Slashdot Mirror

well, lets just say that if it had been equipped with a escape system there would be seven astronauts back in '86 that would not have died.

Bullshit. The Shuttle is a stupid fucking design for a broad variety of reasons, not the least of which is the difficulty of not hitting a wing while ejecting a pod.

Here is the gem from Monsanto "Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is FDA's job." http://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/25/magazine/playing-god-in-the-garden.html?pagewanted=13&src=pm

See this, & call me that (you done nothing with yourself NOBODY), because I am FAR from a malware author:

PSEXEC detected as Malware HKTL_PSEXEC.A:

http://forum.sysinternals.com/psexec-detected-as-malware-hktl-psexeca_topic661.html

OR

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/251492/trojan_lurks_waiting_steal_admin_passwords/?fp=2&fpid=1

Fact is, I'd have to be the STUPIDEST there is, considering I've written the most viewed & well rated guide for securing Windows there is, bar none, here:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

"Poor old APK, well known malware author" - by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday May 30, @10:45PM (#36292632)

How am I a "malware author" shit head? I'm no more a malware maker than is Dr. Mark Russinovich of Microsoft (& a recent malware attack used his wares too, here http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/251492/trojan_lurks_waiting_steal_admin_passwords/?fp=2&fpid=1 )

I wrote an app that a company called Computer Associates (who sold off that division no less recently because their wares sucked) said 1 app of 40 or so I put out over time is a "malware" (one with zero threat levels and has YET to be used in a malware attack & good luck with that - it's NOT scriptable (which is WHY Mr. Russinovich's wares get abused that way, & I saw that ahead of time & why I didn't put in argc/argv possibles into my code for use as a malware))).

Now, COMPUTER ASSOCIATES? LOL, true criminals - busted for ACCOUNTING FRAUD:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/business/worldbusiness/03iht-web.1103computer.3381368.html

You, however & in particular? You're a NOTHING, that's never done a damned thing with yourself... you limited little loser!

---

"just cant stand his own irrelevance" - by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday May 30, @10:45PM (#36292632)

LOL, listen: The day you can show you've done more than this PARTIAL LIST of my favs. only of SOME of my accomplishments in the art & science of computing, and before I did? Is the day you can talk, bigshot:

----

Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61

(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)

PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there

PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there

CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there

GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it

HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!

Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn'

and additionally have advertising: their shows are all standard "44 minute hours" with the remaining time taken up letting us all know about how this show was made possible by a grant from the buystufffromus corporation

Now that is just false. The New York Times just ran an article today about PBS's programming model:

And, [John F. Wilson, the chief programming executive for PBS] noted, PBS shows would still be “the longest hour in television in terms of content,” with as much as 54 minutes of programming, compared with about 40 minutes for commercial networks.

Not to mention, the current programming format means that unless you're watching something over an hour long (e.g. Masterpiece, Great Performances) you don't have to sit through any sponsorships or use a DVR to skip them during the actual program -- the exception being membership drive broadcasts. From what I recall, the best the broadcast networks have done was the "limited commercial interruption" model -- last one I remember was "24" and they still had one or two cheesy Ford commercials during the actual show, probably 2-3 minutes each in length. Plus there's all of the in-show advertising/branding Ford got, in addition to their commercials.

(The article linked above explains that PBS will test programming breaks within the one-hour window, possibly once every ~15 minutes. Even if that becomes the norm, what you call "advertising" on PBS is a far cry from the advertising on broadcast/cable networks. It's a step removed from premium cable -- e.g .HBO, Cinemax -- but just barely.)

If you discount the very first accident (at a testing center, and having nothing to do with the core), then the first "real" (read: injury, death, or radiation leakage) accident was in 1975. The warnings about Mark I reactors began in 1972.

By that logic evolution itself is impossible since no traits not already present in the population could ever emerge. Selective breeding can also capture and spread new traits that arise by spontaneous mutation (the same way natural selection drives evolution by acting on the same kinds of new variation). Breeders even have ways of speeding up the process called mutagenesis, to increase how frequently new mutations occur. Most are bad, some are good. Dwarf wheat -- which uses fertilizer much more effectively -- and red grapefruits are two example of new traits produced before the era of genetic engineering by using radiation to knock whole chunks of DNA out of chromosomes (a form of mutation that happens in the wild, but at lower rates, given the lower levels of background radiation).
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/28/science/28crop.html?pagewanted=print

The safety tests already required of GM crops in the US mean it already costs ~$150 million dollars to get a single new GM trait in a single crop approved for human consumption which is one of the reasons only a handful of giant companies like Monsanto are still in the business of engineering crops. You're right, that's still less than a pharmaceutical company would have to spend to get a drug all the way through regulatory approval, but it's a lot less than the laissez-faire modify whatever they like and release it into the food supply approach many people seem to think is going on.

