Slashdot Mirror

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-11-25-Immigration_N.htm

I'm not a relaxed guy. I told my Member of Parliament in all seriousness that I support economic sanctions against the US, and that I think we should cut the supply of oil running from Canada into the US.

I think we have better things to have our young people doing than taking two mortgages, to get a house in the middle of fucking nowhere Alberta, so they can spend their lives building infrastructure to supply the US with oil, until it's gone and the value of their lifes work tanks.

With all the war crimes your nation has committed, and the fact that dealing with you makes us a viable terrorist target, having anything to do with you is both dangerous and wrong.

The mad cow scare was a great example of how much better off people become when they stop dealing with you people. Now we have our own slaughterhouses and sell frozen steak shipped around the world by freighter instead of getting pennies on the dollar selling it to the US so they can slaughter it and sell it back to us.

You need to clean your fucking country up. Marching to Washington and hanging your entire government would be a great start, and a show of good faith to the rest of the world.

They don't need to have everyone in the database to effectively have a DNA tracking of all citizens. If one person in your family is in the database then you are in the database.
In addition to the fee they collect from you this company might be recieving your tax money through an outsourcing program to the help populate the government database or they may strictly maintain client confidentiality until they receive a national security letter from the department of homeland surveillance, but the end result is the same.

In my previous post I linked to a 4 year old cnn article to show that the government has been using questionable means to populate codis for quite some time now and I doubt that this government intrusion into personal privacy will be exposed until it is too late and the entire population is effectively mapped.

White House seeks to expand DNA database
Citizens, including juveniles who have been arrested for a crime(but not convicted) are being added to the governments DNA database.

Wait, you're suggesting by "I dont know of any company that could afford to beat out the fossil fuel companies to do so." that there aren't companies in the US trying to make money off alternative energy? Further, lots of state governments are actively trying to promote alternative energy, which undermines the theory that the government is afraid of a tax revenue collapse. State governments are subsidizing alternative energy using those very tax revenues, in the hopes that home-grown alternative energy producers will create even more tax revenue in the future.

I hate to sound like a slashvertisement, but I think the following US companies and groups would all disagree with you:

Evergreen Solar (producer based in Mass.)
Heliodyne (producer based in California)
Google (installing panels on its roof)
Solar Energy Industry Association (US trade group)
Tesla Motors) (selling 100% electric cars in the US)
List of solar manufacturers in the US
US solar power installations increase 33% year-to-year

The New York Times has a story about this issue: "Venture Capital Rushes into Alternate Energy" suggesting that $1.5 billion in VC money was invested in 2006 alone in new companies who hope to profit from overthrowing the energy status quo. If you add private equity money then there was $18.1 billion in dealflow in 2006 in the alternate energy sector. Or listen to a 2004 story about the same issue.

It's nice to think that there's some great conspiracy against alternate energy, but the simple truth is that there is a lot of market action in the field and nothing stopping people from making money in it. There is a HUGE amount of money to be made from alternate energy and plenty of people are trying to make it.

If people RTFA they would find that there is something else that is conveniently overlooked in this thread:

"The memo condemns Comer for giving a presentation and attending an off-site meeting without prior approval and for allegedly saying that then-acting Commissioner Robert Scott was "only acting commissioner and that there was no real leadership at the agency."

So essentially she was attending a meeting (aka off doing something else) while on the company clock without permission. Quite honestly, I would myself expect to be fired if I was on the clock and not on my job - off somewhere not related to my specific job duties, without the supervisor approval. What makes her so special in this matter? Because she happens to favor evolution? Or is the "Fundie ID'ers are crazy" a smoke screen to cover her apparent bad behavior (on more than one occassion). Bad mouthing the boss (no matter who he/she is) also to me shows an air of arrogance. But I guess you have that if you feel like it is ok to walk off the job without permission.

Really, her firing seems to be her own doing, regardless of her agenda.

At $20,000 per pound to deliver more air with the space shuttle, it's very expensive air their losing, at $60,000 worth of air per day. How long would it take to leak a minor scientific research project out of the budget?

