Slashdot Mirror

What an interesting way to present the information.

What does seem to have contributed to the abandonment of the Western Settlements, archaeologists said, is climate change. The onset of a ''little ice age'' made living halfway up Greenland's coast untenable in the mid-1300's, argues Dr. Charles Schweger, an archaeology professor at the University of Alberta, who has studied soils around the Farm Beneath the Sand.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05...

It's almost as if you didn't care about what happened, but wanted to score political points.

You have a very "European" outlook towards Israel (the Jewish state). What a pity.

The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews

Quite a few of the problems in the Middle East today can be traced back to actions taken by the Arabs themselves. It was Arab leaders that told the Arabs in Palestine to flee so that they wouldn't get in the way of the great massacre of Jews that they planned. Unfortunately for them the Jews had other plans and the massacre never happened as planned, and many of the Arabs that fled never returned. You are also mistaken if you believe that there wasn't a continuous Jewish presence within the confines of the area that formed the Kingdom if Israel that the Romans occupied.

You also misunderstand the coup in Iran. The actual coup was Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh dissolving parliament, faking an election, ruling by decree, and rejecting the usual control of a head of government (Prime Minister) by the head of state (president/king/etc.) which in the case of Iran was the Shah. The counter-coup returned the Shah to power. Mark that - the Shah was in power both before and after the counter-coup which restored the Shah to power.

You also have things wrong about Iraq. If the US had stayed in Iraq, even if in reduced numbers, it is very unlikely that the so-called "Islamic State" would have been able to threaten the Iraqi government's control. As to Bin Laden, more troops in Afghanistan wouldn't have found him since he was hiding in a Pakistani city near the national military college.

According to history, and the people involved.

Time Now for a Declaration of Mideast Peace; Doomed Arab Refugees

In ''Semites and Anti-Semites'' (New York, 1986), Bernard W. Lewis quotes (page 270) from the memoirs of Khalid al-Azm, Prime Minister of Syria in 1948-49, listing the factors that led to Israel's success:

''Fifth: the summons of the Arab governments to the population of Palestine to leave the country and take refuge in the neighboring Arab countries . . . this collective flight served the Jews and strengthened their position without effort. . . . Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes when we ourselves were the ones who induced them to leave them. . . . We doomed a million Arab refugees, by calling on them and insisting that they abandon their land, their homes, their work and their occupations, and we made them unemployed and homeless.''

The Arabs had considerable enthusiasm for mass slaughter of Jews.

Azzam's Genocidal Threat

An October 11, 1947 report on the pan-Arab summit in the Lebanese town of Aley,[9] by Akhbar al-Yom's editor Mustafa Amin, contained an interview he held with Arab League secretary-general Azzam. Titled, "A War of Extermination," the interview read as follows (translated by Efraim Karsh; all ellipses are in the original text):

Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha spoke to me about the horrific war that was in the offing saying:

"I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre[10] or the Crusader wars. I believe that the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will be larger than Palestine's Arab population, for I know that volunteers will be arriving to us from [as far as] India, Afghanistan, and China to win the honor of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine You might be surprised to learn that hundreds of Englishmen expressed their wish to volunteer in the Arab armies to fight the Jews.

"This war will be distinguished by three serious matters. First—faith: as each fighter deems his death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise; second, [the war] will be an opportunity for vast plunder. Third, it will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs, and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world

Did you take notice that I was quoting actual sources there? It isn't just my "opinion."

Wow, either Dick Cheney is posting to Slashdot, or there are TWO people in the world that still believe Iraq had WMDs.

You are aware that the US recovered 5,000 chemical weapons and 200 tonnes of uranium from Iraq, right? Not including "dual use" stockpiles.
That even the New York Times was forced to admit that Iraq had WMDs, although they tried to spin it as "Bush didn't protect Our Troops!".

Wow, either Dick Cheney is posting to Slashdot, or there are TWO people in the world that still believe Iraq had WMDs.

You are aware that the US recovered 5,000 chemical weapons and 200 tonnes of uranium from Iraq, right? Not including "dual use" stockpiles.
That even the New York Times was forced to admit that Iraq had WMDs, although they tried to spin it as "Bush didn't protect Our Troops!".

It seems like a lot of the car manufacturers are having some major software issues. This Range Rover issue certainly isn't the worst one.

For instance, see this blog post (which links to US court testimony documents) where an embedded software expert (Michael Barr) reviews Toyota's code and finds numerous flaws:

http://embeddedgurus.com/barr-...

