Slashdot Mirror

You are not buying stuff at the same price as 6 years ago, maybe you should actually pay attention to the receipts.

beef, pork, avocado, fruits, veggies, almonds, pinenuts, walnuts, mozarella, cheddar, other cheeses, seafood, grains, soy, soy, palm oil, milk, gasoline, beer and more beer, limes, canadian bacon, barley, restaurants, restaurants, restaurants,electrical energy, car rentals, hotel rooms, cab fairs,

air travel and air travel gets more expensive in many other ways, various extra fees, less room, more seats on planes

aluminium,

You are not buying stuff at the same price as 6 years ago, maybe you should actually pay attention to the receipts.

beef, pork, avocado, fruits, veggies, almonds, pinenuts, walnuts, mozarella, cheddar, other cheeses, seafood, grains, soy, soy, palm oil, milk, gasoline, beer and more beer, limes, canadian bacon, barley, restaurants, restaurants, restaurants,electrical energy, car rentals, hotel rooms, cab fairs,

air travel and air travel gets more expensive in many other ways, various extra fees, less room, more seats on planes

aluminium,

You are not buying stuff at the same price as 6 years ago, maybe you should actually pay attention to the receipts.

beef, pork, avocado, fruits, veggies, almonds, pinenuts, walnuts, mozarella, cheddar, other cheeses, seafood, grains, soy, soy, palm oil, milk, gasoline, beer and more beer, limes, canadian bacon, barley, restaurants, restaurants, restaurants,electrical energy, car rentals, hotel rooms, cab fairs,

air travel and air travel gets more expensive in many other ways, various extra fees, less room, more seats on planes

aluminium,

Netflix is going to bend internet providers over?

http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

So why are they being comcast bitches?

Well, no one is quite the expert at mass murder that the Israelis are, as they're proving in Gaza right now by butchering 4 civilians for every enemy "soldier" that they kill.

The Israelis are fighting an enemy that intends to destroy Israel and kill as many Jews as possible. The Hamas Covenant says (exact quote from the English translation): There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.

Hamas has repeatedly fired rockets and artillery shells into Israel, indiscriminately trying to maim and kill anyone in Israel. Hamas started this, not Israel.

Israel has been dropping leaflets: "Get out of here, we will be attacking the area soon." They have telephoned houses and sent texts: "Get out of the area, it's not safe." They have dropped non-exploding payloads on buildings before dropping the bombs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/07/14/video-this-is-what-an-israeli-roof-knock-looks-like/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/israeli-troops-raid-rocket-launching-sites-in-gaza-as-residents-are-urged-to-evacuate/2014/07/13/4c1a0528-0a68-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html

Hamas has been using schools, churches, hospitals, and people's houses to store weapons or launch rocket attacks.

Given all of the above, there is total moral clarity here. Hamas literally wants to destroy Israel, started the conflict, and endangered its own people; Israel has repeatedly shown that they would be willing to accept a two-state solution, but Hamas will only accept a one-state solution, i.e. Israel destroyed and that land part of Palestine.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-moral-clarity-in-gaza/2014/07/17/0adabe0c-0de4-11e4-8c9a-923ecc0c7d23_story.html

http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-expands-ground-operation-in-gaza-1405836870

So, yes, it's true that Israel has not managed to fight a war with no collateral damage. But what would you have them do?

How patient would you be if someone was shooting rockets that were falling in your home town, and from time to time some innocent person (possibly a child) was maimed or killed? How long would you let that go on?

I am grateful that my own decisions (and especially my mistakes) don't have life-or-death consequences. I don't envy the leaders of Israel, deciding how to handle an implacable enemy that uses the innocent as human shields.

So perhaps he can reconcile those two concepts and explain why we allow H1Bs when we have MILLIONS of unemployed college grads?

That one's easy, English majors who've never taken a Shakespeare course aren't worth very much. Kids graduated thinking their piece of paper was worth something......turns out it's not worth much if you can't do anything.

Of course they were failing. They were failing in 2011, and they knew it, and in case they didn't know it, their CEO told them so. Go re-read their CEO's Burning Platform memo in case you had forgotten how badly they were doing.

