Slashdot Mirror

I saw this on a newsgroup post earlier today:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: iTunes 11 now available
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2012 20:38:19 -0500
From: JF Mezei
Organization: Unlimited download news at news.astraweb.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.system
References:

Found an interesting tidbit:

> http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/apple-rolls-out-a-cleaner-itunes/?src=recg

##
You can now redeem iTunes gift cards without having to type in that
723-digit code number. Just hold the bar code up to your computerâ(TM)s
Webcam; iTunes does the rest.
##

That is neat.

A few months ago North Korea's young new leader was seen on TV with Mickey Mouse. It was bizarre, and Disney had no part in it. The best theories I've heard suggest that he is trying to bring some hope and light into the lives of his people. I'm not sure if announcing that unicorns are real and that they're native to North Korea is the best way to do that, but that's probably what's going on here.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/11/29/world/asia/china-north-korea-leader-is-sexiest-man-no-longer.xml

http://www.theonion.com/articles/kim-jongun-named-the-onions-sexiest-man-alive-for,30379/

I hope it "fails" just like solar research has - about a 90% cost reduction in 30 years.

But the cost fell too quickly, leaving politically connected manufacturers with stranded costs. So now we have government action to raise the cost again.

The government, picking winners and losers!

I'm not sure if you're serious or just don't know what you're talking about, but no, this isn't picking winners and losers.

Giving A123 Systems a 132 million dollar grant is picking winners and losers.

This is funding research into a problem that needs solving. Argonne National Laboratory is already set up to do research, so all they need is some bright scientists and engineers to get started.

Having said that, I think a 5 time improvement in battery technology is optimistic, but at least they're trying.

Anyone knowing anything about BGP and stuff can tell that there are no more facts than this:

All IP ranges behind AS29386 seem to be offline.

Other than that, all we have is speculation. Cloudflame is in no position to "confirm" something.
It could be this way, it could be another way around.

It would not surprise me if some stupid gov shut of parts of internet. But in this case even the Syrian official TV channel had no internet and their daily press overview programme was forced to use only papers.

Also of note: this NYT piece makes it quite clear that it is in US interests not allow Syrian internet presence.

As I said, I have to do my own research, I do not trust people that's all. Why would I trust people? The majority on the TV box and the Internet right now are spewing incredible propaganda that the 'rich' for example are paying low taxes, even 'historically low taxes' (hopefully they do mean when compared to 40s and 50s, hopefully, because before 1913 there were no income taxes of any kind at all and that's when US economy was actually built, the towns, the factories, everything, and that's taking into account the most bloody war on US soil).

So once again, what I see from actual documents is: 0.178% of people in 1958 paid 35% or more in income taxes (or were in those brackets) and they contributed 3.5% of all income tax revenue to the federal government.

Today 2% of people pay 35% or more in income taxes (or fall into those brackets) and that's 2.5 million and they contribute 41.5% of all income taxes. That's more than 10 times the people and that's insane increase in ratio of how much they pay into the system compared to the 1958.

236 people were in 91% tax bracket, it doesn't mean that they paid too much in those brackets, it means it was a small number of people and clearly people who are smart enough to make enough money to be in 91% tax bracket are intelligent enough to avoid paying most of their money in taxes in the first place. So these must be outliers. My point is that a very small percentage of people paid high taxes at the time and to understand it you have to understand that in 1958 it was very easy not to pay taxes at all.

1. you could deduct any loss from any gain. You could deduct house depreciation (it is in those tax documents, I suggest you open them, I linked to them), you could deduct stock market losses and carry credits into the next years even, you could deduct stock market losses from your salary dollar per dollar FFS, that's impossible today. Today the maximum deduction you can have is 3000 dollars. So if you lose 100K on the stock market and your salary is 150K you can't deduct 100K, you can deduct a maximum of 3000. That's a huge difference.

2. You could deduct any purchase whatsoever from your income. You could buy a yacht, a plane, a pen or a chair or take a trip. People deducted club memberships and casino losses! You could deduct all of your expenses from your income, and there was only 1 type of income, not 4 different types of income as today, losses from which can't be deducted one from another.

Again, I explain here how taxes affect people's behaviour in terms of consumption spending vs. investment, the higher the taxes (marginal rate) the less investment there will be, which is contrary to what Buffet likes to say nowadays, because he doesn't admit that investments are risky.

Sure sure, if somebody (gov't) guarantees your losses so you can't lose, then you can truly disregard the tax rate. If you lose, you'll be made whole by the gov't, if you win, you keep your after-tax portion and you can now re-invest again. It doesn't work this way in real life unless you are a bank OR Buffet actually. The guy is full of shit.

