Slashdot Mirror

Which took me all of 30 seconds to find via a search (couldn't recall of the top fo my head)

Or maybe that's too much effort for you ?

First off, I did a search and found lots of McKinnon links, you stupid dick. Maybe if the original poster had "put the effort in" and actually listed the name, there wouldn't have been any ambiguity.

Second, a UK judge said what O'Dwyer did was illegal in the UK. From Wikipedia: "During O'Dwyer's extradition hearing, it was held by the judge that the offences alleged were also illegal under UK law. Whereas TV-Links was able to successfully argue it was a "mere conduit" under the EU Electronic Commerce Regulations 2002, aggregating content "they did not select or modify", O'Dwyer had exerted considerable control over the content hosted on TV-Shack, and therefore the allegations, if true, constituted a crime in the UK. [14]"

And from the cited reference: "However, Judge Purdy rejected the argument from Mr O'Dwyer's barrister, Ben Cooper of Doughty Street Chambers, because of the control the student had over what links were posted on TVShack.net and TVShack.cc.

[..]

"Firstly both TVShack websites were entirely in the hands of Richard O'Dwyer and his co conspirators requiring third parties to sign up to TVShack and be vetted before going further," Judge Purdy said.

The judge agreed with John Jones, barrister for the United States government, that "because he was intimately involved in deciding who was allowed to post links on the TVShack websites, which links would be posted", Mr O'Dwyer's alleged conduct was a criminal offence under British copyright law."

They could be doing it not just for practical purposes but possibly for setting up a DeBeers of rare earth metals.

Maybe they've just produced more than they can use?

the People's Bank of China cut rates in the world's second largest economy for the second time this year. This was quite unexpected and shows that Chinese policymakers have become seriously rattled by the evident slowdown in their economy.

...once buoyant Western export markets are in ragged retreat, and just how much more investment can the Chinese economy take before knocking up against already manifest levels of industrial overcapacity?

Most of the UN wanted to, but sadly Russia and China have interest in Syria and also a shitload of clout. Any proposed action would have been quashed.

I mean its blatantly obvious that the situation in Syria has been as bad or worse than the previous situation in Libya for quite some time. If you want to get angry, be angry with the fact that the rest of the UN, including the United States, the UK, Canada, etc, were all too much of a pack of wusses to call China and Russia out for being such dicks.

I honestly read that as Reginald Perrin...

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01387/Reginald_Perrin_1387994c.jpg

Well, if you look at the picture here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9346957/MEPs-reject-ACTA-piracy-treaty.html he might have meant what he said...

But no, I don't think the recent electoral successes have done that much to influence. However, the Swedish Pirate MEP's, Christian Engström and Amelia Andersdotter, have most certainly done a lot of work in the European Parliament. And I would wager that a lot of pirate party activists have been encouraged enough to actually mail various MEP's simply by having gotten somewhat organized.

But the proponents of ACTA have certainly made it easier as well; by acting as such utter douchebags throughout the process they've certainly made sure that nobody with the least knowledge of it could support it without looking like an utter tool. Having the first official parliament rapporteur on the treaty quit in disgust over the process and his replacement turning from positive to negative sent strong signals prior to committee votes.

This just a few minutes old...

Live coverage of the announcement, courtesy of The Telegraph.

Yes well, we wont extradite a child rapist either who actually committed a crime in the US:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9362298/Paedophile-spared-extradition-to-US-on-human-rights-grounds.html

But create a website the Americans don't like? That's it, off to the US with you!

Apparently a controversal programme is enough human rights grounds to prevent extradition of a paedophile, but the high potential for suicide (McKinnon) or the fact a guy will have his life ruined, and run a high risk of rape in a US jail despite having committed no crime in the US (O'Dwyer) isn't.

...And when has the UK EVER said NO to the US?

Our courts are so perverse that the only time they refuse it is when it is someone with US citizenship who clearly should have been sent back

I'm amazed the Iranians have been so restrained.