Nobody needs to repeat that study, because like you said, it's not relevant.

But you know what is relevant? Instead of all that stuff going up in smoke, it now gets stored in giant piles of waste. Usually on site, but sometimes at an offsite disposal facility. Such fun things as; arsenic, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, chromium VI, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, selenium, strontium, thallium, and vanadium, along with dioxins and PAH compounds.

Perfectly safe, until this happens that is.

JFGI

It stands for "Just Fucking Google It". I.e. don't ask for questions, sources etc where the answer is readily found within a minute of searching using any of the major search engines.

Then why didn't they highlight that case? And any reason you didn't feel like posting any details about it? Or a link?

You can start with reviewing a list of checkpoints in the south:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_Interior_Checkpoints

Here are some documented cases of Border Patrol nosing around quite a bit away from the border in states bordering Canada:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/nyregion/30border.html
http://chronicle.com/article/Far-From-Canada-Aggressive/125880/

(How does "temporary permanent checkpoint" sound to you, by the way?)

Again, plenty more are easily found on Google. If you do not insist on being blind and deaf as a matter of expediency, these are all easily found. Start by googling "border patrol100 miles" and go from there. Searching for "border patrol" on YouTube gives plenty of relevant videos as well, documenting the abuse.

The article never said it was in San Diego. It only gave a vague reference to somewhere around San Diego. They have the same habit as you of being vague and outraged at the same time.

Once again, Google to the rescue (you really need to get a book like "Internet for Dummies" or something!). This says "mile marker 78 of eastbound I-8, 75 miles east of Yuma, AZ (55 miles north of the international border)". That specific enough for you, or you need it down to inches?

So, if I can outrun the border patrol for 2 miles, I'm home free? Sweet.

No, because if they see you running all the way from the border, they have reasonable cause to stop and search you (the 4th only guards against unreasonable search). The problem with fixed DHS checkpoints is that they can detain you even without reasonable cause. And some of those checkpoints are located on roads which do not directly connect to the border.

A further problem in practice is that the roving patrols, while technically bound by reasonable cause, use very flimsy excuses in practice - e.g. refusal to cooperate with them is seen as reasonable cause for a "legal" search (if you refuse to cooperate at that point, you're "resisting") - a creative application of recursion that cops never got away with; but DHS is special.

Why do you accuse me of peddling dodgy treatments? Just google for zinc and cold.

It works better than placebo.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12462910
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/for-cold-virus-zinc-may-edge-out-even-chicken-soup/
http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Zinc-HealthProfessional/

Stick to the pills/lozenges, take them at early onset of symptoms, don't overdose and definitely don't spray your nose with it (or you might damage/lose your sense of smell). May not be a cure, but most subjects would feel better and that's good enough for most people.

AFAIK doctors in some countries are still prescribing antibiotics to those with colds and flu. Despite being told year after year not to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/20/coughs-colds-cures-treatment-antibiotics
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6526575/GPs-told-to-stop-prescribing-antibiotics-for-coughs-and-colds.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1574995/Stop-giving-antibiotics-for-colds-doctors-told.html

My current guess (not enough proof yet :) ) that most people get antibiotic resistant bacteria from hospitals, not farms.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20524852

RESULTS:
Neither the preintervention rate of MRSA colonization or infection (0.56 cases per 1,000 patient-days [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.49-0.62 cases per 1,000 patient-days]) nor the slope for the rate of MRSA colonization or infection changed significantly after the first intervention. The rate decreased significantly to 0.28 cases per 1,000 patient-days (95% CI, 0.17-0.40 cases per 1,000 patient-days) after the second intervention and to 0.07 cases per 1,000 patient-days (95% CI, 0.06-0.08 cases per 1,000 patient-days) after the third intervention, and the rate remained at a similar level for 8 years. The MRSA bacteremia rate decreased by 80%, whereas the rate of bacteremia due to methicillin-susceptible S. aureus did not change. Eighty-three percent of the MRSA isolates identified were clonally related. All MRSA isolates obtained from healthcare workers were clonally related to those recovered from patients who were in their care.
CONCLUSION:
Our data indicate that long-term control of endemic MRSA is feasible in tertiary care centers. The use of targeted active surveillance for MRSA in patients and healthcare workers in specific wards (identified by means of analysis of clinical epidemiology data) and the use of decolonization were key to the success of the program.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/718935