In any case I have to see the numbers on my own to make any sort of educated comment on this, otherwise it's like a bunch of blind people, each holding to a different part of an elephant, trying to describe what it is they are holding to each other.

US atmospheric carbon emissions have declined 20% since the mid-2000s peak. The main reason is conversion from coal to natural gas electricity. Secondary reasons are the Great Recession economic decline and the start of stronger Obama efficiency requirements. By 2015 the US should achieve the Kyoto treaty standards of 6% below 1990 levels.

The US becomes the biggest reducer due to being the 2nd largest carbon producer and its production decline.

The US shift to natural gas regulation was not because of greenhouse reasons. It was due to natural gas being cheaper than coal and anti-pollution laws against coal metal ash.

Let me clarify the record on the liar that is Warren Buffet.

He chooses to pay himself dividends, not a salary. This means that his earnings are taxed on both sides, the corporate side and the individual side. As the major stock holder of BH, Buffet pays 35% as a corporation (lower actually, he is fighting IRS on this, he wants to pay only 30% or so, there is a huge legal battle going on there).

His actual tax (just the federal portion, excluding the State tax), is 35% corporate and 15% dividend, which is about 44% total. Again, that's before State and other taxes. So he is a liar.

Now, he pays himself about 60Million in taxes out of about a billion or so that he earns as a corporation (and corporate earnings are his earnings, it doesn't matter what side they are taxed at, it's the money he can't give himself he has to give to the gov't). He was actually asked in a show about this, his response was: "well, I am giving away 99% of my money, so to me it doesn't matter what I pay as a corporation".

Do you not see a problem with that logic? If he gives 99% of money to charity, the fact that he is actually taxed at 35% or so as a corporation doesn't mean anything to him, he is going to give away all of his corporate earnings anyway, but this goes directly against his message that he is paying only 15% tax (pure nonsense).

Also Buffet likes to say that tax rates have no bearing on people making investment decisions.

I have explained this nonsense position in a comment here, the short of it is: if your investments are GUARANTEED to always succeed, that's one thing, but that's not how investments work, so taxes play a huge role in investment decisions, that's by the way why VCs are leaving.

Do you understand the problem with Buffet? AFAIC Buffet is paying back the gov't that bailed him out in 2009 through the AIG bailout with this propaganda. He'd be on the streets today if not for the tax payer money bailing out his company through AIG.

Also don't forget that BH (Buffet's company) profits directly from other companies being shut down, going into bankruptcy and such (which higher taxes help to set up) because BH buys companies in distress at a huge discount, restructures and sells them for parts.

...limnology? ? ? ?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-28/dupont-sends-in-former-cops-to-enforce-seed-patents-commodities.html

http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2012/11/21/why-so-secretive-the-trans-pacific-partnership-as-global-corporate-coup/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/frank-olson-cia-lawsuit_n_2206983.html

Now here's a great book about my fave subject written by a most astute and intelligent lady:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/fashion/naomi-wolf-on-her-new-book-vagina.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

They should have followed ConocoPhillips and their plans in China. Not only will they not face criminal charges, the government decided not to let the state controlled media report on it until it slipped out via a blog. Darn it! If only the government could control everything, we wouldn't have to worry about everyone else finding out about a little 320 square mile oil spill.

I can't recall too many high profile firings during Steve Jobs tenure

You mean like Mark Papermaster over the iPhone 4 antenna issues? Or the Mobile Me team lead?

Oh.

Has everyone here got some kind of amnesia? Because Jobs stories are rife with him firing people that displeased him. The current firings seem quite mild by comparison.

Oddly people now seem to think Apple under Steve Jobs was some kind of perfect mecca of products without issues and never an employee fired. That was never the case, but Apple Haters sure like to claim it was.

Point of Interest Reverend Fred McFeely Rogers actually sued a company once. This company no longer exists.

Aboutthe lawsuit, rightfully so.

Mr. Rogers Sues to Stop T-shirts Picturing a Gun

The company no longer exists? really? If that's true, it wasn't because of the lawsuit. They used his image without permission. With things like this, the lawyers send a C&D letter. This company told Fred to stick it or ignored it so that he had no choice but to sue. The store in question had 280 outlets. If Fred's lawsuit took it out, then that huge chain of stores was in financial trouble to begin with.

Or you're the family of someone shady.

Or, you had your phone stolen by a shady person, then ported your number to a new (non-stolen) phone:

In some cases the records can include calls made to and from a victim’s new cellphone, if the stolen phone’s number has been transferred

Banish your ignorance - RTFA.