Through September 22, 2007 approximately 19,429 insurgents/militia were reported to have been killed according to the U.S. military, including 1,309 bombers

In addition as of November 21, 2007 approximately 1,357 suicide-bombers have also been reported killed

Grand total: 14,393-20,697 insurgent dead

U.S. armed forces. 3,800 dead.

Tower Minnesota got down to -60F which is ~-51C, Prospect Creek Alaska got down to -80 which is ~-62C. Those temps are fairly recent too, 1996 and 1971, link.

Found the link: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2007-11-22-zune_N.htm

I hate to say it, but I have to: ONE day of deployment in Iraq would pay for this thing.

Costs of Iraq are much higher than that. 12M a year for Arecibo would mean one day in Iraq could fund them for 14.75 years. This war costs far too much. And we all underestimate how much this is costing in other ways too.

"I hate to say it, but I have to: ONE day of deployment in Iraq would pay for this thing."

I hate to correct your being off by over an order of magnitude... 90 minutes of Iraq war would pay for the whole budget and 20 minutes would pay for how much was just cut from it.

The state and municipal debt is also in the trillions.

Additionally, neither the Clinton nor the Bush debt includes the $50 trillion in future obligations that have been shifted "off-book" - the majors being social security and medicaid.

Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.

Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.

This hidden debt is the amount taxpayers would have to pay immediately to cover government's financial obligations. Like a mortgage, it will cost more to repay the debt over time. Every U.S. household would have to pay about $31,000 a year to do so in 75 years.

Contrast this with your neighbor to the north. Social security actuarily sound for at least the next 75 years. Federal surpluses, and a declining federal debt (no deficit) - and projected to be "effective zero debt" - where current assets == current obligations + debts, in 15 to 20 years.

How did this happen? The government imposed a sales tax of 7% on almost everything. This includes new houses (and no, Canadians can't deduct their mortgage interest from their taxes). Almost all provinces add their own tax. It hurt, but it changed history - from increasing deficits and debt to regular budget surpluses and declining debts. Its the only way.

One side effect of the 7% tax on new house sales was that it discouraged speculation by "new home flippers". If you bought a new home from a builder with the intention of flipping it, that 7% is gone - its a sunk cost. Throw in the 7% agents' commission, and you have a 14% "anti-bubble disincentive".

(NOTE: The GST was recetly reduced to 6% to pass on some of the cost savings from the reduction in the federal deficit)

and while you're all at it, better get used to it. There's trillions of dollars in debt that has to be paid back, with interest. Taxes have only one way to go - up!

The federal government is trillions of dollars in debt. State taxes, which this article is about, make no difference to the national deficit.

Where did I say "federal"?

State and local governments are also in hock past their eyeballs, for trillions as well. Even back in 2002 state and local government debt was 1.5 trillion dollars. Do you really think its gone down in the last 5 years? Speaking of total federal debt, if you used GAAP, the federal debt is really 59 trillion dollars.

That money has to be made somewhere. Taxes.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAOMGTOOFUNNNY!!!!!11!!!!!!!!one!

May I remind you of Walter Reed Medical Hospital travesty that *recently* made headlines?

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-161076682.html

http://akaka.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=newsarticles.home&month=3&year=2007&release_id=1570

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-03-21-va-review_N.htm

Hi there, sorry I didn't respond sooner, I missed your reply. As for sources, here is a news story from last year: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-01-10-algae-powerplants_x.htm

If you have access to New Scientist: http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19225725.600-biofuel-made-from-power-plant-cosub2sub.html

Or companies to keep an eye on: http://www.greenfuelonline.com/index.html and http://www.greenshift.com/

-Rick

Last time I checked, I still had a payback period of infinity for a solar system

Clark Beebe, 57, of Springfield, N.J., bought a $50,000 solar power system two years ago for $15,000 after rebates, installing it on the roof of his four-bedroom house. Because he offsets what he uses with what he pumps into the grid, his annual power bill has dropped from $1,270 to $170, though he also installed energy-saving appliances. His $1,100 yearly savings is supplemented by $500 in clean energy credits, cutting the payback period for his system to nine years. After that, he'll effectively net at least a $200-a-year profit. "I am now an electricity company," says Beebe 57. "Plus, I'm generating electricity without any pollutants."

