Slashdot Mirror

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124181970915002009.html

This article in the Wall Street Journal talks about the long term salary affects of graduating in a recession. If you're sure you can find work in your field then you should be okay. If not you might want to consider getting that degree, at least according to the article.

Cheers,
Greg

"Top * Lists" aren't necessarily unassailable data, but mathematicians, statisticians, and actuaries can do pretty well.

No it isn't. Modern Fiction Studies is a technical (English) journal; the WSJ is a general newspaper written to the 10th -12th grade reading level. Its news stories don't require esoteric knowledge or deep background to comprehend; their stories are designed to be self-contained. Take a look at two of today's page one stories: Detroit's Troubles Lure World of Bidders and U.S., Europe Are an Ocean Apart on Human Toll of Joblessness.

Neither is particularly technical. Both summarize their main contents towards the beginning of the story ("Foreign bidders are lining up to pick off parts of General Motors Corp. as the contraction of the U.S. auto industry sets the stage for a global reshuffling.").

What is unique about the WSJ is that a) it doesn't use wire service copy and b) writes "deeper" stories that eschew "fire department pulls cat from tree" headlines for "an in-depth look at changes in the firehouse surrounding the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program" or something like it. People pay for the WSJ because they can't get its stories anywhere else, but that doesn't mean it's a technical journal.

No it isn't. Modern Fiction Studies is a technical (English) journal; the WSJ is a general newspaper written to the 10th -12th grade reading level. Its news stories don't require esoteric knowledge or deep background to comprehend; their stories are designed to be self-contained. Take a look at two of today's page one stories: Detroit's Troubles Lure World of Bidders and U.S., Europe Are an Ocean Apart on Human Toll of Joblessness.

Neither is particularly technical. Both summarize their main contents towards the beginning of the story ("Foreign bidders are lining up to pick off parts of General Motors Corp. as the contraction of the U.S. auto industry sets the stage for a global reshuffling.").

What is unique about the WSJ is that a) it doesn't use wire service copy and b) writes "deeper" stories that eschew "fire department pulls cat from tree" headlines for "an in-depth look at changes in the firehouse surrounding the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program" or something like it. People pay for the WSJ because they can't get its stories anywhere else, but that doesn't mean it's a technical journal.

Newspaper publishers don't stand a chance to charge for their content on the internet, but they can charge for the convenience of it being made available on Kindle.

Now, Amazon is offering them a new sales channel but the pricing is not controlled by the publishers. At least this is the major problem about which the wsj.com complained -- wsj.com: Publishers Nurture Rivals to Kindle

Presently Kindle is not an independent distribution platform. You can't distribute your newspaper on it if you don't sign a deal with Amazon first. While newspapers will be happy to sale content via Kindle, they wouldn't wish to substitute the crummy revenues from internet with the possibility of extortion by Amazon. On top of that there is no room for ads on Kindle, so the content is entirely unsubsidized.

The point is not that CRA is singularly responsible for the financial bubble, but rather that the financial and housing industries are highly regulated (i.e. controlled) by the government - a fact that is widely overlooked by the media, in my experience

Not only do the Treasury, Fed, and HUD play large roles in matters financial and housing related, including Freddie/Fannie, FDIC, SOX, interest rate manipulation, etc., but it is getting to the point where it is suicidal to even try to stand against the government. All the TARP recipients were told to take the money under threat of government persecution, execs who disagreed would get the boot. The govt fired the head of GM and installed a puppet to cram it's bankruptcy plan down.

Here Warren buffet mentions Moody's rating role in the real-estate bubble

If Moody's had started to take a negative view on residential real estate, the ratings firm would have been hauled before Congress to testify about why it was hurting the U.S. economy with its bearish ratings.

The 3 rating services themselves are government-sponsored monopolies

Here's some -isms for you...

I fear progressive authoritarianism operating under the guise of a liberal democracy. I fear those who would tear down our current society to enforce a raw democracy, guided by the "enlightened" elite, using propaganda via the media to steer the masses, creating a perception of "have-nots" so they can hate those that don't like where the system is taking us. Those that don't follow are run over; it's not a new concept, after all, these tactics have been around since "Philip Dru: Administrator", 1917.

We're being steered away from the republic, because a republic represents the freedom to get away from bad decisions made by others. "Why do we need an electoral congress when we can just let the people decide?" No... we have a democracy where you only need a majority to decide that someone else should pay for what you want, a fear that the Founding Fathers voiced often. There's a reason why they call it a progressive tax code, such that today 90% of the public pays 30% of the federal tax. Our "closing the loophoole" will end up chasing away the 10% that actually generates the cash for our society.