Did Toyota fix these flaws? Who knows? Toyota still denies that there's even a problem. They released an update to the Prius last year which corrected a problem with premature engine shutdown, but that was only for limited number of Priuses. Accorrding to Michael Barr, these software issues affect Toyota, Lexus (and possibly Scions) made in the last ten years.

The only way in my mind to be pretty sure our cars are safe is for the manufacturers to release their software as open source, where it can be reviewed and any flaws are found. While folks wouldn't be able to find *every* bug, it sure would be a lot better than we have now.

But you'd think that regulators would at least ask a few questions, llike "what happened" and "what can we do to make sure the same thing doesn't happen again".

You write as if they didn't do that several years ago.

The solution to oil spills is not: "another regulation that requires the regulated to follow the existing regulation." You develop new regulations when new processes or technology begin to fall outside existing regulations. Otherwise you enforce existing regulations, rebalance penalties, and recognize that no matter how many regulations you have, something will happen again. If you can't regulate theft and murder our of existence you sure can't regulate technological shortcutting out of existence.

Hint: when regulators determine that someone violated existing regulations and charge them billions of dollars in fines, "what can we do to make sure the same thing doesn't happen again" becomes a matter of weighing whether the fines are truly punitive versus something which might be written off as a cost of doing business. $4300/barrel of oil is still pretty punitive.

Was Hollywood ruined by Star Wars and Jaws?

Did ‘Jaws’ and ‘Star Wars’ Ruin Hollywood?

The Decline and Fall of Adult Movies

How The Blockbuster Ruined Hollywood

I had occipital lobe epilepsy (i.e. in the visual cortex), and while seizures began with visual hallucinations, I was never susceptible to flashing lights. There was no response to them even on an EEG.

The strangest case of a trigger I ever heard was the woman who had seizures every time she heard the voice of Mary Hart on Entertainment Tonight.

Enough. I'm not even promoting rightist shit.

Actually you are, just like you always do. Your rant post is a laundry list of bullshit talking points from mental midget conservative talk shows and "pundits." I'm sorry you're a fucking brainwashed idiot, but don't try to disguise your fucking idiocy as anything other than that.... most everyone else here isn't as stupid as you are. Quit projecting your fucking failures onto other people.... us leftists are tired of you conservatives fucking everything up.

Health care costs: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Housing prices are going to go up regardless.... same land, more people... an idiot could figure that out; unless of course you crash the entire economy like Shrub did.

Jobs... oh, jobs..... http://politicsthatwork.com/de...

Crime? Seriously, you are a fucking idiot. Crime is dealt with from min to max, not the other way around. Cities, Counties, States, Federal. If you think either of the parties has much control over criminal activity, you are too fucking stupid to ever be taken seriously on anything. One thing that has increased when democrats are in charge is an increase in right wing terrorist groups http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

I'll add one more note.... THE most progressive event since the signing of the Magna Carta was a group of citizens deciding they didn't need a king, but they needed a government where everyone had representation, and where the rights of everyone where not theirs by the whim of someone else. So you say you don't like the United States? Go fuck yourself.

= = =
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...
But I think it’s also important to understand where this is coming from. Partly it’s Bush trying to defend his foolish 4 percent growth claim; but it’s also, I’m almost certain, coming out of the “nation of takers” dogma that completely dominates America’s right wing.

At my adventure in Las Vegas, one of the questions posed by the moderator was, if I remember it correctly, “What would you do about America’s growing underclass living off welfare?” When I said that the premise was wrong, that this isn’t actually happening, there was general incredulity — this is part of what the right knows is happening. When Jeb Bush — who is a known admirer of Charles Murray — talks about more hours, he’s probably thinking largely about getting the bums on welfare out there working.

As I asked a few months ago, where are these welfare programs people are supposedly living off? TANF is tiny; what’s left are EITC, food stamps, and unemployment benefits. Spending on food stamps and UI soared during the slump, but came down quickly; overall spending on “income security” has shown no trend at all as a share of GDP, with all the supposed growth in means-tested programs coming from Medicaid: [graphs follow] = = =

It’s Silicon Valley 2, Ellen Pao 0: Fighter of Sexism Is Out at Reddit

"Moving to the Republican Party"? You ignorant buffoon, you don't understand anything about history, do you?