Carrie Buczeke, 42, of Livermore, Calif., rolled the cost of her $54,000 solar panels -- $25,000 after rebates and tax credits -- into a home-equity loan. She has wiped out her $400 monthly electric bill and pays $300 a month for the loan. After seven years, the loan will be paid off. "It was such a no-brainer," she says.

We have plenty of uranium at slightly higher price points. It helps that major deposits are in countries like Australia and Canada - not the middleast.

But you are not paying all the costs of nuclear power, even those who don't use any have to pay for it. All that's being done is shifting the costs onto everyone. I bet if owners of nuclear power plants had to pay all of the costs, including storage of nuclear waste and insurance, not only would your bill be a lot higher but not many businesses if any at all would even build a nuclear power plant. The only reason they exist is because of massive government subsidies.

All discussion here about how much right an author/imaginer has to "protect" their property, I suspect a lot of this is ego. Ms. Rowling is probably very protective of her work because she thinks she's the greatest writer since Charles Dickens.

See following quote: "In February 2007 Rowling issued a statement on her website about finishing the final book, in which she compared her mixed feelings of "mourning" and "incredible sense of achievement" to those expressed by Charles Dickens in the preface of the 1850 edition of David Copperfield, "a two-years' imaginative task." "To which," she added, "I can only sigh, try seventeen years, Charles...""

I mean, wow. That's like me reading John Carmack's .plan and saying, "Oh John, if only you had to work on my XML-driven timesheet application..."

Statistics on civilian deaths in Iraq are hard to come by because we, conveniently, don't keep track of them.

Statistics on civilian deaths in Iraq are hard to come by because we, conveniently, don't keep track of them.

In a few hours on Nov. 4, 1952, Univac altered politics, changed the world's perception of computers and upended the tech industry's status quo. Along the way, it embarrassed CBS long before Dan Rather could do that all by himself.

Think about electricity deregulation: the transmission is seperate from the generation, and while everyone has to pay for the transmission (since we don't want overly redundant infrastructure), individuals can choose their generation source.

And we all know how well electricity deregulation worked out for consumers, right?

explain that einstein?

He just did.
This is "News for Nerds".
If you don't understand why he's right, /. is not for you.
You're looking for USA Today.

It's occurred to me. I think it's more likely that, though, that it's because they haven't done enough to end the war in Iraq.

In recent approval polls, the current Democratic congress actually did better with Republican respondents than with Democratic respondents. American's opinion of how the war in Iraq is going is virtually completely unified (and negative), and more Americans "strongly disapprove" of GWB than they did of Nixon, just before his impeachment trial began.

If you're a Democrat (disclosure: I am), this state of affairs sucks, because procedural rules of legislation make it very easy to derail bills through votes for cloture and the threat of a filibuster. The minority party has used this power in this Congress more than any other Congress in history, and then turned around and made fun of the majority party for not being able to get anything done.

The last time there was a Congress strongly unified against the President, it was the "Republican revolution", whose stalemate with Clinton wound up shutting down the government. But then, Clinton definitely wound up on the winning side of public opinion. One wonders if memories of that stalemate are giving the Democratic leadership the jitters.

The question is not, to a small-government conservative, how big the military should be, because the question is obvious: as big as is necessary (and clearly, Reagan was correct on that). The question is about WHAT the government should be involved with in the first place.

You mean, like illegal arms trade to Iran? </cheap_shot>

Yes, but his budgets, if implemented as submitted, would have resulted in a balanced budget by the end of his term. It's Democrats who increased spending. Funny how Reagan critics like to ignore that little fact.

I'm fairly certain it was both parties that increased spending, as I pointed out. Military spending is, indeed, spending. And Republicans who cut taxes.

And Reagan was not even vaguely correct about the size of the military we needed, but that is because no one realized that the Soviet Union would shortly collapse.