We have the media in league with the POTUS, in 100 days reporting favorable stories in a 2:1 ratio over the last president, yes 42% vs 20% favorably biased stories. And it's just not NBC or CNN... They steer the national conversations, and under the guise of entertainment (ComedyCentral, of Viacom, which lest we forget owned CBS up until 2006), they ridicule those that don't fall in line with their political ideology. John Stewart rips apart Cramer thanks to his NYSE executive brother, then falls back on "I'm just an entertainer" when his beliefs are cornered...

It's not socialism, no, because at least there they told you up front that the system was being run by the elite to forcefully equate the masses, except for those at the top of course. It's not fascism this time around either, because under fascism the corporations run the government, when today the government is itching to run the corporations (another $4.5 billion 1 hour ago). It's authoritarianism, chipping away our freedoms, our options, our future. Spending money they don't have today, telling us what we can't believe, then using the 1920's progressive tactics of criticising and ridiculing the non-believers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123896664697090681.html

How did IBM go from seeing enough value in Sun to buy it, to claiming that Sun isn't worth it? IBM thinks that Sun is worth at least 7 billion dollars, that's a fact. It sounds like some IBM executive leadership got their panties in a bunch when they were rejected by the McNealy faction, and want bloody revenge. I would to if you turned around and found out Oracle swiped the deal right from under you. And it only cost Oracle song and a dance more than IBM was offering. Larry wins, Sam looses. Larry was always better at this game. Maybe Sam should go back to playing sax.

I'm really surprised the postings here are all debating whether or not the methods of communication claimed to be used this guy and his colleagues are secure or not, and debates about NSA.

How about questioning if this is what was actually used? Maybe he's just making it up because he's had enough of the conditions he was kept in and will say anything to get away from Guantanamo Bay. I'm not saying he was tortured, but if you put me in a military prison for five years, flew me out to Morocco for some "hard questioning", repeatedly made me feel like you were going to drown me ("waterboarding"[1]), smacked my head against a wall multiple times ("headbanging"[2]) and locked me in a small cage with insects I had a phobia about and told me they might bite me [3] I might well just say anything I thought you wanted me to.

[1]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5185835/CIA-waterboarded-Khalid-Sheikh-Mohammed-183-times.html
[2] http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB123975168816518691-lMyQjAxMDI5MzE5NDcxNTQxWj.html
[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1170857/Obama-wont-prosecute-CIA-agents-used-insects-waterboarding-sleep-deprivation-terror-suspects.html

When the Daily Mail, a right wing newspaper, suggests the US military are echoing interrogation techniques used in Orwell's "1984" then I think we have to be a little bit critical about believing the credibility of the information gathered in this manner.

Or, is it because meat packers are concerned that people might stop eating pork in fear of the virus?

Meat packers aren't just concerned about it - it is in fact actually happening. Plenty of people genuinely (and jokingly) think that eating pork products is a way to get this disease.

Public health officials have to live in the real world, where irrational behavior, fear, hysteria, and misinformation are enemies as big as disease itself. If referring to it as "H1N1 Influenza" rather than "Swine Flu" gets people to smarten up about it, and has the benefit of reducing damage to the meat industry, then so be it.

Specter left the Democratic Party in '81 because he lacked seniority for cool appointments. The Republicans were (and have been) desperate enough for a Pennsylvania senate seat that he could write his own checks in the GOP.

That's interesting, according Wikipedia he's been a registered Republican since 1966. He wasn't even elected to the Senate until 1980. So I call gross fabrication (i.e. bullshit). FYI: If you're going to make shit up, don't make it so goddamn trivial to check.

Now, he's looking at being part of a permanent minority, and the majority party is probably going to give him nicer committee chairs than he could get with the GOP.

He's not getting any.

It's not a principled stand; it's politics.

Oh you're right to say that it's because he was going to lose in the GOP primary, but that's not very insightful, since Specter said that very thing in his press conference today. The real issue is whether he's right when he said that the GOP left him, rather than he left the GOP. I suspect he's right. Barry Goldwater famously went from crazy rightwinger to moderate without changing a position.

It works for Second Life. Almost too well. In 2007, Ginko Financial, an in-game bank, went bust. Then Midas Bank went bust. This drew the attention of The Wall Street Journal. In 2008, Linden Labs introduced bank regulation. Most of the Second Life banks were actually Ponzi schemes, with huge interest rates. It's still possible for a real-world bank to open branches in Second Life, but nobody has bothered.

Of course the slideshow isn't viewable in Firefox.

