also recall reading an article a year or so ago (I believe in Newsweek) of a man who traveled to India to receive some type of heart operation. Rather than go through the expensive US healthcare system, he decided to go to India. He was able to receive what he felt was a comparable level of care, but at a fraction of the cost. He was also able to receive luxury accomodations and was treated like a king.

So, this is purely anecdotal (feel free to look for the article), but it shows anything is possible. Of course, this isn't quite outsourcing as people in IT face. And I don't think you'd ever see the medical profession held in such low regards as IT, but it's still interesting (IMO, at least).

This is not 'real' inovation, they've been using the technique in Arfrica for years as a cheep way of producing glasses.

I coudln't find any info on google but I'm fairly sure they were invented by the wind up radio guy.

or if your really after pior art, it looks like the Greeks may have beaten them to it by 3000 years.

Here's an encarta link too

A recent article points out that the sky is actually a range of wavelengths which we perceive as "blue" because of color mixing in the eye. So it's not just a special property of that frequency of blue, but rather an illusion that nets out to that blue.

I didn't rush. I started this just-dinged-level-59 char on january 1 of 2005 and have played a bunch of alts to ~30 when I run out of rested on the main guy. There were a couple of server-jumps to follow my friends as well. There has not been ANY rushing. I find that I know where things are in the game, and the rushed folks do not. I find level 60 people asking my level 32 alt chars "Where can I get a lot of wool?" and I answer them. I definitely haven't rushed.

I believe I stated clearly that there's a ton of fun to be had between 1-59; this is why so many of us enjoy starting new chars over and over again. Perhaps I should've said the game restarts at sixty? The comfortable pvp and regularly-attainable equipment, that much of us remember from text-based MUD games, that stuff really starts at higher levels. Suddenly the people you group with know where you need to go to get a chance at some epic drop. The game definitely changes there and I'm reporting that:

• other folks have said "it starts at 60"
• I think I see what they mean

Not only haven't I rushed, but I also now have about 3GB of screenshots on my HDD (some of which are available to slashdot here.

Finally, when I said "There's quite a bit I haven't seen" there's some clarification that I should've included. One: I have not played past level 23 on any alliance char. I haven't seen a lot of their areas. Two: my only highlevel char is, as I said, 59; there are a crapload of instances that I've not seen yet that are becoming available to me as I get quests completed.

It's no wonder Hollywood is considering alternatives, they've just experienced their worst box-office slump in 20 years. Ticket sales are down nearly 8% compared with 2004. With movie revenue quickly shrinking (due to lackluster movies, overpriced tickets and dvd's), this seems like a logical transition for Hollywood studios.

There is no slump!

This so called "slump" is just political marketing on the part of the big studios. There is no slump as far as they are concerned. In fact, their theaterical revenues went UP 10% from $797M to $870M for the first 3 quarters of the year.
REF: http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/US205MPA.htm

The real hit has been to indie and otherwise non-MPAA films, they are the ones that have been losing out at the box office. You can find more details in the pair of articles here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2123286/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7421924/

uhhh...
http://www.senate.gov/~kohl/press/statements/20053 09430.html
that ain't an idiot like me talking, that's one of your father's former colleagues who said...

"Such blatantly anti-competitive conduct by the oil cartel violates the most basic principles of fair competition and free markets and should not be tolerated."

another opinion on price fixing...
http://slate.msn.com/id/77957/

i am not a conspiracy theorist. i just think that corporations have too much power nowadays and that they have no conscience that tells them what is right and what is wrong. and that the government is not doing its job of protecting the rights of the citizens, and instead has found a higher paying job of doing what corporations want and lying to the public.
an example...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7804770/

it is only logical for corporations to try to fix prices! they are going to do whatever they can to do what they are designed to do...generate more and more profit. getting rid of competition or collaborating with competition will do that for them. that is my reason for thinking there is price/supply fixing. you can say "well, i've seen the inside of government and corporations, and, believe me, there isn't". and, even if you really believe that, i simply will still believe what i believe.