You are conflating, and therefore incorrect. I was addressing your incorrect definition of "conservative," which is separate from the Republican party.

And you are quite wrong about the party, as well. You've apparently never heard of Barry Goldwater ... ?

I know about Goldwater, that's what I was talking about. I was arguing that traditional conservative thought didn't show up until him, with it actually peaking in 64 with his Presidential run, and didn't really manage to control the GOP until Reagan. (Ironically right around the point Goldwater became so dissatisfied with the Republicans that he left for the Libertarians.)

Which, incidentally, is almost what you said, also, except you said it reemerged with Reagan after having vanished for the previous 80 years. I say that Goldwater (And the Conservative coalition.) instead invented it while fighting the New Deal, and managed to popularize it within the party around 64, enough for him to run, and the party then somewhat subverted it to get Reagan elected. And that it's not comparable to the anti-progressive thought in the 1890s and before, it didn't exist at all until the New Deal 40 years later.

Calvin Coolidge is most remembered as being pro-business (which, of course, is the same as today's conservatives), but he was also what we would today call a "true conservative."

I didn't say that no one behaved as a conservative, I said that the theories and concept which, today, make up conservativism, entered mainstream Republican thought with Reagan. Although the theory itself goes back further, but not that far, only to opposite to the New Deal. In fact, that's where the words 'conservative' and 'liberal' got somewhat scrambled up in politics.

But I'll compromise with you. Let's date conservative thought to 1933, in opposition to the New Deal, and be done with it. :)

No, it's not.

The CIA may not be waterboarding people anymore, but it was in 2002. 'And current and former CIA officers tell ABC News there is a presidential finding, signed in 2002, by President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft approving the techniques, including water boarding.' And it was in February 2005, after the first fact came out and it had issued a memo at the end of 2004 saying there would be no more torture.

In theory, it's not waterboarding people now. In theory, it wasn't before 2004, either, until the fact it was came out. In theory, it wasn't between 2004 and 2007, until the next memo came out. The white house consistently publically declares it's not doing it, or will stop what it's doing, and then secretly issues memos that say that everything anyone is doing is within the law and they can keep doing it.

In the system you are talking about, there are insured people who are mostly well, and there are uninsured people who are mostly well, and they're

Privacy Policy or no privacy policy... if you have been surfing US sites in the past few years, the dept of Home Land Security tracked all (and I mean ALL) your information.

References:
1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-aQ_o_yi-s
2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWW09xzJfS0
3) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
4) http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2006/06/the_newbies_gui.html?entry_id=1510938

You claim those Americans who drive cars do so because they live in sparsely populated areas where public transport is impossible. Yet the internet is full of pictures like this one.

Many Americans (and not just Americans, we have plenty of this kind of people here in Sweden too) don't like the sight of public transport. When they see a bus or a subway train full of people travelling in the same direction they think "Oh no! This is probably some kind of socialism! I won't be a part of it!"

Considering France's stance on p2p and compatibility between personal digital music players, I am not surprised by this ruling. I greatly admire them for their open-minded approach to these sorts of tech issues.

Plus, their wines and cheeses are delicious ;)

No, the $35,000 application fee was too expensive:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/11/hes-not-on-the-.html

the chances of being struck by lightning are estimated at 1 in 700,000

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/basics/wlightning.htm

The chances of being killed by honey bees of any sort are actually less than the chances of being hit by lightning, according to Center for Disease Control statistics.

http://stingshield.com/2000news.htm

Yet

A single dollar in MegaMillions purchases a 1 in 175,711,536 chance

Odds are on the lightning!

Like today's news conference on a bill discussing IED's in this country. You think I'm kidding? I saw a blurb this morning on CNN and here's the link to USA Today verifying the news conference will take place. Second item in the list.

"Is information gathered in this way admissible?"

In the USA it is: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2001/12/27/fbi-snooping.htm

Way to destroy any credibility you had remaining with this little non sequitur.

You're right. As long as the outstanding parking ticket tab stays under $20-million or so , I guess we should consider that a sign of complete respect from the consular community to that host city.