I'm amazed that anyone would say that they believe that.

Malaysia court orders extradition of Iranian over bomb plot
Israel says Thai bombs similar to those in India, Georgia

Good 'ole peace loving Iran.
Iran sends troops to Syria

Tehran, May 30 — Iran has sent its troops to help the regime of embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fight opposition forces, a senior commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards has said.

Iran boosts Qods shock troops in Venezuela

Iran is increasing its paramilitary Qods force operatives in Venezuela while covertly continuing supplies of weapons and explosives to Taliban and other insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to the Pentagon’s first report to Congress on Tehran’s military.

Iran's Quds Force: Supporting Terrorism Worldwide
Experts: Iran's Quds Force Deeply Enmeshed in Iraq

State Sponsors: Iran

Tehran Attempts to Deceive U.S. President Obama, Sec'y of State Clinton With Nonexistent Anti-Nuclear Weapons Fatwa
Chairman of the Gulf Forum for Peace and Security Fahed Al-Shelaimi Accuses Iran of State-Sponsored Terrorism

Yes thats right, even though it is only an accusation, it will cost the innocent £20 to deny the accusation! telegraph article

Two different (but similar) cases: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/oct/11/morrisons-wine-ban-mother?CMP=AFCYAH http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4933325/Mother-refused-permission-to-buy-wine-by-Tesco-in-case-she-gave-them-to-her-daughter.html

Investment in oil futures is important for people who consume oil to allow them to be able to even out price fluctuations. You cannot outlaw this.

However Obama has requested regulatory changes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/9209891/Barack-Obama-cracks-down-on-oil-traders.html

However oil is a global market; any regulation in the US is not going to have a material effect on world trade in a commodity like this.

The idea that the US President can affect oil prices is utterly laughable. Anyone saying such a thing needs a good slap on the side of the head for stupidity.

As the summary says, the video was pulled from the website. The video you're probably watching is not the one being discussed. I can't fathom who would be so dumb as to think that removing it from the website would be more effective than lying and saying it WAS a parody, even after saying it wasn't. Anyway, here's the real one. The summary was completely accurate.

I'm suspicious that the whole thing is an overly complicated marketing ploy by some nail polish company, bribe some science commission to put an ad up. It could easily be a commercial for cosmetics.

On what metric do you base this allegation?

This metric would be my guess.

Judging by the 'tweets', what seems to be the original has been made 'private', i.e. taken-down. (I'm assuming that was the official YouTube posting - I can't find anything more official looking.)

As well as the mirror linked in the summary, we have a Youtube mirror, and another non-Youtube mirror.

Why would they bother? Do they really not realise that if you release something high-profile on the web, it's out for good?

OT:

Espionage virus sent blueprints to China - âoeACAD/Medre.Aâ -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9346734/Espionage-virus-sent-blueprints-to-China.html

http://blog.eset.com/2012/06/21/acadmedre-10000s-of-autocad-files-leaked-in-suspected-industrial-espionage

TSCM Audio Countermeasures: Demo - 'Babble Tape'

http://hpaste.org/70267

England and Wales has 10,182 gun crimes a year (2008, but still), and that's with a blanket ban on gun ownership.
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html

Norway has a high percentage of gun ownership (1.9M guns, population of 4.9M) - so it's not THAT restrictive.

I would say it's just a cultural difference between the nordic countries and the western european/UK models. Certainly our northern snow states have lower gun crime rates (though knives and other weapons rates are higher for states with restricted laws).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

Hawaii has restrictive gun laws and does indeed have fewer gun-related deaths, but again 80% of homicide is using knives or other weapons.

If you live in a warmer climate you get more murders. If you restrict gun laws, you do lower murder rates some, but murders tend to be committed with other weapons instead. So in short - if someone wants to kill you, they will use whatever is most convenient.

