Slashdot Mirror

Four of the largest technology companies tentatively settled on Thursday a class action brought by 64,000 of their engineers, who accused them of agreeing not to solicit one another’s employees. The amount of the settlement was not released, but people with knowledge of the deal said it was in the neighborhood of $300 million.

[...]

As a result of all these machinations, the suit claimed, the mobility and income of the engineers suffered. A guilty verdict in a trial might have meant the defendants would have had to pay triple damages of as much as $9 billion.

The settlement resulted in an average payout (after fees) of ~$2300 per engineer, while fighting out the case and winning would have netted closer to $77k per engineer after fees. The engineers would have had to have just a 3% chance of winning the suit for it to be worthwhile to proceed with the case, and their odds of winning would almost certainly have been substantially higher. However, for the law firm, fighting out the case would have consumed many more billable hours than settling, so their payout (per billable hour) would not have been nearly as high if they won, and they faced a huge loss in terms of unpaid hours spent if the case was litigated and lost. That the lawyers decided to settle rather than continue to pursue the suit is a rational decision for them, but much less so for the plaintiffs they represented.

If we can make alternative energy work, that is.

Oil is... it's great, but there's a high cost, mainly air pollution which may cause autism and heart disease among other problems.

The spills are disasters which cause ongoing problems for decades if not longer.

In addition, the scarcity of the resource makes future wars, politics, etc. inevitable.

I'm looking for one of those reactor-type-devices from the end of "Back to the Future" that can deconstruct ordinary household waste and produce high amounts of energy. Were I President of the ol' USA, I'd slam resources into that before anything else but space exploration.

People never wanted buggy whips. People wanted transport. Buggy whips were just a means to that end.

There were 13,000 businesses in the wagon and carriage industry in 1890. A company survived not by conceiving of itself as being in the ''personal transportation'' business, but by commanding technological expertise relevant to the automobile. The people who made the most successful transition were not the carriage makers, but the carriage parts makers, some of whom are still in business.

One is the giant Timken Company, whose signature products, roller bearings, were first used in wagon wheels in the 1890s. They easily adapted to the automobile because they could be applied ''to nearly anything that moved.''

Failing Like a Buggy Whip Maker? Better Check Your Simile [2010

How about you track blacks and whites that live in the country and then blacks and white in the cities.

The figures are nationwide. Minorities have to wait twice as long to vote as whites:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02...

What you're saying is if I get in line to vote behind a black person, the polling officials will pull me out of line to go ahead of him, and make him wait an extra 30 minutes as well?

No. A specific case does not reflect the "average".

All it says is the lines are longer in black neighborhoods.

Regarding citations, I'm pretty sure you could have found this one yourself. It was the first google result:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02...

I cited specifically Michigan in my statement, but the NYTimes article indicates nationwide blacks and hispanics wait twice as long to vote as whites.

“Your technological model,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. told Aereo’s lawyer, “is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don’t want to comply with.”

and

“I’m hearing everybody having the same problem,” he said of his fellow justices. “I will be absolutely prepared, at least for argument’s sake, to assume” that Aereo’s service is unlawful.

This is ugly... it seems like they have already decided that its illegal and they are trying to figure out why going out of your way to avoid breaking copyright law is illegal.

Hence my use of the phrase "modern day". My belief is that power/and money were less concentrated here in the US in the past. Certainly the oligarchs in the US are more brazen and open about it. Is the US more fair and open than Russia and other systems. Possibly but not the extent it used to be. I suggest that the size and strength of the middle class is the best indicator of health and fairness.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04...

I still believe US is the best place to live all things considered, but we need to change course a bit or it won't stay that way for future generations.

just because prohibition didn't make the nation go cold turkey, doesn't mean that it had no effect whatsoever. I find it hard to believe that removing easy access to alcohol had no impact whatsoever on the rate of consumption. which is why i did a quick google search and http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10...

which, granted was from 1989, and has some flaws in conclusions drawn. but if its numbers are to be believed prohibition reduced alcohol by any measureable metric. and yeah

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...

just because it didn't succeed at its aims, does not mean it was absent accomplishment.