In 2007, Apple stepped in and not only did they define a new high-end smartphone market, they owned it, and shared it with nobody. Nokia went from sharing the top-of-the-line smartphone market with Blackberry to a middle-of-the-road smartphone company, and they did it without moving a step. About a year later Google delivered Android, which redefined and then completely dominated the low-end smartphone market. Meanwhile, Nokia delivered nothing new. Nothing. They feebly tried to do something with Maemo (and later MeeGo), but couldn't even ship it. This was about 2009. And Android makers didn't stop there, either. The Galaxy S (as you mentioned) came out in 2010, pushing the out of the low-end smartphone market into Apple's market, and that was the herald for Nokia's decline. In 2010.

Meanwhile, MediaTek had shipped a reference design for low-end phones in 2008. Any plant in Shenzhen could now produce a cheap handset for about $10, so they did, filling shipping containers with the cheap phones that have become ubiquitous in the developing world. Nokia couldn't ship a cheap phone for twice that price. When you're buying cheap phones, you're going to pay the lowest price - so the cost-conscious consumers immediately abandoned Nokia's low end.

All this happened from 2007 through about 2010. Elop's memo came out in 2011, just after Android sales had exceeded theirs for the first time, signalling the end of Nokia's relevance in the marketplace. Nokia's marketshare continued to decline, as they shipped nothing noteworthy. By last year, Nokia was barely remembered as that company that used to make phones before iPhones came out.

Microsoft drove them into the ground at high speed.

That is completely wrong. Microsoft bought them in September of 2013. According to my calendar, that was last year. "Failing" is a polite word for the dire straits Nokia was in at that time. Microsoft didn't drive them any place they hadn't already gone themselves. Perhaps you're confusing the sale of Nokia with the agreement Nokia made to adopt Windows 8 for the cash they needed to keep the lights on. Nokia had already failed to deliver Maemo, which had been in the works since before the introduction of the iPhone. Nokia was incapable of delivering a smartphone OS. They had four years and couldn't do it. MeeGo might have eventually done something for them, but it would have been an even smaller market than Microsoft could deliver.

Let me repeat: Nokia needed Microsoft's cash just to stay in business, back in 2011. That is not the sign of a healthy company.

All that and I still have to say the Microsoft phone is not a terrible device. Nokia put a really nice camera in there, the battery life is good, the screen is clear, and the device is really well made. But the Windows app store is sadly lacking, and Cortana is certainly not yet at the caliber of Siri. It's still just an also-ran in the phone market.

Microsoft had nothing to do with Nokia's decline. Nokia did that to themselves by standing perfectly still, while the entire market passed them by on both sides. Microsoft just picked them up for the scrap value.

No, we know how much heat CO2 traps based on direct measurement

Your faith is strong, but it's misguided and based on popular oversimplifications. Here's Richard Lindzen writing in a WSJ editorial:

There are, however, some things left unmentioned about the IPCC claims. For example, the observations are consistent with models only if emissions include arbitrary amounts of reflecting aerosols particles (arising, for example, from industrial sulfates) which are used to cancel much of the warming predicted by the models. The observations themselves, without such adjustments, are consistent with there being sufficiently little warming as to not constitute a problem worth worrying very much about.

In addition, the IPCC assumed that computer models accurately included any alternative sources of warming—most notably, the natural, unforced variability associated with phenomena like El Nino, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, etc. Yet the relative absence of statistically significant warming for over a decade shows clearly that this assumption was wrong. Of course, none of this matters any longer to those replacing reason with assertions of authority.

Regardless of what you think of Amazon and them being a monopoly, Apple colluded with publishers to raise the price of ebooks. It was anti-competitive at it's core and it's illegal under US law. Not to even mention that it cost the average US buyer $5 per book.

Too bad (for your argument that is) that in reality ebook prices actually fell in all stores but Amazon. Even on Amazon, only those Amazon had sold below price rose in price. Provable fact.http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304355104579236261045331876 (paywalled) http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/

It was not a broad ruling applicable to corporations in general, where the linked argument might have been relevant.

You mean it doesn't apply to around 90% of all corporations according to the IRS' definition of the term, and that it absolutely doesn't apply to companies like Cargill, Koch and Mars?

So what does that come out to?
They sell something like 800 million books a year:
http://www.digitalbookworld.co...

Multiple that by 9,000 per infringement:
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/...

A conservative estimate would have them owing:
7,200,000,000,000

Or if you don't want to count the 0's: 7.2 trillion dollars.

I think they should fork over the 7.2 trillion; that'll teach them a lesson.

It is a wonderful thing to tell everyone else how to behave, shame them when they deviate from your plan, and then do the opposite privately. It is what humans have aspired to for thousands of years.