Yes, I've heard all the talking points already. Doom and gloom, coming our way! Evil CO2 is going to ruin the world! We need to act now, what can save us? A tax! A tax will save us!
Yeah, right. Sorry, I'm not a sucker, I want to see some actual data, not models where the inputs and factors are guessed at by the person programming the model. Give this article a read. CO2 is not the elephant in the room. CO2 on it's own will only cause a theoretical maximum of 1.1C increase for a doubling of CO2. That maximum requires water vapour and the other gases to not be very efficient at absorbing the infrared radiation so that there's something left for CO2 to absorb. Guess what? The scientists that have been "focusing their brains on this issue" haven't been able to measure how much infrared radiation our atmospheric CO2 actually absorbs! Why? Because the water vapour signal in our atmosphere is so strong, it's impossible to measure the CO2 effect!
As to the oceans being a short term sink for temperature, that's only a theory, with no actual data to support the claim. The ARGO temperature recordings show no additional heat in the oceans since 2004. And why was that theory put forward in the first place? They needed an explanation for why there was no continued warming for a decade! If the theory of CO2 forced warming is true, there has to be a whole lot of heat building up somewhere, correct? The scientists have been unable to find it in the atmosphere, so the only other possibility is the oceans! Well guess what, they missed one possibility; Maybe the theory of CO2 forced warming isn't correct!

For people who might have missed the GP comment http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8658959/Anger-in-China-as-bodies-fall-from-carriages-during-train-crash-clean-up.html

Every single laptop. I've been through this tiresome process so many times I'm not going to bother again. As I said there may be a small window when there is nothing to make a reasonable comparison against but when there is, they are consistently undercut by the competition and for most of the lifetime of the product before the cycle repeats. They are more expensive and quite obviously so.

Motion blur can be artistic. It's mostly a matter of perception, but to me high frame rates remind me of handycam footage and generally low production value.

And apparently I am not the only one who finds this to be the case: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/9225905/The-Hobbit-previews-to-mixed-reactions.html

In any case, it'll probably end up to be a generational thing, and I'll be screaming at these 48p weirdos to get off my screen.

Given the current political climate as concerns teachers and other school employees these days in the states, I doubt there would be very many taxpayers out there that would support actually hiring Nutritionists to run the lunch rooms and give them the autonomy to purchase and prepare lunches according to their own judgement.

In the UK most taxpayers support providing good meals to schoolchildren, although not necessarily giving the school autonomy -- it's probably better to have a few nutritionists define what's good and make schools stick to that (which is what has happened). I think they recognise that the investment is well worth the expenditure, or else that it's simply the right thing to do.

Here's the standard right-wing paper's summary from last week (before this story broke). They write "more significantly secured Oliver a meeting with Tony Blair, and eventually £280 million over three years for schools to invest in proper kitchens" -- that's £280M from tax. They don't seem to be complaining.

Also related:

The backlash from the public and support from Jamie Oliver and other chefs:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9333576/Neverseconds-Jamie-Oliver-backs-Martha-Payne-over-school-dinner-blog-ban.html

For those interested in the topic, Jamie Oliver has a TV series here in the US (Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution) about the poor state of school food. If you'd like to help, he's published some tools:
http://www.jamieoliver.com/us/foundation/jamies-food-revolution/school-food

For his take on why this is important for society, a good place to start is his TED talk:
http://www.tedprize.org/jamie-oliver/

Yep, they reversed the decision.

Not sure about the UK, but the U.S. courts have repeatedly upheld that students do not have free speech. The case Morse v. Frederick comes to mind, otherwise known as the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.

Long story short, the students were released from school early so they could watch the torch pass from the 2002 Winter Olympics, and Joseph Fredrick, a student at the school, along with friends, held up a banner they'd made earlier that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus". He was suspended for 5 days (later increased to the maximum 10 days after quoting Thomas Jefferson, which is hysterical), sued, and lost several times. School speech can be regulated both on and off campus; Frederick was not technically in school at the time of his banner (as they'd been dismissed) and he was also standing across the street from the school, thus not technically on campus, but in view of those that were.