Bullshit. They will get built, and they will work properly. You do things differently when your ass on the line.

The US no longer has manned spacecraft, etc. because of the Challenger disaster. How many billions was lost? How much confidence was lost? All because they went ahead with the launch to save time and money against the warnings from the engineer who said it would fail. And Boisjoley was blacklisted and destroyed for it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02...

Let people run things without accountability and cut corners for profit and you will always end up with a Citicorp, Fukushima, Gulf Spill, Challenger, etc. And in the long term, we will be worse off. Especially with nuclear disasters that will ruin large areas for generations to come.

'You need to be very adaptable, so that you have a baseline skill set that allows you to be a call center operator today and tomorrow be able to interpret MRI scans.'

That's the stupidest fucking thing anyone has ever said.

At least he admitted their bullshit interview questions were designed to make the interviewer feel important and were a complete waste of time.

Sounds like Google is getting a head start on making everything else at their company a waste of time. Maybe they'll hire some grownups someday who have some respect for other people's educations.

Hey Laszlo. There are indie romance novelists who make more than in a month than you make in a year. English degrees produce billionaires. The only people who become billionaires in computers are dropouts.

Now go back to your meeting.

Obama was on Seal Team Six? I didn't know that. He was working with the CIA to track down Bin Laden in Pakistan, before he was President?...

When Obama became President, no one in the CIA was tracking down bin Laden in Pakistan. In 2005 George W. Bush shut down the CIA unit tasked with tracking bin Laden (code named Alec Station and established in 1996 by Bill Clinton). "C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden".

It took an executive action by Obama to recreate an intelligence unit to pick up the hunt, and then a tough call to send the SEAL team in when the intelligence about bin Laden's presence was still uncertain. A weaker man would have temporized about the uncertainty and done nothing (GW Bush and Tora Bora?).

BTW - the right's adulation of GW Bush as a hero, strutting in front of his "Mission Accomplished" banner, when he had never fired a shot in the invasion, while pretending Obama had nothing to do with the termination of bin Laden "because he wasn't on Seal Team Six" is a double standard so glaring that it makes one stand dumb-founded at the intellectual dishonesty involved. Yeah, and Reagan defeated the Soviet Union single-handedly. Right.

http://frugalliving.about.com/...
http://www.drfuhrman.com/libra...

Leafy greens especially are really important to preventing many diseases. Cabbage is a fairly cheap one. You can steam the cabbage while cooking the rice. Dandelions are a terrific source of healthy greens (if they have not been sprayed with weedkiller etc.). It's crazy that people have been taught to hate healthy Dandelions.

Our stainless steel "Miracle" rice cooker with a steamer attachment was one of our best kitchen investments ($70) as it does not have Teflon as most rice cookers do, but we worked up to it from cheaper Teflon ones.

Without good food, the mind and body can go into a downward spiral of low energy and depression -- thus a cycle of poverty. Hunter/gathers are more than 100 different types of food over the course of a year. Getting calories in not enough -- you need micronutrients too, and that means a diversity of foods -- but they don't have to be expensive foods.

Of course, so many sick care schemes (Medicaid, Medicare, "health" insurance) will pay for expensive drugs and surgeries but won;t pay for good food to avoid drugs and surgeries. It doesn't help that stressed-out people tend to bulk up on calories as an ages old survival mechanism, not knowing where the next meal may be coming from. This is all made worse by US farm policy:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes....
"Thanks to lobbying, Congress chooses to subsidize foods that weâ(TM)re supposed to eat less of."

Watch out for additives in bullion that might cause headaches and such. Lots of bad headaches could make it hard to keep a job or graduate from college.

Beans are also cheaper to buy dried than canned -- except you need to know how to prepare them and have a place to cook them and the electricity or gas too cook them, which together may not be possible for many students.