See, when you start thinking your shit doesn't stink, this is what happens. You want more. You think that the law is a fine thing, but just for the little people to follow. Someone such as yourself shouldn't be held back by such trivial concerns. Morality? It's backwards, its only purpose is to hold you back from what you deserve in life. Hypocrisy becomes not something bad, but a stamp of approval for your lifestyle. You relax and let everything flow. Of course, in public, you strongly condemn others, and you will take action and spend money to maintain the mask of respectability.

Why do the powerful always become outraged when the little people successfully make a point? How dare those little shits speak to me like that? It's not something new, it's been around forever. This is the default of human behavior, when it doesn't happen, that is exceptional. Why is it noteworthy that the global warming brigade does the same thing? The fact that they hold themselves over the rest of us should be a flashing neon sign that things just ain't right.

"'Rotten?' said Uncle Andrew with a puzzled look. 'Oh, I see. You mean that little boys ought to keep their promises. Very true: most right and proper, I'm sure, and I'm very glad you have been taught to do it. But of course you must understand that rules of that sort, however excellent they may be for little boys -- and servants -- and women -- and even people in general, can't possibly be expected to apply to profound students and great thinkers and sages. No, Digory. Men like me, who possess hidden wisdom, are freed from common rules just as we are cut off from common pleasures. Ours, my boy, is a high and lonely destiny.'

As he said this he sighed and looked so grave and noble and mysterious that for a second Digory really thought he was saying something rather fine. But then he remembered the ugly look he had seen on his Uncle's face the moment before Polly had vanished: and all at once he saw through Uncle Andrew's grand words. 'All it means,' he thought to himself, 'is that he thinks he can do anything he likes to get anything he wants.'"

-- The Magician's Nephew

Kim Dotcom may not be such a good example.

Kim Dotcom Extradition Decision Delayed

The Internet entrepreneur and his fellow defendants— Finn Batato, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk —were due to appear in a New Zealand court at the end of July for a hearing on whether they would be sent to the U.S. to face charges including criminal copyright infringement, money laundering and conspiracy to commit racketeering.

It is ridiculous to pretend that extraordinary rendition is a threat to the rights of typical Europeans. Or did I miss a trend in Europe to join international terrorist groups?

Now look at what the claim was that I responded to: "The difference is that it is America that is a direct threat to my personal freedom and the personal freedom of much of the world."

Are you really going to try to claim that nonsense it true? If you want to do that I think you're going to have to cast a much wider net than a small handful of disputed extradition cases, including ones connected with terrorism.

The heritability of a human's intelligence is as high as 77.1% in identical twin studies.

But of course, genes are just the hand you were delt. What you do with that hand is up to your parents, environment and later you.

Just flat out saying it's 50% is just an oversimplification and I'm sure it's the same with the chimps.

We are also under the delusion that the CEO's actions really matter. If you took the CEOs with the best track records and brought them in to run the businesses with the worst performance, how often would those companies become more profitable?.....the answer is roughly 60%. That isn't much better than the flip of a coin.

And I"m to find another stat that said that a CEO contributes about 5% to a company's bottom line.

There have been CEOs - Lou Gerstner's turn around of IBM in the early 90s comes to mind - that may have been worth it.

But all in all, they are over paid for what they do. Yahoo!'s new CEO, for example, is just throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. Marissa was the great blond hope for Yahoo! but she is turning out to be mediocre - like most CEOs. But, regardless of what happens, she'll get her $60 million - remember that when you bust your ass to meet a deadline and during your review you are told you could have done more and therefore you are rated as only "meeting objectives" and you just get a cost of living raise (1.5% If you didn't bust your ass working 60 hours a week for months, you would have gotten a "below standards" rating, no raise and if lucky you keep your job until they offshore your entire department.).

Yep, we live in a meritocracy all right.

Goldman Sachs Predicts Brazil As World Cup Winner http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat...

Except it's not 97% of the world's climate scientists. It's only 0.3%!

" In Science and Education in August 2013, for example, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found "only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse" the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work" - From here

a "continuing criminal enterprise" charge that's better known as the "kingpin" statute used to prosecute criminal gang and cartel leaders.

Given the billion's of $US that various banks have been fined recently, for things like evading US taxes and money laundering for Syria, Iraq, and Somalia, isn't it about time that the legal system give the same treatment to bankers committing these crimes?