Then, of course, are the myriad cases cropping up over the last few years where student's Facebook posts are getting them suspended Just a few months ago a 12-year-old girl was interrogated at length by the administration at her school, with police officers present (but not her parents, of course), and ultimately forced to give up her Facebook password.

If this girl had been here in the U.S., she'd probably already be charged with some form of terrorism by DHS and thrown in a cell with murderers, rapists, and people that upload HD rips of hit movies to the internet.

A) The limits on withdrawals on your debit card are for your own protection. You don't want someone cleaning you out because they stole your card. If bitcoin were to catch on (big if), it would need something equivalent to a debit card, and such cards would have limits. There are likewise good reasons to be suspicious of people carrying hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash across national borders.

funny that... they're actually planning reducing the daily amount of cash you can withdraw as a means of preventing a run on the banks in Greece RIGHT NOW...

I'm pretty sure there was a report of SOME guy dying. Let me look it up.

*intermission*

Oops, you were right, if this was the case I was recalling.

But the top result for my search (keywords "guy dies from popcorn") was a man being shot for eating popcorn too loudly in the theater during a screening of 'Black Swan', while the third result was a man dying on Popcorn Road. I'm an evil person, because I've got 'Thunder Road' by Springsteen in my head, only it's Popcorn Road.

Frankly, I think it's awesome that we've gone from talking about scientific exploration on Mars to an in-depth discussion about microwaved popcorn. Oh, internet, I love thee.

Windows phones probably are outselling iPhones in China because the iPhone still has limited carrier selectivity over there at the moment, at least according to all the news reports about Chinese carriers indicating they'll be offering it "soon".

For example, it's still not on China Mobile (the world's largest cellphone network) as of May 2012: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/electronics/9268854/Worlds-largest-phone-company-China-Mobile-in-iPhone-talks-with-Apple.html

Apple claimed that the new phone, which is yet to go on sale in the US but went on sale in Australia last week, could cause it "irreparable harm," citing press reports that mobile companies had already sold more than nine million units in pre-orders.

Hardly surprising that Apple is worried, according to the Telegraph the Samsung Galaxy S3 has now overtaken the iPhone 4S as the UK's most popular phone.

The tech industry is probably the last major holdout in the understanding that women are not simply sex objects. Women refuse to work in the tech industry because of sexual harassment. Unfortunately, the field becomes dominated by men who don't understand it, which then perpetuates the alienation cycle.

If "booth babes" (I can't say I've noticed any at IBC, BVE, and the occasional linux expo, which are the only conventions I go to) are the worst that the tech industry gets, it pales in comparison to banking

You might be disappointed:

China does have some wonderful forests, mountains etc, but the truth is they are not in great shape and can’t compare with the wildernesses on offer in parts of Europe and America. The Great Wall will always be a must-see attraction, but that isn’t the basis of a national tourism industry. A friend recently came back from Guilin (one of China’s best-known beauty spots) and his overriding memory was one of riding bikes with his family through the breathtaking scenery, all the while wobbling to avoid the lorries thundering up and down the road carrying boats to take the next load of tourists up stream. I was out in the Siliver Pagoda Forest north of Beijing on the weekend – they’re nice, but not that nice by international standards.

Because stopping climate change requires rebuilding the energy infrastrcuture, which means that the oil and coal companies will lose money. Also, it will require either nuclear power or an absolutely enormous amounts of resources being permanently devoted to building and maintaining renewable power plants. Nuclear power is scary, and using enormous amounts of effort to maintain renewable power will mean far lowered quality of life for everyone (since that effort is removed from producing consumables).

Basically, climate change means that everyone who's in school now has nothing but misery to look forward to, either from trying to stop the change or from not stopping it. Also, fossil fuels are running out. Combine these two and there's precious little reason to bother graduating.

Are you seriously telling me that you have assumed all warming is going to be bad and will cause everyone to live in misery? And you are telling people to not bother graduating? Wow, that is quite pessimistic viewpoint. Since I do not claim to know the future, you might be right, but giving up on living now is probably going to ensure that you do not live that long....