The summary metions Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling. Jeff Francis, pitcher for the Rockies is a Physics Major: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/columnist/bodley/2007-10-23-bodley-column_N.htm.

Sony has already developed a camera with a simpler form of "smile detection." If engaged, the camera will scan the scene for all subjects to smile and then allow the shutter sequence to fire. Seems really gimmicky (useless in practice) to me, but a new tickbox on the carton equates to sales.

Sony Smile-Detecting Camera

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-08-18-judge-sentenced_x.htm

Marion Oltman spent the last eight months of World War II in a Nazi prisoner-of-war camp, and tears still fill his eyes when he recalls those desperate days.

After working all day to fill craters left from Allied bombing, each prisoner got a boiled potato and a slice of bread with sawdust used as filler. Oltman was given the task of slicing the bread to feed 12 men.

This quote is particularly telling I think:

Adding salt to Palm's wounds, Apple proclaimed last week it sold a million iPhones in its first 74 days in the smart phone market. Palm has yet to sell that many Treos in a quarter.

"These days, if it's under 500 miles each way, I'll drive it" I completely agree. The flight would be less than two hours, but you'd spend three hours per leg futzing with security, ground transportation, etc.

"I used to wish for the airlines to all go out of business" Anyone ever said to you: be careful what you wish for. One good reason the fares are so cheap is because there are so many available seat miles. Just imagine if there were no AMD to counter Intel. Fares will rise as capacity is constrained.

"we (US taxpayers) were forced to bail them out after 9/11" I have no idea what you are talking about here. If you are referring ATSB loans, you will find this enlightening: Bailout or boon? 9/11 loan guarantee program generates profit for taxpayers. To summerize, That program made money for the government. Incidentally, of the $10B pledged to the program, only $1.6B were granted. There were far more rejections than approvals and this ensured the resulting Ch.11 filings (more likely good for the corporations and taxpayers, bad for employees). JFYI, on average 25% of every dollar of fare is sent to government entities as tax.

Yes, the airlines are plagued with problems, but the most common issues consumers have about airlines' problems lie with the unrealistic expectations they have when they buy a seat. I know you're thinking I'm suggesting people just lower their expectations, but travelers complain to me all the time about problems that are beyond our control. We don't make the weather, we don't control ATC (they have been doing stuff the same way for decades- remarkably UNmodernized!), airplanes are well maintained but sometimes break (they aren't lawnmowers), crewmembers are human (not superhuman)- we have federally mandated work limits and we get sick, really.

No, I'm not asking people to lower their expectations, just align them closer to reality.

This story is an interesting counterpoint to the news that Major League Baseball has agreed to endorse StubHub as their official ticket reseller.

Personally, I'm torn on this issue. Basically, as a person on a fairly standard middle class income, it sucks that I'll likely never be able to attend major sporting events because scalpers quickly scoop up all of the tickets and price them out of range of the normal fan. On the other hand, if teams insist on building stadiums that don't hold the number of fans that would actually be willing to go to the games (for example, Invesco Field in Denver was built to almost exactly the same capacity as the old Mile High Stadium, even though waiting lists for season tickets there are decades long), it might make sense to let the free market determine the price of seats.

Personally, I think that scalping should be illegal, as scalpers essentially make their money by employing dirty tricks to corner the market on tickets, thereby possibly artificially inflating the cost of tickets. I understand the free market argument, but I think measures should be taken so we can be sure that fans at a game represent a true cross section of the fan base for the team, not just the ones that can afford $500 or more for tickets.

Here you go: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-07-17-rudolph-monday-sentencing_x.htm

Hold the phone, there. Did the "wisdom of the crowds" put GWB in power, or did Gore win "the popular vote" in one of those? You (the general you, not specifically the parent) can't argue it both ways. There's a difference between wisdome of the crowd/mob rule and the crowd choosing representatives (electoral college) to make the official vote. The founding fathers designed the process that way on purpose because they saw the inherent ignorance of "the crowd"

Yes Gore won the majority in the first one, barely. I am more concerned with the "wisdom of the crowd" who voted for him the second time, after it had become apparent what a misguided train wreck his administration was.