Here's the New York Times (Not exactly conservative, right?): The Myth of the Southern Strategy

Your entire claim is lies and bullshit. The Democrats championed slavery for more than a century, then fought against integration for another one after that. Bull Conner was a Democrat, and the only KKK member in Congress was a Democrat. Racism is bred deep into the bones of the Democratic party, and it will take a lot longer than these past few years to be rid of it.

The technology enables us to lie more effectively. We can find whatever truth we desire:

"The anti-vaccine agitators can always find a renegade researcher or random “study” to back them up. This is erudition in the age of cyberspace: You surf until you reach the conclusion you’re after. You click your way to validation, confusing the presence of a website with the plausibility of an argument.

Although the Internet could be making all of us smarter, it makes many of us stupider, because it’s not just a magnet for the curious. It’s a sinkhole for the gullible. - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07...

Technology has been instrumental in spreading lies on a scale that was hard to achieve earlier: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

They'll be fine as long as they remember to order the armadillo well-done.

Shutting the exchange down for a few hours — they've resumed trading already — is not going to move the needle for Chinese interests. China herself has just banned "major stockholders" from selling for six months .

If I were in your shoes, I would've gotten tired of being wrong all the time by now — your stamina is, indeed, quite astounding.

Sorry you fail to see your own binary logic. How can you support more kids with less money? How can you claim our social programs are a loss, and what "Chicago event" are you referring to?

Welfare success stories: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
https://www.nytimes.com/books/...
http://occupywallst.org/forum/...

There are plenty more.

It's a stupid comparison.
If the submitter wanted to be honest, he'd compare this guy's conviction to others that comitted similar crimes, like David Ray Camez, who ran carder.su, or the LulzSec guy.

Aaron Swartz was a man-child that couldn't handle the fact the I'm famous on the interwebz defense wasn't going to fly, and his actions would have repercussions.
I'd say there's no comparison whatsoever.

They literally have whole cities just lying around idle. I mean, Spain's got one, sure, but they have several. The economy never developed sufficiently to employ people in jobs that would permit them to live in developed cities in a capitalist society... so the places rot.

You are quoting gloating "China is fallin - see?" populist Daily Mail-grade articles which have little to no relevance to reality.

I.e. OMG LOOK AT THIS GHOST CITY! Silly Chinese peoples. Don't they know any thing? Their stupid, stupid brains.

Meanwhile, in reality...
It's a case of combined schadenfreude over someone's perceived failure and a situation akin to when a small turnip farmer from Lower Bumfuck comes to a BigCityTM and starts despairing at the sight of a construction yard which will surely fail cause there is no chance that 50-storey building could ever be filled with people.
He could have planted turnips there.

Ordos is actually an entire prefecture. Slightly bigger than South Carolina or Austria (86,752 km2).
Population: ~1.9 million.
Urban population: ~582,544, living in the Dongsheng District.
That region has 16% of all coal reserves in China. And a 2nd highest income-per-capita in China.
It has a textile, petrochemical, car, electricity generating and a building industry - all built on the back of all that coal.
And they are using it to rapidly urbanize the prefecture - pooling all those 1.9 million people in one place.
http://www.theatlantic.com/chi...
http://www.vagabondjourney.com...
http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes...

China is urbanizing RAPIDLY. At the rate of about 1% per year.
How much is 1% out of 1.35 billion people, yearly? About an entire Los Angeles of people looking for home, food, work, running water, electricity... and generally better living conditions than back in their village.
Year after year after year...

So, China is building entire cities from scratch and half coaxing half forcing people to move there.
Not just dropping apartment buildings or giant towers and sand islands that "someone will surely buy into" either.
Those are planned cities with built-in infrastructure (including all those "empty" parks and highways) to support hundreds of thousands of people with tens of thousands pouring yearly into Ordos alone, on a 20-year urbanization plan.
Many of those people coming in quite literally from the fields.

I asked the men where they had lived before moving to their apartments in Kangbashi. One of them, a 56-year-old man named Li Yonh Xiang, spoke up. "I lived here," he said.

Li had been born and raised just steps from the bench where he was sitting. About half of the 90-acre park had belonged to his family; the government bought the land in 2000. "When we were peasants, we lived according to the weather," Li said. "Now I live in a heated building with six floors. The city is very nice. There are many cars and buildings, but the air is very clean."

By stick and by carrot both.
http://europe.chinadaily.com.c...

China's urbanization program has been forced into motion by a fiscal policy that all but demands local cities expand to remain economically solvent. According to the World Bank, China's cities must fend for 80 percent of their expenses while only receiving 40 percent of the country's tax revenue, so land sales are often used to make up the difference.