It's a debatable point as to whether Gates ever actually grew up. He is famious for yelling "That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard" at his underlings. It would expalin his total lack of a moral compass in his business dealings.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123991010146926199.html

Poor understanding of IT jargon by a politician's office...what a shock...

I'm a doctor, dammit!

Here's a link to the story in the Wall Street Journal.

Damn. Just who are the pirates in this case?

Mathematicians do not live like rock stars

Well, some do. Such as Jim Stewart, who made a ton of money off his wretched Calculus textbooks, enough to buy a $24million house. Not all mathematicians are motivated by altruism.

It's about market segmentation.

Let's say a normal Windows license costs $50. XP costs $15 and they want to get rid of it. Hence Windows 7 Starter Edition.

The idea is that most netbook customers won't mind the 3 app limit. Or maybe they will and they will upgrade.

The Wall Street Journal has more thoughtful writeup of why MS is doing rather than the "Windoze is shiat. Install Linux. Be a haxxor!" dribble. The problem is three fold:

• Netbooks are becoming more popular because they are cheap.
• They often can't run Vista very well because of resource constraints.
• The only current option for MS is XP which they have discontinued.

One option that MS has (other than continuing to support XP) is to get Windows 7 to run with fewer resources; however, netbooks have even smaller margins than regular desktops which means that most manufacturers will not pay for a regular OEM license. So MS has to make Win 7 cheaper. The only way to do that is to make it more limited. The only other option is to concede the market to Linux which they will never do.

right now

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123987956572324825.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://sev.prnewswire.com/transportation-trucking-railroad/20090415/DA9992115042009-1.html

all that interfered before was economic ability, that's the only reason china lagged behind japan and europe in rail adoption

india likewise is similarly dense, and as it matures economically somewhat behind china, watch india too make a massive increase and rail in a few years/ decade or so

True, Medicare's administrative costs are just 3% of total spending, while the private sector hits 11% to 14%. But insurance companies spend money to screen their claims for fraud. Medicare automatically pays more than 95% of the bills it receives. This lack of scrutiny reduces overhead, but it makes the program highly vulnerable to abuse.

Does this work for you? I've never tried this and I think I like the approach, how do people react?

People are quite prepared to believe that there will be problems with any computer they might use. If they have used computers, they are used to the problems; if they haven't used computers much, they have probably heard stories. Consider all the hoopla about Conficker. I just had to spend hours working on my sister's laptop; she was hit by a fake antivirus infection.

Do they stay with the Linux install?

My wife is perfectly happy with her Linux install, because it does everything she cares about. My mother hated Vista so much that she asked me to install Linux, and she is still using it. I have a few friends for whom I set up a dual boot, and I think they mostly use Windows.

I am constantly asked by people to help them with their computers but I just don't want to fix windows problems anymore, even re-installing presents hours of time if the windows box is to be built and patched properly. Even then there is no guarantee that the user won't end up in the same situation they were in before.

I tell people that they should absolutely get a hardware firewall to protect their home computers; I personally recommend a Netgear Internet router with Stateful Packet Inspection. This will greatly help cut down problems. People with laptops using WiFi are a separate problem.

I tell people to consider a Mac, and I also tell them that if I weren't using Linux I'd use a Mac. I hate viruses, spyware, and the other malware that strikes Windows; and I hate how time-consuming it is to do anything with Windows.

If you set up an Ubuntu system, make sure to install with two partitions, a "/" partition and a "/home". The Ubuntu installer is fast, but it works by wiping the "/" partition and unpacking default directories. If you have the separate "/" and "/home" partitions, you can let the installer wipe "/" and have it not touch "/home"; the user's settings are preserved. Just last week, I helped someone who had a messed-up, un-bootable system; his computer took a power hit (no UPS) and the disk got messed up. We re-installed Ubuntu and preserved his "/home" and got him up and running faster than I could possibly have done with Windows.

steveha

The WSJ's Cassandra Sweet calls Solaren a "stealth startup:"

The company is in talks with two trusts, one in the U.S. and one in Europe, about financing for engineering, design and testing of the system, and launching a pilot system, The company needs funding "in the billions of dollars" [simply for the pilot project] after which it will likely float an initial public offering. UPDATE: PG&E Looks To Outer Space For Solar Power

The faith of the innocent.

Solaren is one guy with a pick-up team of engineers: it has no money and no track record.

You might want to check out the tax plan set out by Ari Fleischer.

Basically he suggests get rid of all specialty taxes, and all specialty tax breaks. Make it simple.