"And then all end up jail. Yeah, right."

okay, i think you're missing one of my points all along. my point, that i'm sure you know, is that things don't work like they do in theory. in theory, those fines from the crimes exxon committed would stop them from doing crimes in the future, but those fines won't. those fines are only another part of the cost/benefit analysis that a company does when it decides to do something. and even fines like $500 million are not enough of a disincentive to deter a company as big as exxon. i think the fines that these companies face should absolutely cripple them. that is the only way that corporate power can be checked, because that is the ONLY thing that it understands, money.

and, if amazon cooked the books, i don't think they would most likely end up in jail...

they might be found not guilty...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8293846/

they might not ever go to trial (5 years and waiting...)
kenneth "kenny boy" lay

or they might get a "harsh" penalty...
bernie ebbers

just look at this page...
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/features/scandal_s heet.asp?cbsReferrer=www.google.com

the majority of those on that page are NOT in jail, years after their crimes were committed. i understand that justice is slow and these cases are complicated, but still.
now, compare the page of corporate scandals' status with this one about mandatory drug dealing sentences...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snit ch/primer/
(scroll down to the mandatory sentences table)

now, who did more damage? the guy coming out of the ghetto, with no father, no education, a lifetime of dissapointment and discrimination, who has drugs in his pocket because that is what everyone else does and that's the only way he sees to make money or the corporate criminal destroyed the financial savings and jobs of thousands of people because he was greedy?

now do you see why i think there some type of fishy business going on? i mean look at the penalties. they fined samuel waskal $4 million dollars and sent him to jail for 7 years. but he got $73 million in compensation in ONE year! plus he'll most likely get out early. so, when he gets out he'll have millions of dollars in the bank

uhhh...
http://www.senate.gov/~kohl/press/statements/20053 09430.html
that ain't an idiot like me talking, that's one of your father's former colleagues who said...

"Such blatantly anti-competitive conduct by the oil cartel violates the most basic principles of fair competition and free markets and should not be tolerated."

another opinion on price fixing...
http://slate.msn.com/id/77957/

i am not a conspiracy theorist. i just think that corporations have too much power nowadays and that they have no conscience that tells them what is right and what is wrong. and that the government is not doing its job of protecting the rights of the citizens, and instead has found a higher paying job of doing what corporations want and lying to the public.
an example...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7804770/

it is only logical for corporations to try to fix prices! they are going to do whatever they can to do what they are designed to do...generate more and more profit. getting rid of competition or collaborating with competition will do that for them. that is my reason for thinking there is price/supply fixing. you can say "well, i've seen the inside of government and corporations, and, believe me, there isn't". and, even if you really believe that, i simply will still believe what i believe.

"And then all end up jail. Yeah, right."

okay, i think you're missing one of my points all along. my point, that i'm sure you know, is that things don't work like they do in theory. in theory, those fines from the crimes exxon committed would stop them from doing crimes in the future, but those fines won't. those fines are only another part of the cost/benefit analysis that a company does when it decides to do something. and even fines like $500 million are not enough of a disincentive to deter a company as big as exxon. i think the fines that these companies face should absolutely cripple them. that is the only way that corporate power can be checked, because that is the ONLY thing that it understands, money.

and, if amazon cooked the books, i don't think they would most likely end up in jail...

they might be found not guilty...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8293846/

they might not ever go to trial (5 years and waiting...)
kenneth "kenny boy" lay

or they might get a "harsh" penalty...
bernie ebbers

just look at this page...
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/features/scandal_s heet.asp?cbsReferrer=www.google.com

the majority of those on that page are NOT in jail, years after their crimes were committed. i understand that justice is slow and these cases are complicated, but still.
now, compare the page of corporate scandals' status with this one about mandatory drug dealing sentences...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snit ch/primer/
(scroll down to the mandatory sentences table)

now, who did more damage? the guy coming out of the ghetto, with no father, no education, a lifetime of dissapointment and discrimination, who has drugs in his pocket because that is what everyone else does and that's the only way he sees to make money or the corporate criminal destroyed the financial savings and jobs of thousands of people because he was greedy?

now do you see why i think there some type of fishy business going on? i mean look at the penalties. they fined samuel waskal $4 million dollars and sent him to jail for 7 years. but he got $73 million in compensation in ONE year! plus he'll most likely get out early. so, when he gets out he'll have millions of dollars in the bank

uhhh...
http://www.senate.gov/~kohl/press/statements/20053 09430.html
that ain't an idiot like me talking, that's one of your father's former colleagues who said...