Why do they get to pay fines that don't have any real effect? Just look how their stock always go up after they announce a deal. If any individual ever gets fired it's always the low level person who takes the hit, and they all end up going to work for someone else and never face any real problems.

Oh, I just remembered: bribes/campaign contributions along with the revolving door and juicy high paying jobs for former regulators. To bad drug dealers can't have a revolving door with law enforcement.

Basically the survey found that the experts in the field have 97% consensus

Problem is that skeptical scientists such as Richard Lindzen agree with that 'consensus', because the question is too narrow. Ask something more interesting like, "should we replace all our coal power with renewables because to prevent AGW?" or "is AGW going to be catastrophic?" and you will find that there is no consensus.

But I think they can be constructed to be close enough to determine a reasonable outcome.

You didn't clarify what you mean by 'reasonable outcome,' but this paper in Nature demonstrates that the climate models have serious errors.

First of all, injection wells are not "fracking" (which is properly spelled fracing) and injection wells used for disposal of wastewater are not injecting only water from hydraulic fracturing. There are thousands of wells drilled with traditional vertical drilling methods in Oklahoma that produce water. There are wells that produce 90% water and 10% oil for most of the life of the well and this is common in some formations in Oklahoma (e.g. Mississippi Lime). That water has to be disposed of because it has high salinity- it was once ocean water- and the salinity is hard to deal with economically in traditional municipal wastewater treatment methods. In fact the aerospace industry and many other high-tech industries use disposal wells for disposing of various waste material. All of these disposal wells are regulated by the EPA as Class 2 wells. These injection well operators are contractors, providing a service to hundreds of different clients, mostly oil and gas, but not exclusively. They have operated these businesses since the 1940's (although at that time there were even fewer regulations and some of those disposal wells turned into Superfund sites (Southern California is one of those). Large amounts of the waste recovered by skimming and cleanup crews from the Macondo spill was injected into disposal wells.

The oil and gas industry is recycling wastewater from hydraulic fracturing in many cases, but sadly not every operator can or will do it. Here are some examples in a WSJ article: http://online.wsj.com/news/art... There are companies that can recycle frac water to the point it is potable and a few are doing that. There are also companies that deliver their waste water to municipal sewage plant operators that can bring the water to standards that allow it to be discharged into surface rivers.

1. I would acknowledge and even argue that the oil and gas industry needs to find more methods of recycling frac water. However, the conventional vertically drilled wells that have been around for many decades produce more wastewater than fracing in some areas. Examples are Mississippi Lime wells in Oklahoma and Kansas, Austin Chalk wells in Texas and Louisiana, and Phosphoria wells in the Rocky Mountains. Even the historically drilled well targets in Pennsylvania and Ohio have large quantities of water production associated with the oil. I think one reason the oil and gas industry is not reacting quickly to this is that they have ALWAYS had this much water to dispose of and the practice of hydraulic fracturing looks like more of the same to them.

2. The EPA is doing a lousy job of monitoring these Class 2 wells. As soon as slight tremors are measured pumping needs to stop. Seismic surveys need to be done around the wells that have proven to be an issue and new wells need this added to the permitting requirement. Yes that will add $10 million or more to the cost of these wells, but the alternative is public hew and cry about the bogeyman (which is how the public views earthquakes, and most other natural phenomenon), and some legitimate concern about damages caused by these tremors to nearby structures.

3. My own opinion is that fracturing with water is going to become an obsolete practice. Quite a few wells are now being fraced with liquid nitrogen gel, liquid carbon dioxide gel, propane gel, and liquified natural gas. This is the frac fluid of the future that will eliminate the need for using water. It does less damage to the formation because it is either an inert gas (nitrogen), a solvent to oil (carbon dioxide, propane and methane) or is native to the reservoir (propane and natural gas). Most water fracs damage the formation by the water being adsorbed into the shale. This occludes porosity and makes the well harder to produce. It only works because it is cheap- not because it is efficient and ideal for the rock.

Facebook Experiments Had Few Limits"Thousands of Facebook Inc. users received an unsettling message two years ago: They were being locked out of the social network because Facebook believed they were robots or using fake names. To get back in, the users had to prove they were real. In fact, Facebook knew most of the users were legitimate. The message was a test designed to help improve Facebook's antifraud measures...'There's no review process, per se,' said Andrew Ledvina, a Facebook data scientist from February 2012 to July 2013. 'Anyone on that team could run a test," Mr. Ledvina said. "They're always trying to alter peoples' behavior.'...The recent ruckus is 'a glimpse into a wide-ranging practice,' said Kate Crawford, a visiting professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for Civic Media and a principal researcher at Microsoft Research. Companies 'really do see users as a willing experimental test bed' to be used at the companies' discretion."