"when you buy that fake Movada, you're rolling with al Qaeda."

''Consequently, terrorist groups turned to a variety of activities, including charitable contributions, narcotics trafficking, cigarette smuggling and I believe selling counterfeit products,'' Mr. Johnson said.

Right from the article. Note the BOLD.

Give me a break.

"when you buy that fake Movada, you're rolling with al Qaeda."

I'm writing an article right now; let's see if it makes it to the front page of the NY Times: "Link Found Between People That Are Alive and Breathing and Terrorist Planning"

/snark

The prospect of finding an alien civilization that uses hairspray is not very good, given that Little Green Men rarely have hair in Hollywood or Roswell. However, CFCs are less likely to be an indicator of hairspray than plastic foam, circuit board manufacture, Star Trek-esque hypospray propellent, refrigerators or air conditioning. The NY Times just ran an article about how we're still venting CFCs from home central air units in the U.S., over 20 years after the big marketing push to eliminate them.

The prospect of finding an alien civilization that uses hairspray is not very good, given that Little Green Men rarely have hair in Hollywood or Roswell. However, CFCs are less likely to be an indicator of hairspray than plastic foam, circuit board manufacture, Star Trek-esque hypospray propellent, refrigerators or air conditioning. The NY Times just ran an article about how we're still venting CFCs from home central air units in the U.S., over 20 years after the big marketing push to eliminate them.

A lack of tax cuts doesn't seem to negatively affect the economy and since we have to either raise revenue or cut services, which will have a corresponding circular effect of giving people less money to spend , and so on, generating more revenue i.e. taxes seems to be the best option. Besides isn't that how most corporations have been run to into the ground in the US, by cutting expenses instead of a focus on generating new revenue?

"when you buy that fake Movada, you're rolling with al Qaeda."

Actually the budget needs to be cut by 0%. Austerity has failed horribly in Europe

Indeed, right when a recessed economy is getting back on its feet is no time for government cutbacks. As you say, generating jobs is the answer. Nor should we raise taxes on anyone whose tax rates will have an effect on their spending; i.e., tax the top 2% as much as you want, but leave the rest of us alone. If my taxes go up, I can't afford to spend as much, but if Warren Buffet's taxes go up it won't affect his spending or investment in the least. He has an insightful quote in a NY Times piece:

SUPPOSE that an investor you admire and trust comes to you with an investment idea. âoeThis is a good one,â he says enthusiastically. âoeIâ(TM)m in it, and I think you should be, too.â

Would your reply possibly be this? âoeWell, it all depends on what my tax rate will be on the gain youâ(TM)re saying weâ(TM)re going to make. If the taxes are too high, I would rather leave the money in my savings account, earning a quarter of 1 percent.â Only in Grover Norquistâ(TM)s imagination does such a response exist.

Between 1951 and 1954, when the capital gains rate was 25 percent and marginal rates on dividends reached 91 percent in extreme cases, I sold securities and did pretty well. In the years from 1956 to 1969, the top marginal rate fell modestly, but was still a lofty 70 percent â" and the tax rate on capital gains inched up to 27.5 percent. I was managing funds for investors then. Never did anyone mention taxes as a reason to forgo an investment opportunity that I offered.

Under those burdensome rates, moreover, both employment and the gross domestic product (a measure of the nationâ(TM)s economic output) increased at a rapid clip. The middle class and the rich alike gained ground.

The colonies are explicitly approved by the Israeli government. Most so-called "outposts" are promoted to full "settlement" status. There is nothing tacit about it. Their plan is to colonize and annex as much territory as possible with as few non-Jews as possible. So they can preserve their precious Jewish majority that was created by force. Jewish settlers receive assistance from the Israeli government, protection from the army, special roads that only they can drive on, and are under the Israeli legal system. The indiginous non-Jews can't drive from town to town, are under martial law, and suffer from malnutrition while their crops wither in their fields because they are unable to leave their homes to harvest them. In Gaza, Israel counts their calories and prevents the importation of food leading to stunted growth of children. Israel even prevents the export of food and goods, ensuring that the Palestinians remain under the thumb of Israel. All of this has been going on for decades prior to the establishment of Hamas.

But hey, they shoot rockets back at Israel so it's all OK, right?

um... can you point to instances of premeditated violence against non-combatants as sanctioned by the US government?

Why should I have to? It isn't me who decided to define terrorism in such a way as it couldn't apply to a government. I suppose they had a reason for that.

collateral is not exactly premeditated.

I never said anything about "collateral", however:

If I do a thing at it has an effect I can assume that if I do it again it might have the same effect.