"Such blatantly anti-competitive conduct by the oil cartel violates the most basic principles of fair competition and free markets and should not be tolerated."

another opinion on price fixing...
http://slate.msn.com/id/77957/

i am not a conspiracy theorist. i just think that corporations have too much power nowadays and that they have no conscience that tells them what is right and what is wrong. and that the government is not doing its job of protecting the rights of the citizens, and instead has found a higher paying job of doing what corporations want and lying to the public.
an example...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7804770/

it is only logical for corporations to try to fix prices! they are going to do whatever they can to do what they are designed to do...generate more and more profit. getting rid of competition or collaborating with competition will do that for them. that is my reason for thinking there is price/supply fixing. you can say "well, i've seen the inside of government and corporations, and, believe me, there isn't". and, even if you really believe that, i simply will still believe what i believe.

"And then all end up jail. Yeah, right."

okay, i think you're missing one of my points all along. my point, that i'm sure you know, is that things don't work like they do in theory. in theory, those fines from the crimes exxon committed would stop them from doing crimes in the future, but those fines won't. those fines are only another part of the cost/benefit analysis that a company does when it decides to do something. and even fines like $500 million are not enough of a disincentive to deter a company as big as exxon. i think the fines that these companies face should absolutely cripple them. that is the only way that corporate power can be checked, because that is the ONLY thing that it understands, money.

and, if amazon cooked the books, i don't think they would most likely end up in jail...

they might be found not guilty...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8293846/

they might not ever go to trial (5 years and waiting...)
kenneth "kenny boy" lay

or they might get a "harsh" penalty...
bernie ebbers

just look at this page...
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/features/scandal_s heet.asp?cbsReferrer=www.google.com

the majority of those on that page are NOT in jail, years after their crimes were committed. i understand that justice is slow and these cases are complicated, but still.
now, compare the page of corporate scandals' status with this one about mandatory drug dealing sentences...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snit ch/primer/
(scroll down to the mandatory sentences table)

now, who did more damage? the guy coming out of the ghetto, with no father, no education, a lifetime of dissapointment and discrimination, who has drugs in his pocket because that is what everyone else does and that's the only way he sees to make money or the corporate criminal destroyed the financial savings and jobs of thousands of people because he was greedy?

now do you see why i think there some type of fishy business going on? i mean look at the penalties. they fined samuel waskal $4 million dollars and sent him to jail for 7 years. but he got $73 million in compensation in ONE year! plus he'll most likely get out early. so, when he gets out he'll have millions of dollars in the bank

Pepsi runs television ads in which they clearly identify themselves as the sponsor of the ad. Had they deceptively referred to Coca-Cola as the sponsor, they would be in serious trouble.

However, this discussion is about search engine advertising. I just googled for Pepsi and found no advertisements for Coke that triggered from the keyword.

... while some guy in Korea murdered another guy over a rare sword that existed only in an MMORPG.

CHINA, not Korea. It happened in SHANGHAI. Geez, do a little research, tens of thousands of people are going to read your submission...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8143073/

Happy now? Time to stop the denial then.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5217861/ http://www.zapworld.com/cars/smartCar.asp "Hybrids are crap, utter crap until they get on their worst day 50mpg." On my worst day I got 53 MPG. Darn the day... I was traveling 75mph on a highway. I never have gone below that, but I do admit that I am much more gentle when the light turns green and I do not rely on the air conditioning very much. (Although I was using the air conditioning when I got the 53 mpg.)

That makes perfect sense for him to say more and more imports come from overseas.