However, I am in favor of ubiquitously available contraception (for everyone, not just women, I'm egalitarian that way...).

I don't really see how it isn't already. I mean planned parenthood sells a month supply *anywhere* for $15. I don't know/care much about the Limbaugh incident, but I do know that the whole stink Sandra Fluke was making about costs was just that. She claimed it was effectively $960 a year...Are hers gold plated and turbocharged or something? Somebody researched it and found a target near her school was selling them for $9 for a month's supply, which is a LOT less than the number that she testified before congress.

http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

It's kind of stupid how the media uses a two-bit political pundit (Limbaugh) in order to push the extremes of feminism, and had he said nothing at all I can almost guarantee that somebody else would have come along talking about how incredibly stupid somebody would have to be to pay the amount she quoted.

GMs pension liabilities are huge. The company as currently constructed is, more or less, a non-profit structured to pay pensions.

Quick Google: GM has about 114 billion in unfunded pension liabilities (104 billion white collar, 10 billion union which is relatively well funded). http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

GM has a market cap of 58.73 billion. A number which no-doubt reflects the future expenses (not so much, it reflects recent performance, velocity, advertising to investors etc).

Inflation alone will make a $60B marketcap worth $120B in less than the 20 years when those amounts are due, but let's put this into simpler terms. For comparison, how do you stack up against that metric? Is your personal pension liability to yourself a million? Two million? Do you have that much in net worth today?

I know I don't have enough money today to fund the rest of my hoped for life without further earnings. If you are between 30 and 60, you are also in the middle age of your life, unless you plan on living past 90. Why would you expect a company to be able to pay for future debts out of current earnings? That's the entire point of having debts - to pay them off over time.

The US process of letting certain entities shed certain debts while locking others (student loans in particular) is a completely different issue.

GM exists to finances it's pensions. GM's unfunded Pension liabilities: 114 billion $US. GM's market cap: 59 billion. http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

GMs pension liabilities are huge. The company as currently constructed is, more or less, a non-profit structured to pay pensions.

If you had Google type capital and wanted to enter the car market you would be insane to buy GM. Start from scratch, leave the deadwood behind. Honda B-engine VTEC should be out of patent protection. Just copy it (with racy parts) and bolt it up mid engine, modern trans and carbon fiber body. Woot. You won't be the first to found a company on a straight copy of Honda engine (Hyundai), but you could be the first to do it right.

Quick Google: GM has about 114 billion in unfunded pension liabilities (104 billion white collar, 10 billion union which is relatively well funded). http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

GM has a market cap of 58.73 billion. A number which no-doubt reflects the future expenses (not so much, it reflects recent performance, velocity, advertising to investors etc).

The impetus for the study was an age-old complaint of some Facebook users: That going on Facebook and seeing all the great and wonderful things other people are doing makes people feel bad about their own lives.

So although conventional wisdom might say that seeing positive things makes you happier, here there have been accusations to the contrary -- positive things about other people makes you feel lousy about yourself. This study ostensibly looked at that (and I think it found something along the lines of conventional wisdom: happy posts make you post happy stuff, a [dubious!] proxy for your own happines...).

If Facebook knew (and how would they?) that X makes you depressed, then yes...there might be some moral issues with that. But it seems that Facebook asked a legitimate question -- especially so given that it was published in PNAS.

That said, yeah...it feels a little shady. But then, when I log onto Facebook, I am certainly not expecting any aspect of the website to be designed with my best interests in mind!

My favorite way to kill birds is with solar.
http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

Considering that blue states pretty much fund the red states via large federal gov. money, you might want to re-consider.
Basically, the red states are welfare cases who live on large amounts of money from the blue states.

Just google Three felonies a day ... http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

It's very un-American to do something without the plan to profit from it!

Interesting. . . . . So what do you think Snowden makes? I hear he only gave about 200,000 of the 1,700,000 documents to reporters. A buck a page? Two? Ten?

American Generosity
Americans are the most generous, global poll finds

Americans are more apt to donate to a charity, volunteer, or help a stranger than residents of 152 other countries.
 