March 22, 2010 â" A multifaceted infection control program led to a significant decline in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) cases in Paris-area hospitals with high endemic MRSA rates, according to an article in the March 22 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

There are other superbugs too:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.02/enemy_pr.html

It's true that many species of acinetobacter flourish widely in the environment. Thriving colonies have been recovered from soil, cell phones, frozen chicken, wastewater treatment plants, Formica countertops, and even irradiated food

House Dems votes against by more than a 2-1 margin. If Republicans didn't control the House, the Patriot Act would have expired this morning.

Source: http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/1/376

It's a theory that's been contested. One citation: NYT Magazine article, What Happened to Air France Flight 447?, page 4. Look for the discussion of the pitot probes.

Please downvote, radon prediction is not a reliable predictor for earthquakes, and this guy is known in the seismology communities to be a bit of a loony. He has a history of mispridicting earthquakes, in fact suggesting that this earthquake would occur one week prior to when it did and in a completely different city 30+ miles away.

I saw him present his findings at AGU in 2009, and came to the conclusion of many others: a broken clock is still correct twice a day. Based on the science today, it is completely disingenuous for someone to claim they can predict where and when an earthquake would occur with accuracy and precision.

Please don't perpetuate his myths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_prediction#L.27Aquila_controversy

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2009/0408/p06s02-wogn.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/08/08/science/hopes-for-predicting-earthquakes-once-so-bright-are-growing-dim.html?pagewanted=all

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/earthquake-warning-was-removed-from-internet/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/04/07/us-italy-quake-prediction-idUSTRE5365GO20090407

http://in.reuters.com/article/2009/04/06/idINIndia-38908220090406

Please downvote, radon prediction is not a reliable predictor for earthquakes, and this guy is known in the seismology communities to be a bit of a loony. He has a history of mispridicting earthquakes, in fact suggesting that this earthquake would occur one week prior to when it did and in a completely different city 30+ miles away.

I saw him present his findings at AGU in 2009, and came to the conclusion of many others: a broken clock is still correct twice a day. Based on the science today, it is completely disingenuous for someone to claim they can predict where and when an earthquake would occur with accuracy and precision.

Please don't perpetuate his myths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_prediction#L.27Aquila_controversy

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2009/0408/p06s02-wogn.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/08/08/science/hopes-for-predicting-earthquakes-once-so-bright-are-growing-dim.html?pagewanted=all

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/earthquake-warning-was-removed-from-internet/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/04/07/us-italy-quake-prediction-idUSTRE5365GO20090407

http://in.reuters.com/article/2009/04/06/idINIndia-38908220090406

Sorry, I got my numbers wrong, but my point still stands. 23 voted against, 18 were Democrats. http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/senate/1/84

Honestly, trying to paint republicans as favoring large expansive governments is disingenuous.

Here is a map which shows who voted for the extension "PATRIOT" Act. Count the red dots. Count the blue dots. Compare and contrast.

Democrats believe in all sorts of social programs, republicans dont; I didnt think that anyone disputed that.

No-one does. It's just that it's not the only area in which government can be expanded. Republicans are big believers in being "tough on crime", which in practice means stuffing prisons with harmless weed junkies. Then there's those unconstitutional TSA "near-border" patrols. There's Guantanamo.

(Yeah, all that stuff is now tacitly maintained by D for their schemes, but it was created by R.)

Here you go: http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/1/376

Here's how the Senate voted: http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/senate/1/84 Still looking for the House votes.

Actually, I think a lot of people are looking at the wrong bill... The one I posted above is from February (sorry) but this one was from today:
http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/senate/1/84

The NY Times vote coverage is a pretty handy resource for this sort of thing:

http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/senate/1/84

See how your senators voted here. I'm happy to see that both my senators (Cantwell and Murray) voted against.