I don't think the argument was EVER that Saddam CAUSED 9/11, although there has been argument and (some claim evidence) that he was a contributing factor. Argument that he was a threat - well, based on information given at the time there was reason to be suspicious and the whole nation was still in knee-jerk mode. (I can be SINCERE and CONVINCED and still be WRONG.) The UN, not the people of one particular country, agreed he was enough of a threat to levy a series of sanctions. CONGRESS, not the people, authorized use of force in Iraq.

I respect the libertarian way of thinking, but please save the empty rhetoric for the usual two parties.

Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

I'm not try to use empty rhetoric, but point out how it was and is used to easily manipulate the so called "wisdom of crowds".

The only reason congress authorized the use of force in Iraq, and we eventually invaded Iraq, was because the American people were in support of it. They were in support of it because of the focused grouped nonsense coming from the administration and repeated in the media like it was an echo chamber. Sure you can be in knee-jerk mode, sincere, convinced, and wrong. It doesn't end this nightmare or bring back the dead that the American peoples collective lack of critical thinking, reasoning, and knowledge caused.

The point I was trying to make is that large groups are easily manipulated when they all get their information from limited sources. Combine that with fear and you can get large numbers of people to do just about anything. Just a few years ago people were covering their doors, windows, and in some cases, whole houses in plastic and duct tape. Thats how its been for a long time, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. Maybe, if there was no mass media, if it was more granulated, things would be different.

I've always thought, looking back at history, it seemed society has continually become more wise. From Monarchy to Democracy, slavery to civil rights, society has (with the occasional bump) seemed to continually improve, albeit slowly. Perhaps that, in a way, is the "wisdom of crowds".

I like this quote from the Washington Post article: Her take on Comcast: "What a bunch of sub-moronic imbeciles."

Another quote: "Manassas police spokesman Sgt. Tim Neumann says there have been other police calls to that Comcast office..." I would love to know why.

Quote from the parent comment: "I called Comcast and started screaming. This got me somewhere as I finally got escalated to the CEO's office where they had a customer care executive assigned to me."

You never get to the CEO's office, I'm guessing. They just say that to try to make you think they believe your complaint is important. In 2005, the Comcast CEO made $14.3 million, just for that one year. I know, I know what you are thinking: "I'm sad. He had a bad year!" But, don't worry, in 2006 he made $27.8 million.

I think that it is safe to assume that someone who makes millions each year for doing a bad job has no concerns whatsoever about any troubles you have with his company. Any phony expression of concern is handled by people who barely make a living.

In case you want to express your horror that he only makes tens of millions instead of hundreds of millions each year, contact the Comcast CEO directly: Brian Roberts.

Why is being rich considered by rich people a license to be evil?

I want small drone airplanes continuously flying above the major highways and streets and broadcasting the observed view over a TV-band. Anybody with a compatible set within range will then be able to observe traffic incidents, police traps, and road repairs in real time.

Supposedly, our military's use of such things is rapidly growing. Police use is growing too. Hopefully, the technology will allow peaceful civilian use soon.

It can be advertising-sponsored — the images may display an advertising logo in a corner of the screen, or something...

Well, the original statement is clearly hyperbole. But consider that the total number of active duty military personnel is 1.4 million, I think 500k-750k dedicated terrorists already in the country could do some pretty devastating damage. You could pick the top 50 strategic targets and send 10k-15k terrorists to each. Imagine if they all had stockpiled military grade weapons and explosives. Considering the state of our military today, and considering the total SNAFU that Katrina was, how well do you think we'd be able to fend it off? Local law enforcement could only do so much against machine guns, grenades and RPGs.

Not that I think this scenario is likely. The more people you get in on a plan, the harder it becomes. The logistical nightmare of trying to organize and keep such a large plan secret would be almost insurmountable.

It's definitely worth calling him out on the mansion, but the zinc mine thing had a retraction on it. Check out the following usa today article (near the top).

Also, he's donating the money, and your comment is written as flaimbait. You do not deserve a positive "insightful" rating.