Generosity in America

You Commit Three Felonies a Day - this of course includes the cops and IRS agents.

People should realize this before saying stupid shit like, "If you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about." because you ARE doing something wrong and you most likely don't even realize it.

Our legal system has become unjust and corrupt.

Of course it's not, but when idiots like you ignore science no matter what facts are presented

That's rich, from an evangelist like you. There are so many facts getting in the way of evangelizing the AGW alarmism that the alarmists have just taken to saying "Well what difference does it make? We should make all these policy changes even if it's wrong!" Really. Here are a few direct quotes for you.

Also, if 97% of scientists all believe something

Well, they do believe something. Just not catastrophic climate change, or current driver of the most recent changes. Because that was not the question, even though it's claimed that it was.

Please provide a single scientific proof of anything Al Gore ever accomplished?

OTOH:

Blood And Gore: Making A Killing On Anti-Carbon Investment Hype

Al Gore invests millions to make billions in cap-and-trade software

Al Gore Invests $6M To Make BILLIONS In Cap And Trade

Gore lies to Congress about personal finances

Gore’s Dual Role: Advocate and Investor

The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore’s Carbon Crusade

Al Gore pushes Global Warming for personal profit

Cyber-Thieves Make Millions from Emissions Cap-and-Trade Scam

Obama's draft budget projects cap-and-trade revenue

Cap-and-trade: The biggest scam of all

Experts: Carbon Tax needed and NOT Cap-and-Trade Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)

Leading Global Warming Crusader: Cap and Trade May INCREASE CO2 Emissions

Cap-and-Trade's Unlikely Critics: Its Creators

Fraud in Europe's Cap and Trade System a 'Red Flag,' Critics Say

Spending Cap and Trade Auction Revenues Will Undermine California’s Climate Goals

Yet LFTR get's pooh poohed because it's experimental. Amazing.

Taxpayers in the red - that means losses

Since its creation it's lost $800 million

Energy Department projects $2.9 billion in losses

I can provide many more if you like - because the program hasn't made a dime. It's lost billions (and it was planned to lose even more billions, but the program's not done yet - there's still time to lose more. Dywolf's link showed nothing about a gain. It said losses were less than expected - but still losses. I can't find anything that says the program is making money - it's all losses. And if you want to dig further, read the White House's independent review of the program where it states we're on the hook for 30 years, we have inexperienced people managing it, poor oversight, no planning, no accountability, and no goals.

.
Adobe's Cloud Solutions Fuel Strong Financial Results

So, apparently, Adode has convinced many people to buy in to an unreliable service. I sincerely wish them success.

Virtually everyone from that generation is dead or beyond any political influence

Except for the politicians that take trips to a shrine which contains war criminals, and various anti-korean sentiment and some pretty skewed views of the sexual enslavement (a.k.a comfort women) of foreign nationals during the Japanese invasion.

The Mountain Pass mine only produces a handful of the rare earths, yet all of them are necessary. The ore is shipped to China, thanks to legal insanity which prevents it from being processed in the US. Shipping the ore half way around the world and the refined products back will impact the economics, and creating competitive products with "local" rare earths will become more difficult.

The issue is that all rare earths are found with Thorium, which can't be processed in the US. Many other mines also pull up these valuable elements, but the tailings are dumped right back into the ground because of the oppressive regulatory burden. In China, thorium is recognized as an asset, and set aside for future use. Not only is it an excellent nuclear fuel, but it has other applications including high grade optics and alloys.

Only one change in US policy is necessary to restore our rare earth industry, and that is to classify Thorium as an asset and allow it to be set aside, rather than insisting that it be disposed of as radioactive waste. Thorium itself is barely radioactive, and in oxide or metallic form it isn't even water soluble, and so poses virtually no health threat. See more about the Thorium Problem.

If this was possible, a likely target would be the FBI's auction of Silk Road Bitcoins:

http://online.wsj.com/articles...

The Leaf is not an economical car, either in monetary terms or for the environment.

My car, similar in performance and physical size to a Leaf, gets 40mpg average and costs £50 to fill the tank, which I do bi-weekly. It looks like we have roughly the same annual mileage, too, of around 8 - 10k. Maintenance and tax is approx 500 per year, covering tyre changes, brake pads etc as required, adding up to approximately £1800 per annum. My car was purchased for £7000, brand new.