The Patriot Act isn't as invulnerable as it once was. It got only 72 votes in favor -- twelve above the necessary threshold. Maybe we can get rid of it in ten years or so.

Just yesterday, I was reading this article in the NYT about a pair of conjoined twins that sport something no other pair of conjoined twins have -- a thalamic bridge between their brains. Their brains are separate and discrete but networked together via a thin wire of neural tissue that connects their thalamuses together -- a thalamic bridge.

So they are individuals who have their own cognitive functions, but can share sensory input. One twin can close her eyes and see through the other twin's eyes. They recieve a double set of sensory inputs.

It's like telepathy. When one twin swallows, the other twin can feel something going down her own throat, even though nothing is there. The doctors are amazed because this sort of neural thalamic bridge structure has never existed in any other set of conjoined twins.

Fascinating article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/magazine/could-conjoined-twins-share-a-mind.html?_r=1

The first naturally occuring (or at least documented by science) neural network connection between two human minds.

It could be argued that Microsoft bailing out Apple to the tune of $150 million in 1997 is one of the main reasons they are here today.

Yeah, because a company that had over a billion in cash needed those $150 million. Not to mention that this was part of a settlement that Microsoft had to pay.

It could be argued that Microsoft bailing out Apple to the tune of $150 million in 1997 is one of the main reasons they are here today.

If this ever does become a full-on police state, I'll be one of the first to grab my rifle, fill up some molotovs, and start taking back our rights. But until then, let's be reasonable - on both sides.

At what point do you cross that line? Suspension of habeas corpus for non-citizens? Detaining American citizens without charge? Detaining Muslim Americans as they try to legally enter America after going abroad? Spying on Americans without warrants? Using National Security Letters to avoid what little oversight still exists?

In regards to this specific case, how is en masse monitoring of everyone's electricity consumption not an abuse of power? We're not talking about a cop seeing something suspicious from the road and using that as probable cause for a search. We're talking about monitoring the records of everyone with no probable cause or warrant and then using that as the basis for a search. Granted, Canada is not subject to the same laws as the United States, but this seems pretty damn abusive no matter where you are.

The actual brain / machine interface is the hard bit.

I thought you just let the nervous system figure it out for itself?

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/25/on-our-radar-meltdown-on-greenland-ice-sheet/

A good number of researchers are quite involved in research into developing games to use as teaching and learning tools. One notable school in New York City, Quest to Learn (http://q2l.org/) actually has a curriculum based around 'game-like' learning and actively uses a number of educational video games as part of the curriculum. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/magazine/19video-t.html http://g4li.org/ http://www.educationarcade.org/

Interesting since their stock value and basically the "value" of the company doesn't match their books: "The companies have comparable revenue, with Microsoft at $58.4 billion and Apple at $42.9 billion. But in their most recent fiscal years, Apple had net income of $5.7 billion, while Microsoft earned $14.6 billion. Microsoft has more cash and short-term investments, $39.7 billion, to Apple’s $23.1 billion, which makes the value assigned by the market to Apple, essentially a bet on its future prospects, all the more remarkable." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/technology/27apple.html Apple certainly does have the coolness factor as of late... I guess that makes up the difference. :)

Quoting numbers not one year out of date would make up much more of a difference. Gee, I wonder if you did that on purpose...

Interesting since their stock value and basically the "value" of the company doesn't match their books: "The companies have comparable revenue, with Microsoft at $58.4 billion and Apple at $42.9 billion. But in their most recent fiscal years, Apple had net income of $5.7 billion, while Microsoft earned $14.6 billion. Microsoft has more cash and short-term investments, $39.7 billion, to Apple’s $23.1 billion, which makes the value assigned by the market to Apple, essentially a bet on its future prospects, all the more remarkable." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/technology/27apple.html Apple certainly does have the coolness factor as of late... I guess that makes up the difference. :)

economics is not a zero sum game, where someone must lose so that someone else must win. economics is a more-for-everyone game. the chinese are enjoying more prosperity than they had before. you are assuming if they weren't manufacturing iPads their life would be better. compared to the usa, indeed, their life is worse, right now. but it would be even more worse without this plant

the chinese are where the usa and great britain were in the 1800s. and they are already fighting for their rights, like workers in the west had to to enjoy protections:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/business/global/09labor.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire

the chinese will eventually become just as prosperous as the usa, eventually, if not surpassing the usa, as soon as workers start fighting for their rights. but you don't get something by not fighting for it in this world

and you don't become economically prosperous by doing nothing. and you certainly don't get to complain about not having something that someone else has because you are doing nothing while the prosperous are doing something that made them prosperous. the chinese know that, why don't you?

the end game of globalization is prosperity for everyone. of course that's not painless. but stopping globalization perpetuates inequalities, it doesn't solve them

I hear name calling, "You are naive" but nothing factual.