First of all, the point was that Bush's defenders are so bereft of ideas that they are reduced to using fabricated statements to support their man.

In the case of this quote, Salon provides some context:

"It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas."--Beaverton, Ore., Sep. 25, 2000

Furthermore, the Salon page provides over 350 other absurd statements by Bush. It makes one wonder if he actually knows what he is saying even when he manages to sound reasonably coherent.

I'm not sure if this is kosher on /. or not, but the OP brief is a direct ripoff of an MSN Money article of (almost) the same name. I know because I read the MSN article this morning.

Maybe they'll send her to their "faith based" prison to repent.

I read the msnbc.com article on this. The gist of it I believe was that Microsoft filed the patent after the iPod came out, and Apple was slow to file for the patent. Apparently prior art means nothing to the patent office.

I suspect the human population will be in the hundreds of millions, by the end of the century, rather than the projected tens of billions.

In some places the population is already declining. The fertility rate for children is 2.1 yet many places have under 2 births per couple especially in western Europe. Fact is is that as education, equality, and income increases birht rates drop. China and India, the two largest countries in population, are both seeing declining fertility rates dropping in properous cities. Populations are starting to level off and in 20 to 50 year could be steadily declining at current rates. It's sad to say, to some anyway, that as wages raise the perception of the need to have children drops, where before people felt they had to have lots of kids so they can be taken care of in old age, people now feels having children gets in the way of their careers, lifestyles, and such.

"What? Of course the climate changes! I don't think anyone ever denied this. The important question isn't even if humans affect change, because we do." Well now there you go again, to quote a famous president, trying to rewrite history. The neocons have long denied that global warming is happening. The Bush administration is still doing it. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6341451/ Now I'm going to to go googling for past quotes by the administration and many other neocons regarding the denial of global warming because I dont have the time and you have access to google too. That is if you really believe what you have stated. I am pretty much in agreement with the rest of your post. I do think we can slow it down, maybe even reverse it but that will take time. In the mean time we need to decide what to expect and what to do about the changes coming up. Also to those who claim there have been warm periods before and it is caused by natural cycle of things. There are explanations for the warming periods in the past such as increased volcanic activity, meteors, etc. In this case there are no such explanations while increased human caused CO2 release does explain at least part of it. Deforstation also interrupts the cycle of removing C02 as well as adding CO2 into the air from rotting or burning vegetation. The exposure of long frozen peat may add even more CO2. While those are part of a natural process, it comes into play because of man made causes which started them.

First off, yes, there were denials of warming by some neocons. At least until now:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8917093/

Then there's the argument that, oh, the environment will just adjust and absorb the carbon. Nope:

http://www.sundayherald.com/51146
http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/umw elt_naturschutz/bericht-47597.html

Oh, and why worry, it's just heat, right?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/20 02377292_ocean13m.html
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L29498448 .htm
http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2005/08/05/ne ws/community/friloc07.txt
http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/pr/news/2005/news8474. html

Why Hello Thar!

Wait, sorry, that was a link from our universe. In your bizarro world, all you got was a headline about TSA agents being reprimanded for harassing a white guy instead of focusing on those dark skinned death machines.

What "type of information" are you talking about? You have credible information that dark skinned guys are going to attack? Funny, the link you gave was for credible information that Al Qaeda was going to attack. Something seems a little different there, but I can't quite put my finger on it, can you?

normally I would have laughed, but I just read the following article about a man who died several minutes after playing a game for 50 hours in a korean internet cafe:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8888579/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4584576/

AIDS, few births slowing population growth

So, even that simple article says that the slowdown is due to a combination of family planning and disease.

What the article doesn't talk about is the disruptive effect of loss of arable land and consequent famine and migration into cities.

Human population growth is slowing because we are not only far beyond sustainable levels, we are approaching population levels that can't even be supported through unsustainable plunder of the environment.

That is not going to happen while hundreds of millions of people, billions world-wide, still depend on radio for entertainment, news, education and emergency services. Bringing radio to rural Africa

I believe this is what you are takling about. :) Though I can't find a price.