People need a healthy source of fat, too -- something lacking in what you outline. The brain is mostly fat, so it is no wonder on low fat (or poor fat) diets that people can get messed up mentally. Nuts can be one, but they tend to be expensive and they may be lacking in Omegas 3s. Eggs might be a good cheap choice of fat including some Omega-3s for many people; some other sources:
http://www.self.com/blogs/flas...

Eating vegetarian in general is healthier and cheaper. So is buying the right things in bulk, maybe splitting big purchases with others.

We also got a lot of value from a $100 blender to do smoothies from frozen fruit -- but that is beyond very cheap (although still cheaper and much healthier than a carton of ice cream).

Still, something like a "basic income" may be a needed as a general solution to poverty. The problem with a lot of frugal advice is that it forces people to take on various risks (like health risks of lack of vegetables, or safety risk of a cheap car, or assault risk in a bad neighborhood, and so on). Or it entails doing a lot of time consuming things that prevent more productive activities. Your advice though is very time-saving and practical, which is why I like it (except for quibbles on some of the above points as far as long-term living).

I cited actual an actual peer reviewed study. You sited an anecdotal opinion piece from an absurdly biased internet "news" site. The title of the article is a joke followed by a question but I read it despite this sad attempt at journalism. What I discovered is that your citation doesn't even support your original argument. The farmer in the article just used traditional crop rotation methods to reduce his use of GMO seeds, pesticides and herbicides. This single example is also in one of the most fertile farming valleys in North America.

There is no point in continuing a "conversation" with someone who is so easily fooled by baseless suppositions but adamantly opposed to science.

I would have ended the conversation when your resorted to personal insults but this topic really bothers me. Organic farmers and health activists aren't just saying "Hey! This way is better!". They said that but they're still being outperformed by other farmers so they have resorted to lobbying politicians to make everyone else's way illegal. I'll end this conversation with this final unbiased example citation and hope that at some point you chose facts over feelings and assumptions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01...

“How the hell can you ignore this?” - Robert Boisjoly, Thiokol booster rocket engineer for the Challenger
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02...

“They completely ignored me in order to save Tepco money,” - Kunihiko Shimazaki, a retired professor of seismology at the University of Tokyo
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03...\

For things that are too big to fail and would cause major disaster, the corporate shield must be removed and executive management must be held directly responsible. Financially and criminally.

“How the hell can you ignore this?” - Robert Boisjoly, Thiokol booster rocket engineer for the Challenger
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02...

“They completely ignored me in order to save Tepco money,” - Kunihiko Shimazaki, a retired professor of seismology at the University of Tokyo
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03...\

For things that are too big to fail and would cause major disaster, the corporate shield must be removed and executive management must be held directly responsible. Financially and criminally.

Given that Ford earned $7.2 Billion in net income in 2013 and GM made a $3.8 billion profit over the same period I think GM and Ford will be very surprised to hear that they cannot make cars in the US profitably since most of their profit comes from US operations.

They'd only be surprised if you told them they'd be doing it in Detroit, instead of non-union plants in other U.S. states:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/...

You don't need to expand factories to make the efficient.

Correct. You just need to reduce the number of employees to increase the profit per employee, which is something you can do with automation, and.or lower wages, which is not something you can do in Michigan.

Bennett is also not an information security expert.

He wanted to be, but Microsoft said he was "too dumb for it". I doubt that was the real reason. He sounds like a total asshat.

Yep, seems to be about that way. I've got some blue tomato seed that has no patents on it (Dancing With Smurfs, actual name), and no one makes a fuss about it. I don't see what their point is here. I was about to mod you up but since I actually work with plant breeding think I'll give my own 2 cents instead.