The second (and subsequent) times I can't claim that that effect is unintended.

agents engaged in active conspiracy against US citizens and military targets are not non-combatants.

I never said anything about this, either, however:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=3

It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.

Remember, this is the BBC, who took a corporate decision in 2006 to pursue an alarmist reporting stance.

Technique one - ad homineum attack on the messenger. A study was done. That study was reported. Attempt to discredit the study by attacking the credibility of the entity doing the reporting. Instead considering the worth of the study itself, the hope is the integrity of the study will be smeared by smearing the entity that reported it.

Technique two- change the topic. We were talking about the effect of global warming on the oceanic food web , now we're going to start talking instead about the BBC and whether they're biased or not.

The original paper says that this is only a pilot study, and that it cannot definitely point to any disadvantage to the animals - 'they MAY suffer increased predation' is a typical comment

Technique three, misrepresent normal and appropriate scientific qualification of results as a license to dismiss the study's findings. The fact is, no single study is definitive. That's normal science. The certainty increases as each successive study is confirmed, amplified, and new studies support the same conclusions using different approaches. Each study considered individually comes with caveats; the picture of reality emerges from an aggregation of such studies. This is called "normal science" and it's how science gets to truth. This study fits into that framework.

Technique four- decontextualize the study from the larger supporting body of related evidence. Closely related to technique three above, the mass of evidence pointing to the devastating effects of oceanic acidification on the food web is incontrovertible. This study reinforces and elaborates this finding with new evidence. Seen in its proper context, this study's relevance increases because its findings are congruent with other studies showing the same disturbing trend- acidification of the oceans is assaulting the food web in the ocean.

The smallest part of the omitted scientific context:

http://www.ocean-acidification.net/FAQeco.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/10/ocean-acidification-epoca

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/opinion/acid-test-for-oceans-and-marine-life.html?_r=0

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/03/02/436193/science-ocean-acidifying-so-fast-it-threatens-humanity-ability-to-feed-itself/

http://oceana.org/en/our-work/climate-energy/ocean-acidification/learn-act/effects-of-ocean-acidification-on-marine-species-ecosystems

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/06/local/la-me-acidic-oceans-20121007

http://www.examiner.com/article/lethal-carbon-dioxide-and-ocean-acidification-threaten-marine-life

What every one of our foreign competitors has chosen over the past several generations is a public health insurance system like unemployment insurance, which we already have for a lot of Americans in either Medicare, Medicaid, VA insurance and some others.

I would count Germany, for example, as a competitor, but they don't have a fully-public health insurance system. However, it has a lot more "gummint interference" than I suspect would be acceptable to fans of the free market.

Actually, Obama spent more, which puts lie to that. Half of Obama's Super PAC donations were of more than US$1m, while those of Romney's made up only a third of his total. So that puts lie to that as well.

Do your homework BEFORE posting nonsense, not after.

Massachusetts: Gas Explosion Levels Building

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/24/us/massachusetts-gas-explosion-levels-building.html

It's interesting how Apple is more profitable, but it seems that Google is the one getting the attention. Apple was highlighted by the NYT in April of 2012: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1353677512-m5vLQkPH5461NGq9bcQvqw

Here's an article from 1895, http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9B01EEDC113AE533A25756C1A9669D94649ED7CF&scp=1&sq=%22age+of+consent%22+delaware&st=p click the PDF link for the full article.
Note that it is women complaining about how low the age of consent is, especially in Delaware where it is 7 years of age. So as recently as a 117 years ago it was OK to have sex with a 7 year old in at least one State with it considered rape if she was under 7.

Well, here is what the NYT has to say http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/opinion/no-model-for-muslim-democracy.html , not that they are the most reliable of sources.

As an IT administrator all I can say is your attitude is poor. Why does the average worker need access to facebook and twitter? they are paid to work not to slack of tweeting and updating profiles.

That guy you just accused of having a poor attitude is your boss's boss. You don't have the right to tell him what he can and cant do with his corporate account. Your job Is to harden the system so that the things he feels the need to do with his equipment does not damage the company.

Too many IT people forget their place in the company. They are not corporate officers, and have no right to dictate company policies. They can make recommendations to the governing bodies, but making IT policy is *not* the IT departments mandate, enforcing it is.