At my (our) usage level, and if your car has no running costs at all, you will have made the money back on your initial investment of £26,000 (base model, UK price) within 10 years. I am aware that there are leasing options for just the battery, or the entire car, but leasing is never cheaper than an outright cash purchase.

Oh, and my car has a 300 mile range, doesn't suffer from poor performance in cold weather, and is "recharged" to full capacity, everywhere, in less than five minutes. But yeah, that Leaf... <s>At least it's green </s>

"Because someone had a drink" - no, because someone was drunk, friend. "The bottom line is that NONE of those people would have died in an ignition switch accident had the switch not been faulty." - and no one would die in DUI collisions if individuals didn't drink and drive, your point being...? "I'm not even going to address the ludicrous inanity of your "Also MY Toytas accelerate fine!!"" - yep, quite crazy that my vehicles work as they were intended to, I know. Here's some other people who think Toyotas work just fine: http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

The New York Times article Slashdot mentioned, Tim Cook, Making Apple His Own, is an example of the collapse of the New York Times.

The authors are WRITERS (Heavenly horn sounds). The first 4 paragraphs are examples of their intent to tell stories like novelists, avoiding writing boring stuff like news. And, of course, WRITERS don't care about messy things like technology, even if they write about technology companies.

It's okay to put in some facts to give novels a feeling of realism: "And the [Apple] stock price fell nearly in half from its 2012 peak to the middle of 2013" Then: "To shore up shareholder faith, Mr. Cook split the stock, increased the dividend and engineered a $90 billion buyback -- steps that helped shares rebound almost entirely." The price of stock goes up when someone buys a lot of it.

But novelists have problems. Sometimes facts are more weird than any novelist would invent: "rap star Dr. Dre ... will join Apple." The Wall Street Journal's novelists say Apple is "Tapping Tastemakers to Regain Music Mojo". Apple will sell "high-end headphones", under the Beats name. What could go wrong?

Mr. Cook is not much like Steve Jobs. He supports brand confusion: "Mr. Cook is trying to broaden Apple's brand, too, taking to Twitter and other public venues to express support for environmentalism and gay rights (and for Auburn University football)."

There are big hopes for the Apple iWatch "... according to people involved in the project, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to press." Steve Jobs fired people who announced products early because announcing early creates brand confusion.

The whole point of being a novelist is to avoid unpleasant realities. It's like being a drugee, but without the drugs. Don't get involved with messy issues. Quoting: "Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple ... says Mr. Cook has not neglected the company's central mission: innovation. 'Honestly, I don't think anything's changed,' he said."

Mr. Cook wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal in support of proposed federal legislation protecting gay, lesbian and transgender workers.

Nothing has changed?

Another quote: "Last July, a federal judge ruled that Apple had illegally conspired with publishers to try to raise prices in the e-books market; Apple is appealing."

And this: "Apple has also started building apps for Android systems".

Novelists like to live in their fantasy worlds. They don't want to think about messy news like the beginning of a gay, rap-singing, law-breaking, watch-making Apple that makes software for Google.

The real story? Apple and the New York Times are both spiralling downwards, in my opinion.

The New York Times article Slashdot mentioned, Tim Cook, Making Apple His Own, is an example of the collapse of the New York Times.

The authors are WRITERS (Heavenly horn sounds). The first 4 paragraphs are examples of their intent to tell stories like novelists, avoiding writing boring stuff like news. And, of course, WRITERS don't care about messy things like technology, even if they write about technology companies.

It's okay to put in some facts to give novels a feeling of realism: "And the [Apple] stock price fell nearly in half from its 2012 peak to the middle of 2013" Then: "To shore up shareholder faith, Mr. Cook split the stock, increased the dividend and engineered a $90 billion buyback -- steps that helped shares rebound almost entirely." The price of stock goes up when someone buys a lot of it.

But novelists have problems. Sometimes facts are more weird than any novelist would invent: "rap star Dr. Dre ... will join Apple." The Wall Street Journal's novelists say Apple is "Tapping Tastemakers to Regain Music Mojo". Apple will sell "high-end headphones", under the Beats name. What could go wrong?

Mr. Cook is not much like Steve Jobs. He supports brand confusion: "Mr. Cook is trying to broaden Apple's brand, too, taking to Twitter and other public venues to express support for environmentalism and gay rights (and for Auburn University football)."

There are big hopes for the Apple iWatch "... according to people involved in the project, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to press." Steve Jobs fired people who announced products early because announcing early creates brand confusion.