As for the science, I guess you read a little too much of Bill McGuire: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay-festival/9312347/Hay-Festival-2012-Government-adviser-Bill-McGuire-says-global-warming-is-causing-earthquakes-and-landslides.html

Don't worry, the children will be fine, but if you keep listening to people preaching doom and gloom all the time with no science to back it up, you will probably just be depressed all the time. This is why we need to teach better science in schools and teach that facts are more important then emotional tirades on how the end of the world is coming. Stick to the facts and not emotional outbursts. The world will go on like it has regardless, and if we do warm, well we either adapt or die. That is evolution for you. (I guess I am assuming you believe in evolution...)

I've been on a treadmill desk at home since November - even got a brief mention in the news as apparently I was one of the first in the UK to give it a try. I can't recommend it enough. I walk at 1 kph, which doesn't detract from my abilities at all as far as I can tell. Even if it did, the increased alertness and mental stamina (no more afternoon sluggishness) would more than make up for it - no contest. And then there are all the health benefits that come with the extra physical activity, even though it's really, really gentle exercise. I just wish I could have this at work for 8 hours a day instead of just evenings and weekends.

There's a recipe for making your own walking workstation on the cheap in this thread on Office Walkers.

>>>you know, BBC and associated press.

The BBC was just caught doctoring a ~5 year old Iraqi photo of child-aged corpses, in order to make that claim that Syrian children had *just* been killed in a massacre. So..... you can't trust BBC either. They too manufacture/distort their reporting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html

Then you must be a genius if you can evaluate an entire OS in just a couple of hours.

Not according to your employer.

Microsoft says 82 per cent found their way around the whole system within an hour.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/microsoft/9302910/Microsoft-Windows-8-Release-Preview-review.html

At least in the UK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/5061004/Woman-who-plays-classical-music-to-soothe-horses-told-to-get-licence.html

Rosemary Greenway has been playing passages of opera and orchestral symphonies on the radio to the animals at her stables for more than 20 years, convinced that it helps soothe them.

While not all of her staff are quite as fond of the output of Classic FM as she is, Mrs Greenway, 62, kept the radio tuned to the station religiously while mucking out because of the apparent benefits.

But she has dropped the practice after being told that she must pay a £99 annual licence fee as it constitutes a "performance".

Because her stables, the Malthouse Equestrian Centre in Bushton, Wilts, employs more than two people it is treated in the same way as shops, bars and cafés which have to apply for a licence to play the radio.

Quite true, so when will the evolutionists start to deal with the fact that the evidence doesn't fit the theory?

http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/search/label/False%20expectations

So when will the physicists start to deal with the fact that the evidence doesn't fit the theory? Oh, wait, it already happened. Sometimes a simple model works for a while and then, as more evidence shows up, has to be replaced. That's what's happening here; it's not as if "God created it all at once and nothing big has changed since then" is the only replacement (or even that it's a replacement at all, unless you have an alternative explanation for the fossil record blah blah blah).

Very few (and let's face it, wacky) sects out there actually refuse to accept Darwin's theories of evolution these days, so I'm not really seeing the story here.

Let me make that clearer still: Most Christian sects have no problems with Darwin or evolution, and the largest/original sect has never formally condemned it, even back when it was new and untested. That link also is an example of it being embraced by Christianity.

Certainly, again, there are nuts who take the Bible waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too literally. But really... how many of them actually read Slashdot again? I mean, it's cool that Leakey is thinking that things will be easier to understand for the kids and all, but it's not like there's nothing really new you will ever dig up in the lineage of Homo Sapiens Sapiens that going to convince anyone not otherwise convinced by now.

So, err, what was the point of this again? Outside of allowing posters to post various bigotries in a socially acceptable manner, I'm not seeing why the story should be given anything more than just a 'oh, okay - cool.' attitude. Mod me down all you like, because I know it'll come, but seriously - Evolution is a non-issue these days.