Just because *you* think something is frivolous, doesn't mean that it is. Access to Pandora may not seem like a corporate necessity, but it could boost productivity. People could be using facebook and twitter in ways that are helping to improve communication within a company. Several of my co-workers spread across three states use twitter and flickr to do well what we paid a ton of many to have our sharepoint system do, only not as well. In short, if you have a productivity problem, it is a problem of local management: you're not going to fix it through draconian corporate IT policies, in fact, those corporate IT policies will likely make the problem worse not better, and can drive away otherwise qualified talent. If you treat your employees like criminals, then you will eventually get what you think you've got.

-=Geoskd

First the directors of the company generally sets the policies and in ITs case we follow them though we help engineer the policies when technical input is required but by your own responce we do what we are told. If your working for a company that doesnt consult with IT for data security or any related IT matters then i seriously do wonder what your IT department is doing. Often the higher ups in my company will seek guidance from the IT department when thinking about shinny toy A or B because they want to follow the company policy and keep the company safe.

Not sure which bit of my statement outright banned the use of any social technology. In your stated case its obvioulsy a usefull tool but that isnt the case 100% of the time. People need the right tools to do their job and not distractions from said job which the original poster seems to think is a right of employment.

A LASER GUIDED BOMB accurate enough to hit a fucking shoebox.

Yeah. You've just proven Jews kill civilians in Gaza on purpose.

As an IT administrator all I can say is your attitude is poor. Why does the average worker need access to facebook and twitter? they are paid to work not to slack of tweeting and updating profiles.

That guy you just accused of having a poor attitude is your boss's boss. You don't have the right to tell him what he can and cant do with his corporate account. Your job Is to harden the system so that the things he feels the need to do with his equipment does not damage the company.

Too many IT people forget their place in the company. They are not corporate officers, and have no right to dictate company policies. They can make recommendations to the governing bodies, but making IT policy is *not* the IT departments mandate, enforcing it is.

Just because *you* think something is frivolous, doesn't mean that it is. Access to Pandora may not seem like a corporate necessity, but it could boost productivity. People could be using facebook and twitter in ways that are helping to improve communication within a company. Several of my co-workers spread across three states use twitter and flickr to do well what we paid a ton of many to have our sharepoint system do, only not as well. In short, if you have a productivity problem, it is a problem of local management: you're not going to fix it through draconian corporate IT policies, in fact, those corporate IT policies will likely make the problem worse not better, and can drive away otherwise qualified talent. If you treat your employees like criminals, then you will eventually get what you think you've got.

-=Geoskd

Firstly the Nasa mistake was actually caused by Lockheed Martin. Lockheed's Deepwater fiasco cost an atrocious amount of money (Billions), and turned the Coast Guard's old (but still usable) cutters into scrap. According to congressional testimony these 8 cutters were unfit to gift to Panama to use in river patrol suffering from 'prematurely' cracked hulls. They would make those mistakes anyway, being (imho) the Microsoft of the Aerospace world.

As for the Tokyo incident, how do you not notice that an axle doesn't fit? If there is slop in it, it's pretty easy to tell there is a problem. The individuals responsible would find ways to make other costly mistakes. Besides these were ASIANS, come on man, if they can't do it, there is no hope for the rest of us. Unless Russians are better at math than Asians? Since we're all being so racist anyway...

I really dislike the idea of America having such racist standards, and it isn't that I am one of those double think monkeys, that loves the idea of celebrating our diversity through being 'Politically Correct', as celebrating diversity by removing it is impressively thoughtless.

Costly mistakes happen regardless (page iv)

I do agree that the metric system is a better system to use as it's flexibility, range, and ease of precisional use keep things more straight forward. I use it myself whenever I am calculating something that matters. I however recognize that it is a person's free choice to use whatever system they prefer. I don't believe in government mandates, I would rather have inefficiency with my freedom, so I won't gripe about it, and overall? It isn't that big of a deal. Converting from one system to another is just one small hassle of an engineering challenge, and life is not ideal. Think of the many many times that people throughout the world convert from one system of calculation, or measurement to another without error.

The biggest problem with our educational system is the way that we are taught. We should be presented with concepts, and have a very firm grasp of them BEFORE vocabulary is introduced. This gives the human mind (at least mine) a firm handle to actually conceptualize, and retain the area being studied. It is a lot like learning hands on for it's effectiveness. It needs to be known that understanding the concept is 90% of education. The vocabulary is necessary, but without a firm grasp on the concept, there is no foundation, and the inextricably linked series of memories that we like to call 'education' will be washed away, never to return. In our current state we would be far better of by polling people who have exited K-12 schools 5 years down the road, and only teaching the things that those people remembered...

Except R isn't interested in compromise. For example, way back when Obama started with redoing health care, he invited the Republicans to participate and said "Lets start with the plan from one of YOUR people, John McCain." The response was that that plan was unacceptable and that they wouldn't participate AT ALL.