The claim in TFA about being worried about no more germplasm is totally ridiculous. With my blue tomatoes I've got a bunch of heirloom varieties of things (Blue Jade sweet corn, Dragon Tongue bean, Red Kuri squash, Giant Prague celeriac, Star of David okra, and lots more) that can in no way be patented. They are there, and as long as people keep propagating them they'll always be there, free to use. Furthermore, the patents on plants do expire; Honeycrisp apples used to be pateneted, but they're not anymore (by the way, that patent brought in tons of money to the program that developed it, allowing them to develop some other pretty amazing varieties). And Monsanto (because everyone brings up Monsanto) is not an exception here; their first Roundup Ready soybean goes off patent in a few months. That means this very year, farmers can, if they choose, save that variety and plant it for the 2015 crop. I really can't see the problem people have with these sorts of patents, isn't that how things are supposed to work? Develop, patent, recoup losses, then the invention falls to the public domain, and the profit is reinvested for new innovations (ex. SnowSweet apples and DroughtGard corn). Don't like patented plants? Fine, don't grow them, problem solved. And with the 'farmers sued for cross pollination' thing being a myth (no, accidental cross pollination is not the same as intentional selection any more than making a home movie is the same as recording a film in a theater and selling it), so I really don't get the Monsanto hate people are inevitably going to flame up with this. The vast majority of the reasons they are demonized for are nothing but lies, and yet somehow, Monsanto is still the bad guy here, not the weasels lying and being emotionally manipulative to make an extremely important technology look evil via guilt by proxy.

Additionally, I am envious of these guys if they have a program that has enough money to release things for free, although reading TFA it seems like they will be picking and choosing which is released for free and which is patented, indicating this is just a way to get some good publicity out of things that would otherwise be discarded. I work with a breeding project and you can bet whatever comes out of it will be patented, not because I'm out to get rich (we'd all go corporate if money was the prime concern) but because there is not enough funding for public agriculture research. You think we want to? We don't, but breeding programs need funding. That's a fact of life. Times are hard for funding, and sometimes it seems the only time the public stops long enough to pay attention is to demonize us for saying GMOs don't cause cancer, or autism, or whatever the hell the denialists and conspiracy theorists are prattling on about today. Maybe if everyone called up their local congresscritters and other politicians and demanded more funding for their land grant universities and public agriculture research that wouldn't be the case. Ever been to a corporate lab? Well I have, and it'd be great to have the equipment they can afford. But hey, go on attacking Monsanto and other private breeders for trying to support themselves (anyone think pluots just magically appeared? Someone spend a hell of a lot of time and effort developing those, nice to hear from the anti-plant patent crowd that they deserve to get screwed over for it), I'm sure hurting them will make all the actual problems magically disappear.

All that aside, its damned cool that they're working with quinoa bree

the Colorado Government is already at it with their right wing propaganda

Colorado is (narrowly) governed by the Democrats, not right wing. The Democratic governor is trying to slow down states from legalizing, despite it being a roaring success for everyone.

In fact what you'll find these days, is that most right-wing people lean libertarian - which is exactly why the people of Colorado (who lead independent/to the right) were perfectly fine legalizing something so many people did all the time anyway.

Look to the Democrats to shut it down... They are the ones that need the massive funds the government gets from the war on drugs to help fund lots of other progressive measures.

The thing is, the NYT has a lot of high quality articles still, even if their newsroom is all liberal. They go deeply into subjects and do good research. You shouldn't believe everything they say, and if it's important, you should verify; but they give you good overview of the world.

Another high quality newspaper is the Wall Street Journal. If you're looking for print, it can't be beat, for similar reasons. The main difference is the WSJ focuses more on economic issues, and the NYT focuses more on social issues.

The editorial staff of both newspapers is mediocre, but the quality of the guest editorials can't be beaten, in both papers. You have ex presidents, or the commanding officer of the armed forces of Lebanon. Maybe you don't agree with the guest editorials, but they are often worth reading, more than the average blogger.

Do people REALLY still cling to the myth that the New York Times is not a left-wing newspaper? Puh-leez. We're adults here, people. In this day and age, we're still denying basic facts like this? You don't believe me, do you?

Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is.
--Source: The New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

My rent is 900. Any home I'd want to live in would be at least 250k. Property tax of at least 2.3% also kills it.
Investment rate in that calculator is also a pathetic 4% by default.