Some ultra orthodox jews believe that when God invented the universe, he also invented it with all it's history. But if God is benevolent, why do we have contagious diseases, and cancers?

Very few (and let's face it, wacky) sects out there actually refuse to accept Darwin's theories of evolution these days, so I'm not really seeing the story here.

Let me make that clearer still: Most Christian sects have no problems with Darwin or evolution, and the largest/original sect has never formally condemned it, even back when it was new and untested. That link also is an example of it being embraced by Christianity.

Certainly, again, there are nuts who take the Bible waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too literally. But really... how many of them actually read Slashdot again? I mean, it's cool that Leakey is thinking that things will be easier to understand for the kids and all, but it's not like there's nothing really new you will ever dig up in the lineage of Homo Sapiens Sapiens that going to convince anyone not otherwise convinced by now.

So, err, what was the point of this again? Outside of allowing posters to post various bigotries in a socially acceptable manner, I'm not seeing why the story should be given anything more than just a 'oh, okay - cool.' attitude. Mod me down all you like, because I know it'll come, but seriously - Evolution is a non-issue these days.

First, genetic engineering is a way of improving a plant. A monoculture is growing all the same thing. these are entirely different concepts. Trying to link the two only makes it look like you don't know the definition of either.

Second, how are Monsanto's seeds wrong? sure, the make Monsanto a profit, but there's nothing wrong with that. The insect resistant ones have feared pretty well, reducing pesticides and even benefiting farms that don't grow them. The herbicide tolerant ones have, for all their ill will, been environmentally positive, having reduced the need for tillage to control weeds (tillage degrades the soil quality and promotes fertilizer runoff into water systems), reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and replaced harsher herbicides.

Monsanto? Is that why anti-GE groups are protesting the publicly funded Rothamsted GE wheat trial in the UK? Is that why they complain about the Rainbow papaya, Arctic apples, Golden Rice, and BioCassava, or why groups destroyed the GE grapes in French, GE wheat in Australia, GE potatoes in the Netherlands, and GE wheat in the UK? It might be true for you, but that is minority thought. You can not play that card while the vast majority of the protest against GE crops is also applied to those that have nothing to do with Monsanto.

This is nothing to do with partisan politics anyway.

It's about how effective Microsoft's lobbying is nowadays.

Since Ballmer took over lobbying activity has massively increased, whilst growth of new and useful product lines has basically flatlined.

I've historically been quite supportive of Microsoft here on Slashdot as I like a lot of their products, XBox 360, Visual Studio, SQL Server, Windows Server etc. but I'm so sick and tired of all the anti-Google shilling from Microsoft and Facebook, that when I see something like this I'm more likely to be correct if I assume it's yet another Microsoft lobbying victory, than if I assume it's not.

See shit like this to understand where I'm coming from:

http://falkvinge.net/2012/03/02/how-microsoft-pays-big-money-to-smear-google-audaciously/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/8184065/Dark-forces-gunning-for-Google.html

It's pretty fucking clear there's a problem, and not only is Microsoft failing to produce new product lines to grow the things people buy from them, they're actively pushing away people like me away, who, as a primarily Windows based developer/architect, is precisely the sort of person they've depended on to maintain the strength of their main product lines within the business world.

Between the failure of Microsoft in mobile coupled with the increase in importance of mobile, and this sort of shit, they really run the risk of losing everything in the long run. I fucking hate Apple too, but it's getting to the point where my next computer will run iOS, just to make a fucking point of not buying Windows and not funding Microsoft until they grow the fuck up and start focussing on products, rather than what basically amounts to corporate trolling.

If they spent as much time on producing innovative and cool new stuff as they did corporate trolling, they wouldn't need to worry about corporate trolling in the first place.