The whole point of being a novelist is to avoid unpleasant realities. It's like being a drugee, but without the drugs. Don't get involved with messy issues. Quoting: "Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple ... says Mr. Cook has not neglected the company's central mission: innovation. 'Honestly, I don't think anything's changed,' he said."

Mr. Cook wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal in support of proposed federal legislation protecting gay, lesbian and transgender workers.

Nothing has changed?

Another quote: "Last July, a federal judge ruled that Apple had illegally conspired with publishers to try to raise prices in the e-books market; Apple is appealing."

And this: "Apple has also started building apps for Android systems".

Novelists like to live in their fantasy worlds. They don't want to think about messy news like the beginning of a gay, rap-singing, law-breaking, watch-making Apple that makes software for Google.

The real story? Apple and the New York Times are both spiralling downwards, in my opinion.

I'm pretty sure the smuggler who figures out how to keep his heart rate low can suddenly be super effective. Then, this will give the incentive to create methods to learn how to control your heart-rate and it will be soon mastered by many smugglers.

It is worth noting that the TSA has a human-powered version of this, they call it behavior detection and they've spent at least 1 billion dollars on it and caught 0 terrorists. Of the people they have pulled out for extra inspection, about 1% end up being arrested for things like outstanding warrants and carrying drugs.

That's a 99% failure-rate in the best case. A technocratic version of the same thing could be 10x more effective and it would still be a profound intrusion on basic human dignity.

Skip the whole grains. Carbs are the whole problem, and while whole grains may have more nutrition, they are still digested nearly as quickly as pure sugar. The resulting release of insulin causes the storage of fat AND the eventual depression of blood sugar which causes craving for food. After more than 30 years of struggling with waking up hungry at night, regardless of whether I ate a lot or little, after trying a ketogenic diet, I no longer get hunger pangs. Fat just melts away, without even trying or worrying about counting calories. I no longer suddenly step from fine to lightheaded and agonizing hunger pangs 2-3 hrs after every meal. Rather I just slowly start getting tired and a little weak.

Basically, modern medicine has pulled a fast one on the population, by selling the low-fat diet. It's false. And now it is embedded into government policy! The reason for obesity is carbs. People can't help themselves but to eat when faced with the intensity of cravings for food that high carb. low fat diets cause. The Drs. have caused the obesity epidemic with their attempts to prevent heart disease. http://www.biosciencetechnolog... http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

Runaway1956 used the premise "Time and again, when cities and states make gun laws stricter, crime increases. And, repeatedly, when gun laws are relaxed, there is a short initial period of increased violence, followed by a decidedly downward trend in crime." which is false. In the UK increased restrictions on gun ownership actually show the opposite pattern.

Citation needed. Google tells me the opposite. First hit, second hit. Of course, these articles focus on gun crime. Even in Australia, the gun bans have decreased gun crime but increased violent crime overall. Do you have any citations that support your claim, or are we all just arguing from emotion?

Take a look at this.

Steve Jobs disagreed, and so does Santosh Jayaram.

According to the MLA (cited in the article), the problem is "“anti-intellectualism, anti-aesthetic hostility to literature, antipathy to theory." But this article reports hostility to literature within academia. At UCLA, you can graduate as an English major without ever taking a class about Shakespeare.

It doesn't have to be that way. People who truly understand the humanities have value in industry, as Steve Jobs pointed out multiple times.

According to the MLA (cited in the article), the problem is "“anti-intellectualism, anti-aesthetic hostility to literature, antipathy to theory." But this article reports hostility to literature within academia. At UCLA, you can graduate as an English major without ever taking a class about Shakespeare.

It doesn't have to be that way. People who truly understand the humanities have value in industry, as Steve Jobs pointed out multiple times.

Ahhh.

Okay, I'll grant that manufacturing employment has improved for people able to work at $217 to $500 dollars per month wages.

Even so, as I said.. china's already automating heavily - so even the incredibly low wages there are not preventing automation.

http://online.wsj.com/news/art...

"Delta is testing a one-armed, four-jointed robot that can move objects, join components and complete similar tasks. By 2016, Delta hopes to sell a version for as little as $10,000, which would be less than half the cost of current mainstream robots.

That price is also cheaper than the salary of a Chinese worker, and the robot can work around the clock."

Ironically, the manufacturing is likely to return to the U.S. in that case, but not the jobs.