Land is bought by cit

Can you cite some evidence please ChrisMaple? I thought this was refuted http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02...

Proof? You want proof? How about this?
http://www.runnersworld.com/fu...

The Federal Reserve doesn't work like that. The USA can maintain its government deficit because enough people are willing to buy US government bonds. If, one day, people no longer trust it to repay its debts, there will be a financial meltdown the like of which the world has never yet seen.

The largest purchaser of US bonds today is ... wait for it ... the Federal Reserve.

Because, if we talk about why a woman has three kids of unknown paternity at all, it reflects badly on her life choices and since that is her choice, we as a society must accept it. Anything else is "hate".

As in, this fictitious woman, I must hate her for even mentioning she might exist somewhere, as you have already implied in your post ... " my convenient self-serving narrative is not instantly and universally accepted as true and relevant"

The fact is, there is such a person, somewhere out there. The fact that you can't figure out hyperbole mixed in with my point, is proof that you are incapable of having a rational discussion. Your response is one of pure emotion. (I rest my case)

And there is probably more than one, since similar people are trotted out by the "Living Wage" proponents all the time. So, if it isn't true, then the "living wage" people are lying about it being "normal" and we don't need a "living wage" to help support this non-real person.

The lie is either we accept anecdotal evidence or we don't. Pick one. If it is acceptable for proponent of the cause you support ("living wage") then it is equally acceptable to use that as a case against it.

Please don't try to convince me that the proponents don't use such people in their propaganda.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes....

FYI, I realize that I violated my own rules on talking to supporters of "Living Wage" because they are simpletons. In simple terms, for my point to be valid, there must exist more than zero people that fit this description, and for your point to be valid there has to be none. Having watched any number of day time talk shows "Who's your baby's daddy?" I am confident that there exists at least one that resembles ...

https://www.google.com/search?...

Today, on Krugman, he mentions back when we did bail Texas out

From the Economist, a fairly conservative magazine, we have this map of net state-federal transfers. Illinois,New York, and California all pay more in fed taxes than they get back. Oddly De la Ware (sorry, just had to spell it that way) has the highest net payment vs recieved payments. But those blue states you like to skewer did pay more than they got. No bailouts. (And texas' bailout was well before the window surveyed). The bottom half of the chart, the states that received the most net bailout, lean a bit red (though not exclusively - Maine's in there too).

Greece: "Hey Russia, I'm broke. Can you help me out with some money? I'll be your best friend!"
Russia: "Um, okay." (beat) "Hey, China, I'm broke. Can you help me out with some money? I'll be your best friend!"
China: "Um, okay." (beat) "Wait, uh oh......"

How quickly you forget the unlimited swap lines the Fed opened for European banks, including the ECB, during the most recent financial crisis. You would be insolvent now if it weren't for the Fed's largesse, yet you criticize Greece for asking to borrow a tiny fraction of the amount you borrowed? As Bagehot said, "Men of business have keen sensations but short memories."

If you're looking for details and depth, Paul Krugman's Op-Ed is a good place to start. His blog posts also have much of the same content if you're having trouble with the NYT paywall.

If you're looking for details and depth, Paul Krugman's Op-Ed is a good place to start. His blog posts also have much of the same content if you're having trouble with the NYT paywall.

Three people, working independently, made errors in programming and website updates which nearly bankrupted United Airlines when the errors came together on September 8, 2008. "Shares fell to about $3 from more than $12 in less than an hour, wiping more than $1 billion in value before trading was halted.".

When the market first opened that Monday, United Airlines was trading at over $12 a share. The public summary of the events state that Chicago Tribune re-indexed their archives, resulting in a six-year-old story about United Airlines bankruptcy to be re-posted on the Web site of The South Florida Sun-Sentinel without a date. Google picked up the "new" article, saw the missing date, and inserted the current date of 9/8/2008. That article was picked up by a research firm, Income Securities Advisers, which then posted a link to it on a page on Bloomberg News, which sent a news alert based on the old article. The news alert triggered automated trading systems to issue sell orders. Nasdaq finally ordered a halt in trading the stock at 11:08 a.m, but the damage had been done, United Airlines Stock had lost 75% of it's value.

Three people, working independently, made errors in programming and website updates which nearly bankrupted United Airlines when the errors came together on September 8, 2008. "Shares fell to about $3 from more than $12 in less than an hour, wiping more than $1 billion in value before trading was halted.".