It's interesting that you would say that after doing the same yourself. When you state "It's also true grass roots, unlike the paid astroturf deployed against it" what facts do you have that show it is "true grass roots"? What "paid astroturf"? You state that the person you replied to is ignorant, yet have no facts to back up your assertions. Then you come and claim that I need facts. Why must I prove myself yet you do not have to?

Which TEA party isn't grass roots?

I'll give you that the original movement of the TEA party was somewhat grass roots but has since been co-opted and formed into an astroturf campaign full of people being manipulated by larger organizations

Who is funding them if they aren't grass roots?

When you have Tea Party organizations such as "Americans For Prosperity" which are funding a lot of Tea Party movements and activities. Then you realize that the "Americans For Prosperity" are funded by the Koch brothers....You begin to wonder. That, and if you look at the funding that Tea Party candidates receive, you find that they get tons of donations from the oil industry, gas industry, health professionals and the financial industry. Every large donation (Tea Party Patriots received a $1million donation from an 'anonymous donor'. How is that grass roots?) is hidden behind the new laws that don't require disclosure. So while you might look at everything I just said and claim I made it up (I did not) and then say I haven't proved it isn't grass roots. I say to you, you haven't proved that I'm wrong and that it is grass roots.

Did I hear you say according to your assertions that Rand Paul is ultra conservative far right?

Rand paul is so conservative that he scared Dick Cheney. Think about that for a second:

Some of his positions frighten even staunch conservatives like former Vice President Dick Cheney, who backed Paul's GOP opponent. Source

He opposes abortions even in cases of rapes and incest and wants to overturn Roe v Wade. He wants to eliminate the department of education. I'll give you that some of his positions aren't as far right. He's an interesting mix of both far right and moderate, even a little left (such as legalizing Marijuana). But if it'll make you feel better, my original assertion was slight hyperbole and should have said "are generally ultra conservative/very far right" because yes, there are some exceptions.

The TEA party was effective in....

Just because they got someone elected does not necessarily mean they were effective. Consider Wisconsin where I'll be surprised if Scott Walker gets another term doing anything ever again. He's outright shown that getting rid of Unions has nothing to do with the budget or money, he just wants to bust unions. Including firefighters and policemen. In fact, the only public worker he's not trying to take a paycut and benefits from is himself!

Just because you haven't been paying attention, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I never said it didn't happen, hell the Tea Party is causing chaos, I even said that. But don't pretend that there's no corporate influences going on here. Don't pretend there's no astroturfing. Hell, don't pretend that the Tea Party is "drastically chang[ing] the conversation towards what We the People believe is important" because it's not. It's just another corporate funded group of people who believe they know best thinking that they are speaking for many more people than they actually are.

Yes, we can always hope that flaws of critical systems will be treated responsibly. Kinda off topic, I know.

At least not explicitly. They both live on the same side of a road that most of us here chose never to cross, but they aren't the same thing.

Also important in this discussion though is the fact that engineers have been implicated as a group as being especially good violent extremists. (Viz. one , two , three , and of course, four.)

Probably also suited to running authoritarian, quasi-market-based state. Just a thought.

The illusion is that it's not a pyramid scheme for the creators and early adopters. The mailing list in-crowd creates a few million easy coin first (out of a total of 6.2 million coin currently created, total market cap $49 million), then opens up the service for speculators. The speculators drive up the exchange value against real currency and the original 'investors' cash out their imaginary bits.

It's like how an IPO makes the original owners wealthy on the back end - they sell 49% of the company and keep a majority stock themselves that they can divest under the radar at a later higher market valuation. The only difference is there's no immediate cash infusion from the IPO and there's no company.

You did note that 19% of the income comes from corporate income tax, excise taxes, fees, and the like, correct? Which means that 42% of the money that "funds" the government does not come from income tax. Hence, your original statement that , "The federal budget is funded by federal income taxes" is in fact disingenuous and mendacious.