Please find less biased sources of news. What actually went down couldn't have been farther from the truth. If you want the truth, you follow the moderates (like Olympia Snowe for instance, who originally voted FOR the healthcare bill in initial committee, but quickly grew frustrated as the size of scope of the bill spiraled out of control and no one wanted to continue discussing it). What actually happened (and was flat out stated in the press by Dems) is that they believed in 2008 that they had a "mandate" delivered by the people to avoid Republican ideas at all costs (remember the "your policies fucked the country, now we get to drive" rhetoric Obama continually spewed?) This "mandate" concept is happening yet again, where now Obama seems to think the people want him to be a stickler for fucking the rich: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/11/14/obama-signals-hes-firm-on-raising-taxes-for-wealthiest-americans-obama-signals-hes-firm-on-raising-taxes

You want to see compromise? See what length Boehner took to TRY to make a debt deal happen and then look at how easily Obama undid months of effort by attempting to move the goalposts at the last minute: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/magazine/obama-vs-boehner-who-killed-the-debt-deal.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Read that and then tell me the Republicans are the only ones who have a compromise problem.

Following this idea, your driver licence is the mark of the beast. Last time I checked no christians, no matter how fundamentalist, still carry it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/us/25mennonites.html?_r=0

Amish and Mennonites having to move to a different state due to their rejection of new drivers licenses and having to give up travel to Canada because they won't accept the passport such travel now requires.

Our company had open enrollment for our medical benefits this month. For the first time in awhile, the costs went up SIGNIFICANTLY.

Irrelevant if it's lowered in one area and raised in another (and, so far, I don't see any examples of my taxes being any lower whatsoever in the last few years).

Well guess what. We had our open enrollment a few weeks ago too. Guess how much mine went up? 4%. And if you include the employer paid portion, overall it's up 6%. That's about on par with previous years. So if Obamacare is responsible for these SIGNIFICANT increases, how come I'm not seeing them? I'll give you the answer. It's one of 2 things. Either your employer/insurer is using Obamacare as a convenient excuse to take a piss on you and jack up rates, or your previous "coverage" was piss poor and now you've actually got to pay a little more to get coverage that actually covers stuff. The former is not the fault of Obamacare. The latter is, but I have a hard time seeing that as a bad thing.

Where I work (a very large national engineering firm), they made it clear that the only part of the increase in rates this year attributable to Obamacare was for some increased women's preventive services (yes, including contraception). There really aren't that many other aspects of Obamacare that impinge on employer-provided health insurance (requiring coverage for dependents up to 26 y.o. is another - that went into effect last year). That was how Obamacare was designed - it had minimal impact on people who are already getting their insurance through their employers. In fact, not going for a single payer system is why it is so unpopular among liberals.

Now there may be more next year but blaming an increase this year on Obamacare is nonsense. Premiums went up where I work, but that was almost entirely attributable to increase use of medical services over the last year, requiring an increase in premiums.

And as for the GP's claim of no lower taxes over the last few years, it must be great making over $250K a year. (Federal) taxes for everyone else when down.

I don't know anyone [who was a skeptic] who became a believer in global warming.

You mean like Richard Muller who quite famously denounced anthropogenic global warming only to come to the same conclusion by his own means? Yeah, that opinion piece by him opens with "Call me a converted skeptic."

Oh, I get it, after it turns out that his research didn't back up your "beliefs", he must never have been a skeptic to begin with, right? Or perhaps when you made that statement you meant that you just don't know Richard Muller personally?

Political word games have always been such a pain in the ass.

But you are right that while peer reviewed journals move one way, the population moves the other:

The most striking result is the increase in the proportion of Americans who express strong doubt or rejection of the reality of global warming through their free associations. In 2003, only 7% of Americans provided “naysayer” images (e.g., “hoax,” or “no such thing”) when asked what thought or image first came to mind when they heard the term “global warming.” By 2010, however, 23% of Americans provided “naysayer” images.

This is especially ironic since Leahy is not only handling this warrantless wiretap issue, but he is also a man who has already has resigned from a Senate committee for his inability to keep secrets. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/29/us/iran-contra-hearings-senator-leahy-says-he-leaked-report-of-panel.html

If you want to lose weight, eat less!

Except to have the willpower to decide to eat less, you need to eat more! Oh, shit!