When the market first opened that Monday, United Airlines was trading at over $12 a share. The public summary of the events state that Chicago Tribune re-indexed their archives, resulting in a six-year-old story about United Airlines bankruptcy to be re-posted on the Web site of The South Florida Sun-Sentinel without a date. Google picked up the "new" article, saw the missing date, and inserted the current date of 9/8/2008. That article was picked up by a research firm, Income Securities Advisers, which then posted a link to it on a page on Bloomberg News, which sent a news alert based on the old article. The news alert triggered automated trading systems to issue sell orders. Nasdaq finally ordered a halt in trading the stock at 11:08 a.m, but the damage had been done, United Airlines Stock had lost 75% of it's value.

There is plenty of evidence that most bitcoin mines are moving to use hydroelectric power and geothermal. They aren't doing so out of a sense of environmental altruism , but simply because "greener" power is less expensive. http://gizmodo.com/why-bitcoin... http://www.datacenterknowledge... https://www.cryptocoinsnews.co... http://dealbook.nytimes.com/20... http://www.coindesk.com/my-lif...

http://www.theguardian.com/com...

http://www.nature.com/news/why...

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/18/...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/a...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.mysterypollster.com...

http://www.examiner.com/articl...

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/general...

http://www.outsidethebeltway.c...

http://nautil.us/blog/why-were...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07...

http://articles.economictimes....

First few links from the search engine typing in "why are election polls often wrong"...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-pol...

http://time.com/3558932/pollin...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.u...

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/08/...

http://www.kansas.com/news/loc...

Shut up. Just close your stupid mouth. Sit down. And don't speak again until addressed. You're an idiot. It has been officially noticed.

To scare people into thinking that the FBI is necessary for stability? It's not that weird. After all, we have evidence that this very same department encouraged unstable individuals to carry out terror plots so that they could stop them, presumably to confirm that terrorism is a persistent threat in the US and thereby justify their own jobs.

I'm not saying that's the case here, just that I wouldn't be surprised if it's discovered that undercover FBI agents are helping root out these "domestic terrorists" who are "threatening critical national infrastructure"....

Prove it.

Given the number of times they've been caught lying in the past — including very recent past — the burden of proof is on Iran — and its apologists. The same apologists, who have no problems protesting Iran's innocence, while at the same time arguing for their right to have nuclear weapons...

Oh, and TFA itself is proof — the argument, that Iran are doing it "for energy" is defeated by the simple Math presented here.

It is admirable, that you wish to apply the "innocent until proven guilty" principle even to foreign regimes, but it is also naïve. Even in the legal system and offender on probation has to continuously prove innocence...

But realize that the propaganda machine is using the WMD line to trance you into gearing up for war, just like they did for Iraq.

So, your argument for Iran's innocence is our attack on Iraq? I fail to see a connection... The above-enumerated lies are totally independent of whether or not I am unduly influenced by some ominous propagandists — whom you would not even cite.

Have you considered the possibility, that it just might be you, who are a propaganda-victim? A "deal" with Iran (and Cuba) is the only good legacy Obama can have: despite all the Statist interventions (like the "Cash for Clunkers" flop) the economy is contracting, the Ukraine-related sanctions against Russia should've been Georgia-related and tightened instead of abolished in 2010, Obamacare is increasingly unpopular.

Bringing "peace for our time" with the mullahs would be — he foolishly thinks — something he could point a finger at. The way Clinton can point to his — equally foolish deal with North Korea. This is why they push for the "deal" — the same inept morons, who tried to befriend Putin with a plastic button...

Prove it.

Given the number of times they've been caught lying in the past — including very recent past — the burden of proof is on Iran — and its apologists. The same apologists, who have no problems protesting Iran's innocence, while at the same time arguing for their right to have nuclear weapons...

Oh, and TFA itself is proof — the argument, that Iran are doing it "for energy" is defeated by the simple Math presented here.

It is admirable, that you wish to apply the "innocent until proven guilty" principle even to foreign regimes, but it is also naïve. Even in the legal system and offender on probation has to continuously prove innocence...

But realize that the propaganda machine is using the WMD line to trance you into gearing up for war, just like they did for Iraq.

So, your argument for Iran's innocence is our attack on Iraq? I fail to see a connection... The above-enumerated lies are totally independent of whether or not I am unduly influenced by some ominous propagandists — whom you would not even cite.