BTW, the 47% number is misleading as well. Check out the NYT....

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html

At least with a dollar, I can pay my taxes and not be imprisoned.

You only pay a DOLLAR in taxes? What are you, a corporation?

This test was administered to only students living in Shanghai, and as such was not representative.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/education/07education.html

The fact is that away from the coastal cities China is still very backward.

Depends on the sector, take an Intel chip, the Core series for the North American market are all sourced from US plants, but will go to Malaysia or Costa Rica for packaging, then back to NA for sale.

So some of the product is an export and some an import, same goes for all the leading markets in the world. Parts of an Airbus are made in the US, parts of a Boeing are made in the EU.

Cars, heavy machinery, etc will have parts sourced from a variety of places, things like an iPod are going to be counted as an import to the US, but when sold overseas an intellectual property export.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-wbmake.1.20332814.html

The point isn't the value, its the lack of consensus on what value it ("rich") is. It's a moving target and one day depending on whose definition gets used, it can and will effect you directly.

Index it to inflation and revisit it ever decade or two. Sure, government measured inflation probably isn't 100% accurate to what people feel as inflation, but it tends to float along pretty close to average salary increases. The AMT didn't do this, and yeah, it's a fucking bitch. Blame Nixon.

I do, but you clearly cannot see the forest for the trees.

I can see that if I'm given a choice between getting a hundred dollars and having to give $33 of that to the government versus not getting money at all, I'm going to choose the one that gets me some money.

There are 5 states without sales tax. However, the majority of states do, but its still not all tax-free. For example NH has a %9 prepared food tax. Any which way an individual turns it is likely they are going to contribute to the government in some form or another.

And state sales taxes have zilch to do with federal income taxes.

Of course it does. In MA, people who have made out of state purchases are required to declare on their state taxes. Use Tax Due on Out-of-State Purchases Worksheet The burden of paying the tax is not on the company, but on the individual making the purchase. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the concept of Use Tax? There's nothing complicated about them. We just do not agree on who should take the burden. If you are an internet retailer without a physical presence in some states, should you be adhering to the whims of the state rules of all 50 (plus the small number of US territories), and violating the Commerce Clause.

Ok, that clarifies what you meant. In the case of online retailers, sure, you've got court decisions on your side [1] [2] and I'll concede the point.

On one extreme some people wanted limited government. On the other extreme people want a welfare state. Since you want to talk about what has happened in the last 40 years, I'll throw out the key pieces, but include a little bit before as well. 1966 - Dept. of Transportation

Operates, among others, the FAA, Federal Highway Program, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

1967 - Dept. of Energy

Far as I can tell, the real date is 1977. Anyway, this handles our nuclear weapons, nuclear reactors for the navy, radioactive waste disposal, grants for alternative energy, smart grid and R&D. Most of it's budget is spent on military purposes.

1979 - Dept. of Education

Goes to student loans, adult education, special education programs, and putting kids of poor families into pre-school. There's some fat to be cut, and some policies that I don't like about it (No Child Left Behind is an insipid piece of legislation), but it's not breaking the bank.

1987 - Veteran Affairs

The VA was elevated to cabinet level in 1989, but it's existed since 1930, and was a consolidation of previous agencies that existed before that.

And regardless of anyone's feelings about the current wars or the activities of the US military, we should damn well take care of our veterans.

1990 - EPA

1970, you mean? The problem with the EPA is that's it's essentially been gutted by Republicans into an agency run by political cronies instead of scientists. Right now we've got oil companies fucking up safety checks and dumping oil into the ocean, oil and natural gas companies pumping hundreds of millions of gallons of carcinogens

Here's a couple of links:

[1] http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0&.v=1
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html
[3] http://www.google.com/search?q=47%25+households

Here's another little fact that is rarely mentioned (from item #1):

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

Awesome, no?

Even #2, which is trying to cloud the issue, flat out says:

The 47 percent number is not wrong. The stimulus programs of the last two years — the first one signed by President George W. Bush, the second and larger one by President Obama — have increased the number of households that receive enough of a tax credit to wipe out their federal income tax liability.