Everyone pays a percentage of their income (they get the benefits of having a government, they ought to at least chip in a little bit), and those who make more can pay a higher percentage. Taxes would be significantly easier to calculate (currently tax preparation and processing, if all the labor that goes into it were actually counted, would be one of the largest industries in the United States. Simplifying it will leave people free to do things that are more productive), and it would be hard to cheat the system. No more diesel fuel in your paper processing plant.

There was $79.6 billion of syndicated bank loans in the last quarter. That is down significantly from before the most recent troubles, but there is still some bank credit available to credit-worthy corporations.

But you don't need banks to raise debt. The volume of US investment-grade bond debt issuance hit a record $298.4 billion in the first quarter of 2009. There was even $6.47 billion of junk bonds issued in the quarter.

They have saddled everyone of us with a debt of $165,000 for the bail out (so far) and most of that money goes into their pockets in bonuses, guarantees for their failed investments, and other devious ways they bilk people for cash.

You're way off in your figures. As you can see from this nifty little chart, the entire Federal Reserve balance sheet is only about $2 trillion. Include $700 billion for TARP and $787 billion for the stimulus, and it adds up to $3.487 trillion. Divide that by 250 million people in the United States, and you get $13,948 per person. And Goldman Sachs was only a small portion of that.

Personally I think we should have let them fail. When politicians say, "You must do X or the economy will collapse!" it sounds too much like "you must do X or the terrorists will win!"

The US power grid is already stretched pretty thin and widespread adoption of plugin vehicles would necessitate major infrastructure upgrades.

Obama included money in the stimulus package to upgrade the power grid and is "Pressing for a Power Grid Overhaul".

The average home or even parking lot is certainly not going to be wired to refill a vehicle in 30-minutes.

The average home or parking lot does not need to recharge batteries in 30 minutes. Batteries can be charged while working and sleeping for instance. The problem would come with long haul trucking, however trains are more fuel efficient. Semis could then use hybrid drive systems, a small petro engine recharges batteries which powers an electric engine, until hydrogen can be used.

Falcon

I know, the "MSM" wouldn't dare criticize government policies that led to less profit for their advertisers...

Fox News contributor says comparing Obama to Adolf Hitler isn't out of bounds. (Which it isn't, but whatever.)
http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200902200013

"Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123552068199964531.html

You could watch Fox News for a day and hear countless references complaining of the new administration being marxist, maoist, socialist, which represents evil in the eyes of neoconservatives. Every politician has a few things in common with Hitler and Stalin, but you think the comparison never happens to Obama only because someone told you so.

The comparison of Bush and Hitler happened for a good reason. They both created an atmosphere where questioning the government in regards to it's wartime policies wasn't tolerated. They're both ultra nationalist, believed in only military solutions, drove their respective economies into the ground with war spending and war itself, and used secrets courts, secret prisons, and torture to deny people their right to due process.

If you can come up with some better commonalities with Obama, I'd love to hear them.

Sorry, haven't been on lately. I don't know about the other submitter, but this is current information: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123914805204099085.html And watch for more. (If the information is let out into the public.) Note the article specifically states that the majority of these penetrations were NOT discovered by the company managing the infrastructure, but rather by intelligence services. In other words, the utility provider employees like you are perhaps unaware. If you want evidence, you'll have to find some on your own. My only point is that there have been a lot of breakins, and the utility companies aren't all the same in implementing standards like NERC in consistent fashions. Everyone interprets regulatory standards a little differently, hence variations in methods/technologies for addressing the standards.

Obviously it's a shadowy world and the public at large isn't going to get to see all the information gathered: "Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, "If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on."

I think this article is evidence that I do know what I'm talking about, regardless of your insulting response. You don't know anything about me or what I do or have done, but you were quick to judge. Now I ask, what do you really know about what's going on in your own industry if you aren't aware of these kinds of things?

I accept your apology. 'nuff said.

The WSJ article was apparently triggered by a letter sent by NERC (North American Electric Reliability Council) to its members. I think it shows a healthy development of security digging down to yet another layer of depth.

Forget the major computers in the major control centers. That's what everyone thinks of first. At that level it is becoming like the Indians and athropologists in the Grand Canyon. For every utility cyber worker there seems to be 30 government gumshoes and overseers looking over their shoulders. One would expect no aspects of security to be neglected at that level.

The NERC letter refers to devices at a lower level. Primarily, what the industry calls "protective relays" in substations. From 1888 to a few years ago these functions were really done with electromechanical relays. Now, many of them have been replaced by digital equivalents on a one-by-one basis. In a household analogy, it is like the difference between a central electric control computer for the house, as compared to a "smart" digital LED light bulb. One worries about the central computer being hacked, but at first blush, not the light bulb.