Have you considered the possibility, that it just might be you, who are a propaganda-victim? A "deal" with Iran (and Cuba) is the only good legacy Obama can have: despite all the Statist interventions (like the "Cash for Clunkers" flop) the economy is contracting, the Ukraine-related sanctions against Russia should've been Georgia-related and tightened instead of abolished in 2010, Obamacare is increasingly unpopular.

Bringing "peace for our time" with the mullahs would be — he foolishly thinks — something he could point a finger at. The way Clinton can point to his — equally foolish deal with North Korea. This is why they push for the "deal" — the same inept morons, who tried to befriend Putin with a plastic button...

The coup was a counter-coup. The Iranian PM was the one that overthrew the government, faked an election, dissolved parliament, was ruling by decree, and caused the Shah to flee.

That's not even close to true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://partners.nytimes.com/li...
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

The government of Iran had been overthrown by the Prime Minister who faked an election, dissolved parliament, and was ruling by decree while ignoring the Shah as constitutional monarch. (You know, the traditional head of government being responsible to head of state?) Not even Stalin faked elections as brazenly as the Iranian PM. The Shah fled for his own safety. The US and UK helped restore the Shah to power, not install him.

That is 100% false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

http://partners.nytimes.com/li...

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

It is not that it's some kind of a secret but, still, I find amusing that the obvious fact that current Greek situation was a well planned trap of central/northen Europe and economical lobbies against south Europe economies doesn't gather but a fraction of mindshare than the "Greeks must pay" and "Greeks lived above their means".

Ah, well, straight into conspiracy theory from the beginning, glad you cleared that up.

I, for one, find it amusing how quickly you dismissed the statement you replied to. Granted, the 'Greek government stole the money' is an over-simplification, but the alacrity with which you move past it to lay the blame to Germany and France is remarkable. So, let's see.

• Goldman falsifying the financial situation of Greece to facilitate euro entry. Really? you're bringing up the pre-euro deal instead of the post-euro swaps that were done to hide the fact that Greece's deficit levels were higher than what the Maastricht treaty allowed? I mean, correcting a previously declared 7% to a whooping 12.7% debt level in 2010 is ... all Goldman's fault, right? Did they file the paperwork to Eurostat themselves, too? Regardless, it's just one more Goldman deal, so your argument ... stands? Yet you seem to conveniently ignore that Greece needed the swaps to hide a pre-existing debt level that was too high for European treaties, both for joining and later for being in the euro. Are you going to blame outsiders (Goldman or not) for that pre-existing debt as well?
• war compensations. All I'm going to say about that is, timing and insistence here make the claim suspect. Some parts of the world have something called statute of limitations - and while 70 years might still qualify in some situations, Greece can hardly claim that it was in no position to pursue the damages during all this time. Anyway, there can be merit to the war compensations issue and I'm not opposed to the idea, but (1) it is entirely unrelated to the crisis (and only brought up in populist discourse) and (2) what is still stopping Greece from formally trying to solve it? Saying you should give me that much money without ever initiating proceedings to at least legally determine if and how much is actually owed is disingenuous.
• Military budget. I guess this is a clear example of an agenda not bothering with contradicting facts. According to this 2013 piece more than 70% of Greece's military budget at the time was personnel costs, so arms buying was not the largest slice. (see what I did there? it's called references. Practice it.) Also, you might want to consider returning arms to the US first - while Greece is the largest single buyer for German and French weapons, those together are less than its US weapons purchases. But I guess that does not fit with the Northern Europe narrative (hey, when did the French become northerners?)

• Money not supporting the Greek economy. You're conveniently ignoring facilities like the ELA that put money directly into the Greek economy, via its banks - how else do you think Greek banks would have afforded all the withdrawals happening lately? - while again ignoring the fact that those money do not bring about growth. Well, it's in line with the fact that Greece's deficit spending, when corrected for the pre-2010 lies to Eurostat, did not produce a commensurate economic growth. It makes one wonder how long did Greece expect to be able to keep it up.

Now, blame is a funny thing, and seeing how one apportions it gives a useful insight on which side of a fence one is. The list above is by no means exhaustive and it is one-sided only because it tries to put some paint on paper areas that you intentionally left blank. There's also paint to be placed on the other side of the paper, and in fact you've been doing a very poor job of it as well. My advice to you is, do your homework, p

"Online-media revolutionaries once figured they could eat TV’s lunch by stealing TV’s business model" ref

I disagree, some people in television thought they could recreate the television broadcast modem online - as in videos interrupted by adverts. They were wrong on two counts, people didn't like their videos being interrupted and the Internet couldn't scale to the numbers that a conventional broadcast could. If you take a look at the television demography - the audience is growing older. If online-media wasn't such a threat then why did the Murdochs expend much energy in shuting it down. ref ref

I didn't just cite one source, half wit.