If your investment growth keeps tracks with inflation, then they balance out. If you can save 15K in 401(k) a year and put in an equivalent amount into a house, that is 30K a year and by the time you retire, should make you millionaire equivalent (zero inflation adjusted growth).
Add to this the fact that the profile of a millionaire is very similar to that of a Developer .
Average millionaire is educated with atleast college degree, earns about $100 K (which according to Dept of Labor) is what developers earn, own homes,work 40-50 hours a week etc.
Add to this the fact that most millionaires are very near retirement age and it makes it highly probable that a developer is highly probable to retire a millionaire.

Who is the victim of this heinous wiretapping crime?
If the bully's lawyer wants to attempt to use wiretapping as a defense, then ok.
But why should the cops bring it up?

The power of the District Attorney's office is shown here too.
Instead of going to court, they "took the deal".

More than 90 percent of criminal cases are never tried before a jury, in part because the Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that threatening someone with life imprisonment for a minor crime in an effort to induce him to forfeit a jury trial did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to trial.

You want right and wrong? Talk to a priest/rabbi/pastachef. The law, and the courts, are all about rules, and the interpretation of them, and they should be. Otherwise, we'd be making decisions like "yeah, he was illegally wiretapped, but he was a bad man, so we're going to convict him anyway."

The US justice system is unique in the world in completely throwing out a case if there is a procedural error:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07...
While I'm sure many will defend the way things are done in the US, it seems that this is something
that at least merits some discussion of the pluses and minuses of each way of doing things.

The national ACLU, post-Heller, has tried to stake out a position next to the the dead armadillos, but several state affiliates have consistently held (and local and national have occasionally defended) an individual-rights position.

A lot of it also has to do with the fact that the major rental companies don't compete on pricing because they all use the same third party software and algorithms to determine how much rental units should cost. Conveniently, this lets them avoid charges of price fixing/collusion. This article has more information: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04... explains in their 14 Apr edition that the Feds have Seen the Light and discontinued said policy because of the feedback from the Washington Post story. Every once in a while, we win one.

I do believe he is referring to Chernobyl since the stories we all hear claim the engineers disabled the safety systems to see if they could shut it down manually. Obviously they didn't.

The word "sabotage" implies harmful intent. This is a case where Hanlon's razor clearly rules out sabotage in favor of incompetence.

I will also say that is some good spinning you got going on there. You are the first person on Slashdot I've seen claim 3 meltdowns at Fukushima. I haven't even heard Faux News claim such a thing and you'd think they'd be all over that!

You must be that stereotypical ill-informed American who thinks they know it all. Care to click on the first link in my previous post and scroll down to "Japan"? Or look here or here or here or here.

Please stop misquoting Orwel, he was talking about war not about abusing prisoners.

"foreign democracies aren't as open as ours"

Of course how could any foreign democracy ever be as open as the US. Nothing in Europe or the rest of the world could *ever* touch the US in openness.

Hope you're feeling all snug and cozy under your blanket of US exceptionalism.

And of course you are completely missing the point, no surprise there. None of these foreign democracies ever legalized torture. In cases where the truth is revealed the foreign public reacts with well deserved disgust and outrage. The fact that so many in the US seem to be numbed to the violence conducted in its name is what's most disturbing.

"waterboarding is not torture"

The only Iraq war cheerleader with an ounce of honor actually checked this for himself. Christopher Hitchens changed his tune afterwards.

Your opinion in the matter is completely irrelevant, the procedure just like mock executions is of course well outside any civilized standard.

That you happily put yourself there speaks for itself, and makes my point in highlighting how far the US has fallen.

Fortunately some of this moral cravenness is offset by exceptional Americans like Snowden and Greenwald. Over the long run I am optimistic that the US will regain its misplaced moral compass.

They cancelled this policy almost immediately after it was brought to light.