Israel assassinated one of the leaders of Hamas

The man who was killed, Ahmed al-Jabari, wasn't just "one of the leaders of Hamas". According to Gershon Baskin, who was involved in Israeli-Hamas negotiations:
"Passing messages between the two sides, I was able to learn firsthand that Mr. Jabari wasn’t just interested in a long-term cease-fire; he was also the person responsible for enforcing previous cease-fire understandings brokered by the Egyptian intelligence agency. Mr. Jabari enforced those cease-fires only after confirming that Israel was prepared to stop its attacks on Gaza. On the morning that he was killed, Mr. Jabari received a draft proposal for an extended cease-fire with Israel, including mechanisms that would verify intentions and ensure compliance. This draft was agreed upon by me and Hamas’s deputy foreign minister, Mr. Hamad, when we met last week in Egypt."

In other words, if Israel had really wanted a cease-fire agreement, they would have just waited for Jabari to sign the deal. Instead, they killed him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/opinion/hamass-illegitimacy.html

yes, overachievers are respected in the east. but bullying is just as strong in the east

so who is bullied?

the misfits

stupidity is the rallying cry of the western bully. conformity is the rallying cry of the eastern bully

and i will assert to you that the misfits hold more of the keys to cultural, political, social, and technological advancement in society than a mindlessly conforming unoriginal egghead

furthermore, we'll just wait for the asian eggheads to come to the west:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/world/asia/wary-of-future-many-professionals-leave-china.html?pagewanted=all

the west has problems, but let's keep some perspective here: china has no political freedom. those smart enough and rich enough to flee, do

for all the west's problems, we have a well-entrenched respect for the individual and political expression. as long as the west has that, our governments will be a lot more stable than in the east. a government has to rule by consensus, not fear, or it's time on this earth is limited. when china's economic growth cools in the long term, watch the real fun begin

i honestly believe eastern emphasis on conformity (aka "harmony") is far more deadly to social advancement and stability than the west's championing of the stupid

Not here. I was fingerprinted to run it against the FBI database to make sure I didn't have a previous record. I couldn't get employment without that background check. The FBI put my fingerprints in their system, and now, will have them as a reference. Of course, I shouldn't have anything to worry about, since I don't plan on doing anything wrong. Fortunately, no one was ever put in prison on circumstantial evidence ...

Of course, the FBI isn't interested in making a DNA database of people not convicted of a crime.

I honestly don't know much about the Muslim diaspora in the States, so I couldn't say. In my own home country, Russia, there is a pretty strong traditional Muslim culture, making the majority or near-majority in some regions, like Tatarstan and Bashkortostan. They're also pretty laid back, much as you describe - women don't wear veils, use cosmetics, date around etc, and really you would only know that they're Muslims if you ask, or if you happen to be around during one of their religious holidays like Kurban Bayram. But, again, those communities are being destroyed from within by spreading the violent message to their youth through Saudi-funded madrassah - it already got to the point where there is an active terrorist underground that is blowing up spiritual leaders of the traditionalist movement - and they also have their "legal wing", clergy that is slowly taking over mosques.

At this point, frankly, we (and I mean all stable, civilized states - tre West, China, Russia, India, Brazil etc) should probably just declare Wahhabism an inherently terrorist ideology, and persecute it as such. Don't wait until they start blowing your country up. Nail them when they're still opening their schools and mosques.

And Saudi Arabia just has to go, cease to exist, whatever it takes. It's a terrorist state, literally so - that's where the money that funds all that stuff comes from, and Wahhabism is the state religion there - they aren't even hiding it!

You can read the statements of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (organizations founded by Jews) which condemn violations of international law by Palestinians and Israelis alike. There are clear standards.

This is the kind of disproportionate response Israel has been committing. You can see many more cases like this in the Goldstone report http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Fact_Finding_Mission_on_the_Gaza_Conflict I could accept an Israeli incursion into Gaza if at least they limited themselves to killing combatants and not deliberately killing non-threatening civilians, but they don't. If you're an American, your tax money is paying for this. Are you willing to accept this?

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf

773. At about 12.50 p.m., Khalid Abd Rabbo, his wife Kawthar, their three daughters, Souad (aged 9), Samar (aged 5) and Amal (aged 3), and his mother, Hajja Souad Abd Rabbo, stepped out of the house, all of them carrying white flags. Less than 10 metres from the door was a tank, turned towards their house. Two soldiers were sitting on top of it having a snack (one was eating chips, the other chocolate, according to one of the witnesses). The family stood still, waiting for orders from the soldiers as to what they should do, but none was given. Without warning, a third soldier emerged from inside the tank and started shooting at the three girls and then also at their grandmother. Several bullets hit Souad in the chest, Amal in the stomach and Samar in the back. Hajja Souad was hit in the lower back and in the left arm.