I cited a lot of things. And mostly recently I cited a peer reviewed paper.

Choke on it.

Did you say check on it? OK! Here's a complete list (as of this writing) of your citations in this thread in chronological order:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvfAtIJbatg (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.populartechnology.n... (Site is a one man operation that doesn't identify the operator or his alleged "staff". Attempts to debunk Cook paper by cherry-picking results from a nebulous survey.)
http://www.nature.com/news/pub... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://articles.mercola.com/si... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://arstechnica.com/science... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.the-scientist.com/?... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja... (opinion piece written by a lawyer (who doesn't appear to have ever practiced law) who claims to be a "trained scientist". The article relies exclusively on research done by unnamed "investigative journalists" at populartechnology.com - a blog that by all appearances is operated by a single unidentified individual.)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/201... (first mention of a legitimate source rebutting the Cook paper)
http://link.springer.com/artic... (legitimate source debunking Cook)

So what have we got here...looks like a bunch of citations that have nothing to do with the Cook paper, one citation from a clearly bogus website, One citation written by a hack lawyer relying exclusively on the aforementioned bogus website, one citation from a pop-sci website alluding to an authoritative source, and (finally) a citation pointing to a legitimate source. And guess what? I've recognized your final source's potential legitimacy multiple times. You should probably take that as a win and call it a day.

In any event, don't you think you could've saved yourself a lot of time, effort, aggravation and ridicule if you'd have just kept your mouth shut until you actually come across a legitimate source? Instead, your process (if you can call it that) of supporting your arguments is to link to sources that you haven't subjected to any scrutiny whatsoever. It's a textbook example of a lack of critical thinking skills.

As to your claim that there is only one peer reviewed paper refuting your peer reviewed paper...

You're making things up again. I made no such claim. And for the last time, Cook's paper isn't MY paper. The only time I addressed it's validity I expressed skepticism of it's conclusions. Since you're having trouble remembering, here, let me help you:

"To be honest, I

Improv,

We are in the "cargo cult" phase of neurological research. Our level of cognitive understanding is like that of the South Pacific islanders who made bamboo replicas of WWII airplanes and radios after the GIs left. The islanders said to themselves "We must be very close to reproducing these wonders, because our airplanes and radios looks so much those of the GIs. Now we just sit back and wait for the magic goods to come out of the airplanes and wise voices to come out of the radios."

If you really don't know how little we understand about the brain, NY Times science writer James Gorman can explain it to you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11...

There seems to be the belief among many of you that companies hire the best candidates. In turn, when those hired are white males, it seems to reinforce (ridiculous) stereotypes about women and minorities. There is research that demonstrates the biases that exist in hiring and how it affects many different groups, but in particular women, minorities, those from poorer demographic groups, and older workers. For an overview, look at this New York Times opinion piece; following some of the references might be enlightening. Some of you might view the entrance of startups into this area as proof that something is going on.

There seems to be the belief among many of you that companies hire the best candidates. In turn, when those hired are white males, it seems to reinforce (ridiculous) stereotypes about women and minorities. There is research that demonstrates the biases that exist in hiring and how it affects many different groups, but in particular women, minorities, those from poorer demographic groups, and older workers. For an overview, look at this New York Times opinion piece; following some of the references might be enlightening. Some of you might view the entrance of startups into this area as proof that something is going on.

They might go to a shitty underfunded public school.

The very concept of "public school" is fairly recent. Not only did Aristotle grow up without one, neither Benjamin Franklin nor Thomas Jefferson attended one either. Thomas Edison was homeschooled.

They might get harassed by the police on a regular basis, charged with a felony in a situation where a white kid would get a slap on the wrist, and have their lives effectively ruined by a criminal record.

Even if true, how is this different from what Jews suffered in Europe for centuries?

Why are the supposedly "racist cops" (many of them Black, BTW) today only targeting African Americans? If they really were White Supremacists, wouldn't the statistics for Asian Americans be just as gloomy? Immigrant Blacks are doing much better than the native-born ones too.

A theory contradicting observable facts is wrong. Your explanation is thus without merit. Whether or not there really is "institutional racism" or whatever in America, it simply does not explain the woeful underperformance of African Americans.