He goes on to talk about payroll taxes, etc. But the thing about payroll taxes is that they are dedicated to specific programs. Payments into social security aren't available to be used for running the government and funding non-entitlement services. When you hear about the government spending the money in the social security trust fund, what is happening is that the trust fund is buying treasury bonds, i.e. it's a loan that will be paid back. The other point that people should be aware of is that for all the payroll taxes items (medicare, medicaid, social security) the "poor" will draw more out than they ever put in.

That's a myth; caffeine in the quantities you ingest it by drinking coffee, has very little diuretic effect at all.

[reactors...] breached containment. [citation needed]

'Engineers from the Tokyo Electric Power company (Tepco) entered the No.1 reactor at the end of last week for the first time and saw the top five feet or so of the core’s 13ft-long fuel rods had been exposed to the air and melted down.
Previously, Tepco believed that the core of the reactor was submerged in enough water to keep it stable and that only 55 per cent of the core had been damaged.
Now the company is worried that the molten pool of radioactive fuel may have burned a hole through the bottom of the containment vessel, causing water to leak.
“We will have to revise our plans,” said Junichi Matsumoto, a spokesman for Tepco. “We cannot deny the possibility that a hole in the pressure vessel caused water to leak”.'

AFAIK, all the "leaking radioactive material" stories are about the spent fuel pond(s) not the reactor cores.

Leaking?

"United States government engineers sent to help with the crisis in Japan are warning that the troubled nuclear plant there is facing a wide array of fresh threats that could persist indefinitely, and that in some cases are expected to increase as a result of the very measures being taken to keep the plant stable, according to a confidential assessment prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission."

"The document also suggests that fragments or particles of nuclear fuel from spent fuel pools above the reactors were blown “up to one mile from the units,” and that pieces of highly radioactive material fell between two units and had to be “bulldozed over,” presumably to protect workers at the site. The ejection of nuclear material, which may have occurred during one of the earlier hydrogen explosions, may indicate more extensive damage to the extremely radioactive pools than previously disclosed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/world/asia/06nuclear.html?_r=2&hp

Citation

Even TFA doesn't mention this *in a story about MS integrating FB features into Bing*. Instead, it just says something about Google not going there because they're slinging mud back and forth with FB.

How did this note get modded "interesting"? Did no one read your citation?

The facts from your citation are: a) Microsoft bought 1.6% of Facebook; and b) Zuckerberg owns 20% of Facebook.

No article mentions Microsoft owning 20% of Facebook because there is no evidence that they do.

The thing I never hear spoken about (perhaps because it might be a depressing thought for SETI fans) is that, while it's not beyond imagining that other intelligent species can develop out there, the chances of us detecting them are staggering low, for lots of reasons that easily come to mind.

Taking Earth as an example. 4.5byr old, life only really taking off at the Cambrian, 540myr ago, when Earth is already half way to the grave (Sun will expire in 5byr). So given any "Goldilocks" planet around a sun like ours, only half it's life at most will be spent with any life on it.

Then there's climate events, like ice ages, which could be anything from 20-100kyrs apart but devastating to any established and densely populated technological civilisation.

Any intelligent species which survives its own immaturity would come to the conclusion that long-term survival and growth depends on becoming independent of the natural world, as "unnatural" as that sounds. A population will initially stabilise due to limits on life span and food production (ours will in 2100 at about 10bn people), but as technology develops and those natural limiting factors are "solved", population will inevitably increase again.

A civilisation with abundant food (obviously farming has been replaced by advanced GM or other methods), limitless energy (eg. fusion but probably a mixture of great things) and long life, faces a stark choice: Don't breed much anymore, or find new places to live.

Apart from being rather dismal, the former choice is not viable in the long term. The future on a single planet holds only an inevitable cycle of natural catastrophes, be it a meteor or climate change, undoing what they have achieved. Its own survival, political and social problems solved, the mature and stable civilisation will naturally look upwards, to the planets.

Now a civilisation during this period would be detectable. They'd have been transmitting radio in the past, as we do now. Once embarking on the colonisation of other planets, they'd be even more mindful of the possibility of other successful species like them and continuing to search and transmit.

But this period of time, where they are still "speaking our language" is very limited. A few thousand years at most. Because during that time, a species will change, inside and out. Having solved major problems, socially and technologically, working together and populating planets, they will see themselves no longer as "a species of a planet", bound and subject. They have become "citizens of space", self-determining and outward-looking, no longer identified with arbitrary limitations. I daresay such a civilisation would have different philosophies and priorities to us. Why would such a species want to find others who are, like us, still bound to their world, struggling, infighting, limited and immature?