(The IDF refused to let an anbulance bring them to the hospital, so they walked. Amal and Souad died. Samar had a spinal injury and was left paraplegic for life.)

Second, what should they do? The Palestinians, including Hamas, have been making peace offers for years. One of the Hamas leaders, Ahmed Jabari, was prepared to sign a long-term peace agreement; he was one of the first assassinated by Israel. It really seems that Netanyahu doesn't want peace. This is a consistent pattern -- every time Hamas calls a ceasefire, the Israelis assassinate somebody.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/opinion/israels-shortsighted-assassination.html
Op-Ed Contributor
Israel’s Shortsighted Assassination
By GERSHON BASKIN
Published: November 16, 2012

Passing messages between the two sides, I was able to learn firsthand that Mr. Jabari wasn’t just interested in a long-term cease-fire; he was also the person responsible for enforcing previous cease-fire understandings brokered by the Egyptian intelligence agency. Mr. Jabari enforced those cease-fires only after confirming that Israel was prepared to stop its attacks on Gaza. On the morning that he was killed, Mr. Jabari received a draft proposal for an extended cease-fire with Israel, including mechanisms that would verify intentions and ensure compliance. This draft was agreed upon by me and Hamas’s deputy foreign minister, Mr. Hamad, when we met last week in Egypt.

Gershon Baskin is a co-chairman of the Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information, a columnist for The Jerusalem Post and the initiator and negotiator of the secret back channel for the release of Gilad Shalit.

The brief has been pulled from the RSC website. It's as good a guess as any that it was pulled so fast because someone at the MPAA or RIAA put the kibosh on this. Copies of it still circulate about the internet.

The original brief was written by congressional staffer, a young guy by the name of Derek Khanna. It seems it was not a committee-wide document. Khanna continues a discussion on the matter over at Reddit. I should imagine by now that Khanna has his balls in a vice for this embarrassment.

If you're the kind of person who regularly complains about IP laws, but would rather do something about it, write Khanna a note of support by email or twitter. That doesn't mean you have to agree completely with the brief or other things Khanna has to say. It just gives him the ammunition to say that copyright reform is a good direction for the GOP and that his writing about it was not a mistake. As daemonenwind notes about, the GOP, particularly the younger elements of it, is now taking a hard look at its platform. You may be rather jaded, as I am, and believe that the old neo-con guard is likely to carry the day. They are. But if there's any hope of changing the discourse on this it will be at a time right now, when the older ways of the GOP have received electoral repudiation that a flood of cash couldn't stop. The promise of real electoral support that could come from a pro-reform platform will be particularly attractive now, especially if they get the sense that those under 35 care about this.

The company was already in bankruptcy, and not for the first time - http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/hostess-brands-says-it-will-liquidate/

Julie Larson-Green will be promoted to lead all Windows software and hardware engineering. Tami Reller retains her roles as chief financial officer and chief marketing officer and will assume responsibility for the business of Windows.

Isn't the more important story here the rise of two women to senior positions in management and engineering at Microsoft?

The software and semiconductor sectors have the lowest percentages of women among the five highest-paid executives in a company, with 4.4 percent and 2.7 percent

Where Are the Women Executives in Silicon Valley?

Julie Larson-Green is no slouch when it comes to logging the years and time at Microsoft. She joined the company 19 years ago as a program manager for Visual C++ and has worked her way up through the ranks.

Larson-Green worked hand-in-hand with Sinofsky on Microsoft Office. Before that she worked on Microsoft SharePoint and Internet Explorer. She actually led one of the most dramatic redesigns at the company when she worked on the so-called ribbon interface in Office.

The Woman Behind Windows

''I don't even know how to explain how amazing and exciting that is to every woman who works in tech right now and probably in business across the board,'' said Michele Weisblatt, executive vice president for Women in Technology International.

''It"s not just about (the company) putting them over a division, it's about them leading the flagship product --- the money-making, revenue piece for Microsoft. It's just phenomenal.''

Women hold just a quarter of computing and mathematical jobs in the U.S., according to a 2008 report on women in technology from Catalyst, a nonprofit research organization.

''Microsoft's move is important because of its visibility as a technology and corporate giant, so girls in school who see women like Larson-Green and Reller move into such high-profile roles will carry that with them for a lifetime,''said Jenny Slade, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Women & Information Technology.

Women rising in the ranks at tech companies

Uhhhhh....

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20121018-712893.html

Apple:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/technology/apple-profits-rise-24-on-iphone-5-sales.html

Motorola is losing money not making money.

Someone does t know the difference between profit and revenue.