Gates may have been too aggressive against his competition resulting in the anti-trust stuff being brought against him, but at least he didn't engage in this corporate trolling. I wish Ballmer would die of a heart attack and Gates would come back frankly. It's no wonder he was ranked as the worst tech CEO or whatever - because it's absolutely fucking true.

The actual problem is licensing and economics.

The problem with that notion is that there is just as much opposition to publically funded research as ther is corporate funded research. What do GE grapes in French, GE wheat in Australia, GE potatoes in the Netherlands, and GE wheat in the UK have in common? They were all publicly funded, and they were all attacked. The Rainbow papaya (a virus resistant GE papaya) was developed not by a corporation.but by the University of Hawaii, and you are free to save the seed, yet the anti-GMO people are against it just as much as they oppose Monsanto's crops. The same could be said for Golden Rice, which was developed for the sole purpose of helping people. I've never seen a single major anti-GMO group voice support of any GE crop, even ones that do not have the issues often used to argue against GE crops. So, you can't say that it is about licensing and patents and the like when this sort of stuff happens. It is about the science, and those issues (regardless of whether a particular topic in that area has merit) are added as secondary arguments.

The suit alleges that only big time investors were apprised that rising use of mobile would affect revenue. This was known to everyone weeks ago, well before the IPO. here's an article from a week prior to the IPO all about the mobile risks

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9257232/Facebook-issues-revenue-warning-over-mobile-growth.html

- Civilian deaths in Iraq are likely greater than 100K, so something is off with your math.

The vast majority of which were killed by terrorists and insurgents who did things like explode car bombs in busy markets, and use truck bombs to level entire villages.

If Saddam had stayed in power and killed at his long term average, there would probably have been 50-100% more dead than there were. Saddam is out of power now, and the terrorist and insurgent violence is down by something like 90%. US combat forces are out of Iraq. Iraq is a functioning, if troubled, democracy. And now the Iraqis are rebuilding, putting up schools and libraries instead of another batch of enormous palaces for Saddam.

Of course this only works if you trust those who control it.

Of course this only works if you trust those who control it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel MÃrner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr MÃrner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about. ...
When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.

But hey, we all know that "there is 100% consensus among the serious scientists on AGW", right?

However, they would not have any monatary loss since they would not have any shares left on theri books

As posted elsewhere in the comments, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9276699/Facebook-IPO-fight-back-begins-share-price-implausible-says-analyst.html

Company filings after the market closed on Friday night however revealed the extent to which the banks who led Facebook’s initial public offering - in which $16bn of shares were sold to new investors - were forced to move in to the market and buy shares in order to keep the price above the $38 level. Morgan Stanley, Facebook’s lead financial adviser, ended the day with 162m shares, worth $6.16bn. Other banks including JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs also bought shares, ending the day with $3.2bn and $2.4bn holdings respectively.

Nearly 6/8ths of facebook's stock is currently held by its underwriters; Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, and Goldman Sachs.

but only the people willing to pay that much are ridiculous.

link worth reading

Company filings after the market closed on Friday night however revealed the extent to which the banks who led Facebook’s initial public offering - in which $16bn of shares were sold to new investors - were forced to move in to the market and buy shares in order to keep the price above the $38 level. Morgan Stanley, Facebook’s lead financial adviser, ended the day with 162m shares, worth $6.16bn. Other banks including JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs also bought shares, ending the day with $3.2bn and $2.4bn holdings respectively.

So 3 banks have purchased $11.76 bn of the $16bn total facebook stock available to prevent the share price tanking. Need I remind you of their past successes:

JP Morgan: $25 Billion bailout from US tax payers.
Morgan Stanley: $10 Billion bailout from US tax payers.
Goldman Sachs: $10 Billion bailout from US tax payers.

All those banks have repaid the bailout loans (from what I can figure out?), but it looks as though they are each going to make a fairly big loss on this IPO. That's not exactly a good sign that things have changed for the better imho....

Share price implausible. The tl;dr is that of $16 billion, nearly $12 billion had to be bought by the usual suspect banks: Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. Among all the hype, that is actually a huge failure.