Of course they want to find other life out there but, having the perspective of a strong, space-faring species, they would obviously prefer to contact others like them, or even more advanced, so they can learn new things. Confident, looking ever forward, their main question would not be a meek yet arrogant, "are we the only ones?" No, it would instead be a challenge to the universe and to themselves: "How do we contact those others who travel the stars? How do we achieve the next step for our species?" Those questions do not involve us.

All their prowess would be focussed on determining what kinds of communications and transport other advanced, multi-planetary species would be using. They would not be thinking "radio" anymore. They would be bent on discovering the deeper secrets of interstellar travel and communication. Indeed it would be an obsession because here they are, playing on the shore of an unlimited ocean. They must find a way to set sail, otherwise for all their great achievements, they

No, I'm not thinking about that, I think about what I wrote: the USA are unable to pay for their bills: right now. It is all over the news, just not in the USA.

Oh, good grief, you're talking about this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/17/us/politics/17budget.html?hpw

No, that's petty political brinkmanship, it's nothing to do with economic fundamentals. The federal government is perfectly capable of paying its obligations, but parties in congress love to play these games with the debt limit to put pressure on the other side.

This has become an OCD of the worst kind, and only makes the entire infrastructure even more brittle than it already is. And each connection to the net is just another attack vector, and probably subject to some secret executive order mandating that microphones and cameras be installed.

Citation

I've never understood why this situation doesn't garner more attention in all the debates about either Microsoft or Facebook. I'm not saying that MS owning part of FB is a bad thing or a good thing, it just amazes me that it's not brought up in conspiracy theories about FB privacy, or in stories about Microsoft's 'decline', or whatever...

Even TFA doesn't mention this *in a story about MS integrating FB features into Bing*. Instead, it just says something about Google not going there because they're slinging mud back and forth with FB.

When we citizens speak of 'simplifying' the tax code, we generally actually mean two things:

- Reducing the complexity for people like you and me
- Reducing the advantages to corporations and the wealthy

We hope this means we pay less taxes, and someone else pays more. And we assert our virtue by intending that those who earn more pay more.

So Brin figures that analysis of the tax code could yield a simpler code with the same results. Um, we don't WANT the same results. Really.

No, really. We want that General Electric pays some reasonable tax on corporate income. If you believe, as I do, that corporate income taxes are just a cost that is passed on to consumers, you could live with abolishing it entirely and ending the facade. We also want to the very, very wealthy, who claim to have incomes in excess of, say, $1 million, should pay some reasonable tax. And that 40% or so of U.S. households that do have actual income also pay some reasonable tax. It doesn't have to be much, but the concept that nearly half of all U.S. households pay NO income tax is flawed. Besides trying to consider all this in the miasma of federal v state v local taxes, payroll v income, total tax burden, blah blah blah, look at how they 'pay no taxes'. Earned Income Credit. Sheesh. Simplify this, please. But the tax code is used for many purposes, and one is to win votes. Which also leads to creating heros and villains.

The tax code is so complex, it has to be increasingly made more complex to solve the problems it causes. Ergo, EIC.

If nothing else it breeds a lack of interest in the cost of government, and at worst breeds contempt on the part of many (that pay noticeable amounts) for the entire system.

JUST simplify the tax code, please. If you want to encourage industry and the economy, consider tarriffs. These worked once.

They have missiles thought to be capable of hitting in South Korea and Japan. Hitting South Korea is a no-brainer, they have SCUD type missles with a 300+ mile range that can pretty much cover it. Japan is only ~650 miles away, and they have tested a satellite launching rocket that went far past that distance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8134388.stm

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/world/asia/06korea.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/world/05korea.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31728902/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/s-korea-n-korea-missiles-can-hit-key-targets/

They have missiles thought to be capable of hitting in South Korea and Japan. Hitting South Korea is a no-brainer, they have SCUD type missles with a 300+ mile range that can pretty much cover it. Japan is only ~650 miles away, and they have tested a satellite launching rocket that went far past that distance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8134388.stm

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/world/asia/06korea.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/world/05korea.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31728902/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/s-korea-n-korea-missiles-can-hit-key-targets/