It's definitely not as bad for black people as it was 50 years ago, or even 25 years ago

Actually, you are wrong again — it is worse than 50 years ago. Despite — or, more likely, because of — decades of various policies advocated by your kind, the Blacks' satisfaction is lower today, than it was in 1964. Although, yeah, it may be better than 20 years ago...

(Note, that I'm not putting forth my own theories here. I'm just obliterating yours.)

And yet it happened:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...

Also this notion that peer review catches all frauds is laughable:
http://www.nature.com/news/pub...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://articles.mercola.com/si...

http://arstechnica.com/science...

http://www.the-scientist.com/?...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04...

As to your point about reading the abstracts. That's not enough. You need to actually have the study itself vetted. And peer review does not do that.

These studies are getting busted all the time for making things up or using really sloppy methodology that could be "interpreted" to mean anything... often transparently the author had a conclusion they wanted before even starting the study.

That isn't real science. That's what creationists do. You have to do your study with an open mind and accept whatever the study might say. No forming your theory before the data comes in and no shaping the data to fit your theory. It is FINE to have a hypothesis before you start the study. But it can't go beyond that until you've actually got the data in... and then you base the theory on the data... you do not shape the data to equal your hypothesis.

And that is frequently what is going on.

I wouldn't say they are failing in deploying robots, it's probably just not as easy as they thought but it is definitely having an impact. And you have to remember Chinese workers have been getting more expensive with 12% year over year for a number of years. So they aren't the cheapest workforce in the world any more. A lot of manufacturing of clothes moved to Bangladesh to name one country.

Here is an example of an article from 2007 which mentions the wage growth:

"Wages in China have nearly doubled over the past four years"
http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/...

___

An article on where Foxconn is with building lights-off factories:

On Wednesday, the company’s CEO revealed Foxconn has a fully automated factory in operation in the Chinese city of Chengdu. “We haven’t talked much about the factory, but it’s manufacturing a product from a very famous company,” Gou said, without elaborating.

The factory can run for 24-hours with the lights off, he added. In addition, Foxconn has been adding 30,000 of its own industrial robots to its factories each year. “We don’t sell them, because we don’t have enough for our own use yet,” he added.

http://www.pcworld.com/article...

___

And an article on the loss of jobs in factories in China:

Automation has already had a substantial impact on Chinese factory employment: Between 1995 and 2002 about 16 million factory jobs disappeared, roughly 15 percent of total Chinese manufacturing employment. This trend is poised to accelerate.

That might not be a problem if the Chinese economy were generating plenty of higher-skill jobs for more educated workers. The solution, then, would simply be to offer more training and education to displaced blue-collar workers.

The reality, however, is that China has struggled to create enough white-collar jobs for its soaring population of college graduates. In mid-2013, the Chinese government revealed that only about half of the country’s current crop of college graduates had been able to find jobs, while more than 20 percent of the previous year’s graduates remained unemployed.

According to one analysis, fully 43 percent of Chinese workers already consider themselves to be overeducated for their current positions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

That was ruled on over a decade ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/26/politics/26WIRE-SODO.html

Someone should tell the New York Times that their own article on the subject doesn't agree with an AC on Slashdot.

While they found that under some counting systems Gore would have won, in others Bush would still win. The Gore victories often happened in unrealistic counting scenarios set up by the consortium doing the recount but when using the most realistic possible standard (they asked each county to provide their criteria for counting a valid vote) Bush still won.

In most cases, regardless of the scenario they applied, the vote totals gave a victory to one side or the other by only a couple hundred votes.

In either case they found the Supreme Court decision had no impact on the election since the methodology and rules in place at the time led to a Bush victory with or without the recount.

While it had its place in the 18th and 19th century, the Electoral college has long outlived its usefulness. The entire concept of winner-take-all in most states means that only a few key states actually decide our election every time it comes around....until the rules change, that's how the system works whether you like it or not.

I'd like to agree with you, but it depends on the proposed method of election. Given the population distribution and unique division of powers between state and national governments within our nation, I'm not a fan of a direct popular vote for the presidency. I just don't believe it best encapsulates the spirit of our nation. While I would generally support a change over to the Congressional District Method, I am greatly concerned about gerrymandering and its affect on such a proposed alternative solution.

In fact, check out the statistics at the Daily Kos, then do the math. If every state followed the Congressional District Method, Romney would have won the 2012 election...by one electoral vote! Interestingly, Obama would have still won the 2008 election. I wonder what happened between 2008 and 2012 that would have made such a difference...