Irrelevant. The fact that this started at all is yet more evidence that the "kinder gentler" IRS that 1990 era reforms were supposed to bring about failed and/or didn't stick. The IRS demonstrates, decade after decade, that it is a rogue agency.

Seriously folks - its time for a flat tax. Figure out what percentages are necessary for individuals and corporations to get the desired revenue and go with those and have no deductions at all.

Tax deductions are just the mechanism for political corruption.

With a simple flat tax the IRS can be downsized to a very very small fraction of what it is today. Its enforcement activities negligible. They take the % out of your paycheck, done, fully paid, no extra payments, no refunds, no system to game.

Posting anonymously to avoid IRS retaliation. :-)

They cancelled this policy almost immediately after it was brought to light.

By US law, the Fed returns its profits to the Treasury every year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01...

Consider the history of Microsoft. In the past, Microsoft didn't expend any significant money or effort on lobbying in Washington, D.C. Then during President Clinton's time in office, Microsoft faced serious threats from the Federal government... the worst being that a Federal judge actually ordered that Microsoft be split up. This order was voided by a higher court, so it didn't happen... but you had better believe that Microsoft took it as a hard lesson.

Microsoft now spends a great deal of money and effort on lobbying in D.C. I don't blame them for self-defense via lobbying. (I do blame them for attacking other companies via lobbying, if they do. See below for allegations that they do.)

Google isn't waiting for D.C. to turn on them; they are lobbying to "manage their relationship" with the Federal government. So is Facebook.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52483.html

Here's an article from 2008 about Google learning the importance of lobbying. It includes allegations that Microsoft was using its lobbying infrastructure to try to prevent a deal Google was trying to make with Yahoo.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/google-learns-lessons-in-the-ways-of-washington/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Now I'm picturing Google using its leverage to attack Microsoft, and Eric Schmidt saying "The circle is now complete. In 2008, Google was just a student... now I am the master."

The US has seen a minor decrease in carbon emissions over the last 5 years or so, but this likely at least in part due to the financial crisis. There has been no long-term decrease over the "last 20 years", as you state, so the US isn't setting an example in cutting emissions. What matters, then, is total current emissions, where the US second only to China. The US emitted 5.4 million tonnes in 2010. By comparison, India (one of the countries you single out) and the EU have combined emissions of 5.7 million tonnes. India and China have very much larger populations. The US emissions per capita for 2012 are 16.4 tonnes, whereas China's are 7.1 and India's a paltry 1.6. Clearly the US has a lot of work to do.

Kathleen Sebelius just announced her resignation. It's likely tied to the HealthCare.gov debacle although she is merely a scapegoat. Perhaps it also has to do with the supposedly funny numbers.

The "It doesn't count until they've paid a premium" talking point is pure desperation. They've already bet the farm on Obamacare being a huge flaming wreck, and now they're grasping at straws because it looks like it's more or less following the administration's expectations.

The liberal New York Times is against the ACA and grasping at straws? They list insurance company after insurance company that states huge percentages are failing to pay and finalize their enrollment. One insurance company rep believes it is just people shopping around, perhaps some folks are being double counted and the non-payments represent these double signups.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

Actual summary of article: "It seems really unlikely the enrollment numbers got met because that would have meant a lot of last minute sign-ups *shrugs*"

"Oh and by the way even if the enrollment numbers got met, it probably doesn't count because if you haven't paid your first month's premium you don't count as an enrollment number for some reason because we said so"

Payment is the final step in the enrollment process. No payment, no enrollment. Its pretty simple, if you haven't paid you haven't bought anything.

"Matthew N. Wiggin, a spokesman for Aetna, said that about 70 percent of people who signed up for its health plans paid their premiums ... "I think people are enrolling in multiple places,” he said in a conference call. “They are shopping. And what happens is that they never really get back on HealthCare.gov to disenroll from plans they prior enrolled in"
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

Plus a huge number of enrollees have not actually made an insurance premium payment so they are not really signed up and insured. What was the percentage being reported, something like 15% to 20%?