A barrel of oil is currently running at approximately $63. This is 42 gallons. I'm not sure how refining $1.50 / gallon oil into $0.50 / gallon gasoline works, but I'm guessing the oil companies would be willing to give you millions of dollars for the secret.

(And yes, I realize that portions of the refined oil become other products, but the largest portion does become either diesel or gasoline. Point is, $0.50 / gallon is extremely incorrect.)

Don't worry, be happy. Of course I should just ignore Bush, and how he's created this disaster. Because he's just some slacker, you know? I appreciate your interest in my life becoming more fulfilling. And that you want to help me, and the "undecided" people, to come together to do things right for a change. But we got into this situation by letting reasonable people be "too nice", too polite, too willing to play the loser according to the rules of the Bush team that's killing us. The "undecided" people don't need softer voices. How much more evidence do we need, that we elected the wrong guys to lead us out of our broken economy, attacks by backwards armageddonists, and a nation at its own throat over every possible issue? The fact is that the facts are actually getting to people, after years of media excuses for the "regular guy" from the aristocrat family. Those facts need to be shouted at people too jaded to care that they're helping Bush destroy the country by sitting around doing nothing, by pretending they "don't know" what to make of Bush's latest failure, our latest defeat under his leadership. If that "turns some people off", then someone nicer will have to get to them, or maybe no one ever will. The facts are ugly, and much worse than some angry accusation from my posts. People thinking about these issues will be much worse abused by consequences of their continued complicity in our failures than by my harsh words.

The logic is simple: we let Bush run our country, and he's ruining it. The details are simple, though worse: Bush was responsible for our defense (especially having run on a "strong defense") when we were successfully attacked, so he's responsible for that attack's success. You have only to look at his "deer in the headlights" expression, during the seven minutes he stayed to read _My Pet Goat_ to a room of Florida children, rather than rush to defend the country, to understand just how useless is Bush in actually leading the country. Then watch as he turns an attack by Saudis, backed by Pakistanis, based in Afghanistan, into a counterattack first on Afghanistan (OK), then converted into a massive war on Iraq, which had nothing to do with it. Then watch as the Afghanistan war gets left on the back burner, letting the attackers regroup, while the Iraq war generates many more new attackers. Then watch as our closest allies in those wars, Spain and Britain, get attacked, according to a plan known to the Pentagon since the Iraq war started, which specifies leaving America unattacked, to strip us of our allies. Watch as Spain and Britain abandon us in Iraq, along with all our other allies we've alienated during these wars by screwing up our diplomatic relations with them at every turn. It's hard not to then notice the logic of our screwing up every step that's gotten us to the undeniably bad strategic position we're in, to say nothing of the thousands of dead Americans, tens/hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and Afghanis. That's what I said in the message you're cautioning me about. The logic is simple: we keep screwing up, and we're losing chances to win, and therefore survive. And the "we" is Bush and his administration, along with the people who keep pretending that the news is bad, but the facts are good. Logic dictates that we abandon that self-destructive fantasy, if we want to win, to survive.

What's my "political agenda"? That's pretty simple, too: get us out of the losing corner we've bullshitted ourselves into. So we can survive as a free society. Along the way, we'll obviously have to discard these failures who've sent us into our death spiral. But that "agenda" isn't hidden, and it's certainly not some extra baggage. Pretending that we can't do better than Bush, or that having a Commander in Chief who can think for himself, and outthink our enemies is some kind of unattainable or unnecessary goal, is keeping us victims when we should be running circles around these Keystone Terrorists. Pretending that calling

Into the Woods: Economics and declining birthrates are pushing large swaths of Europe back to their primeval state, with wolves taking the place of people.

I'm not sure if this is good or bad, but I think the "population bomb" never went off.

You have a valid point about Garfield, but much of the reasons for the popularity of Garfield are precisely the reasons you have given - the well engineered mediocrity and conformity hard coded into the Garfield universe. Read this slate piece about it: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102299/


--------
My Pop Culture Theme Quizzes, have fun reading and solving them.
The First
The Second
The Third
Solutions to #1