Straight out of the GOP talking points. Read the LA Times, they have article explaining it for the mentally challenged.

Are you sure that you are not the one with the political blinders on?

Clue: Politicians don't have to lie when the facts coincidentally happen to be on their side. A talking point is not inherently erroneous.

That said I am not a reader of the GOP talking points, I recalled the stats from traditional media. From the liberal New York Times:
"WASHINGTON — One in five people who signed up for health insurance under the new health care law failed to pay their premiums on time and therefore did not receive coverage in January, insurance companies and industry experts say. Paying the first month’s premium is the final step in completing an enrollment. Under federal rules, people must pay the initial premium to have coverage take effect ...

Lindy Wagner, a spokeswoman for Blue Shield of California, said that 80 percent of those who signed up for its plans had paid by the due date ...

Matthew N. Wiggin, a spokesman for Aetna, said that about 70 percent of people who signed up for its health plans paid their premiums ... "I think people are enrolling in multiple places,” he said in a conference call. “They are shopping. And what happens is that they never really get back on HealthCare.gov to disenroll from plans they prior enrolled in" ...

Kristin E. Binns, a vice president of WellPoint, said that 76 percent of people selecting its health plans on an exchange had paid their share of the first month’s premium ...

One big company, Humana, said it had received 200,000 applications for insurance through the exchanges. “About 75 percent of the people paid, and 25 percent did not pay,” ...

Greg Thompson, a spokesman for the Health Care Service Corporation, which offers Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in Illinois, Texas and three other states, said that “around 80 percent” of people choosing those plans had paid their first month’s premium ..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

I thought that the issue was in HOW they dealt with Bashir's condition, thanks to Khan genetic engineering was still a taboo thing.

It's a taboo thing in real life as well.

Don't pretend that Republicans are not hostile to science.

Don't pretend that Democrats are not hostile to science either.

How many of those 7 million signups are forced signups by prison inmates?

"The numbers turned out *much* higher than Fox News predicted, and I *know* that many people couldn't possibly want health insurance, because that brochure from the Heritage Foundation said so. It must be a conspiracy..."

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...

Wrong. Businesses descriminating against customers based on gender is absolutly against the law. The reason that 'Ladies Night' isn't a problem isn't because it is legal. It is because the law is not equally applied. Try putting a sign in the windows of your business that says "No Blacks Allowed", and see how long it takes for you to get your ass handed to you in court.

Citation: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05...

Agreed, "Ladies Night" has indeed been found to be illegal in most jurisdictions that have heard serious cases regarding it.

Wrong. Businesses descriminating against customers based on gender is absolutly against the law. The reason that 'Ladies Night' isn't a problem isn't because it is legal. It is because the law is not equally applied. Try putting a sign in the windows of your business that says "No Blacks Allowed", and see how long it takes for you to get your ass handed to you in court.

Citation: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05...

"The renowned Earth scientist and top Obama adviser Dr. John Holdren"?

http://tierneylab.blogs.nytime...

As the quote from Holdren shows, the man is scientifically illiterate; he actually believed that waste heat from energy generation is going to cause global warming. The fact that Obama chooses such a huckster to push his agenda demonstrates only that Obama doesn't give a f*ck about science.

Our representatives aren't supposed to be experts on science, but they are supposed to be able to make good decisions. I'm glad they are opposing Holdren's kind of b.s.

They can't keep up with the known threats

Comparative reviews since February 2009 - February 2014

Out-maneuvered by new threat vectors

Outmaneuvered at Their Own Game, Antivirus Makers Struggle to Adapt

Conventional security software is powerless against sophisticated attacks like Flame, but alternative approaches are only just getting started.

Some of them even get it, Eugene Kaspersky admits :

The contemporary antivirus industry and its problems

Happens all the time.

If you're talking about marriage, I suppose you didn't read this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...

(And the headline is not following Betteridge's law)

I'm sure the late John Kemeny, sbown hire watching daughter Jennifer write a BASIC program, would approve!