The problem is that the engineers who deal with this level of equipment aren't used to thinking of these devices like the light bulb instead of like computers in a network. They have not identified many of these low-level devices as "cyber critical". The NERC letter urges utilities to change that culture.

This is an industry that owns and maintains hundreds of millions of diverse pieces of equipment. Every day, some fraction of them are converted to digital. No single study, no single policy can change this infrastructure overnight. I think they are approaching cybersecurity thoroughly and methodically, but it will take time.

Remember Y2K? Roughly the same collection of hundreds of millions of devices were threatened by a common-mode failure (Y2K). It was very analogous to an external cyber attack. The utility industry tackled Y2K, thoroughly reviewed all those devices, and performed flawlessly on the morning of 1/1/2000.

My point? Sure we should worry about cyber attacks on critical infrastructure, but don't jump to the conclusion that no security exists or that nothing competent is being done about it.

' Cyberspies have penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system, according to current and former national-security officials'

"There are intrusions, and they are growing .. There were a lot last year"

'Many of the intrusions were detected not by the companies in charge of the infrastructure but by U.S. intelligence agencies, officials said. Intelligence officials worry about cyber attackers taking control of electrical facilities, a nuclear power plant or financial networks via the Internet'

Given the great Northeast Blackout of Aug 14 2003 and a similar incident at a Davis-Besse nuclear power plant the previous January, why is the US still using the Internet to control the power grid? And that's assuming that any of the above is even true.
-------

PROTHERO: Do you believe this crap, Dascombe?

DASCOMBE: It's not our job to believe it, Lewis. Our job is to tell the people --

PROTHERO: "Exactly what they tell us." I Know but do you think that people will believe it?

DASCOMBE: They will if it's you that's telling it to them. Now let's try it again.

Your theory that it's all marketing is interesting, but without facts to back it up, I don't see any reason to suppose it's the case.

We are currently seeing the biggest expansion of marketing of green features and emphasis on green cars from a societal point of view in history. You would think this would be causing people to want to go green.

Instead, what we've seen is that as soon as gas prices declined, Americans went right back to buying the big SUVs that they seem to tend to buy.

Source: Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123776430557508813.html
"Last summer, when gas cost $4 a gallon, buyers snapped up small cars so fast that dealers couldn't keep them in stock. Now, with gas prices half that level, almost 500,000 fuel-thrifty models are piled up unsold around the country."

It seems like it's mainly cost that's a motivator on the green car versus SUV debate for the American public. As soon as the cost factor is removed, people go back to driving SUVs. Sure, it's possible to say this is just because they're brain-washed by marketing, but what evidence is there for that (especially in light of the decline in small car sales during a time of increased green marketing)?

BTW, the HP article linked to is hosed.
Try: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123852934905974845.html

Why use Android on a netbook? Will we get the same vibrant community that the Asus Eee PC has - with many custom Linux distros available, most a vast improvement on the crap that Asus ships them with - with HP & Adroid?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

Seriously, who didn't think that the plan all along was for the gov't to seize control of the financial sector and dictate wages? The writing's on the wall, folks. Liberty is almost dead.

What's truly sad about Monster Cable's bullying is that even after getting duly bitchslapped back into reality by Kurt Denke of Blue Jeans Cable, they apparently still haven't learned the slightest thing about trademark protection. In fact, the opposite seems to be true, to the detriment of numerous small (and some large) businesses.

(Somewhat OT, sorry)

Or is your point that implementing progressive taxation for the purpose of helping all members of society have opportunities available to them is even comparable to illegally seizing private property for merely speaking against corruption?

Yes, it is comparable — and increasingly so. First of all, your priorities are screwed up. "Progressive taxation" is a fact of life, because of the principle, that your taxes are based on your ability to pay. This principle existed since long before the politicians recognized, that they can get elected by promising the poor to "take care" of them. It was neither meant to "give opportunities", nor is it achieving that goal. Despite the poorer half of the Americans paying less than 3% of the total tax, the upward mobility in the country has slowed over the decades.

And now back to the validity of comparing to the case at hand... Contrary to your accusations, the guy's property was seized neither illegally (explicit accusation) nor permanently (implicit). In fact, most of his property is still with him, thankfully. He is, by all appearances, being harassed by the government (incidentally — Democratic government) he criticized, which is very wrong.

But the 90% punitive taxes (except, of course, on the government employees), government's takeover of firms (on the Executive's whim), and refusal to release control of the firms willing and able to pay back the government's money are much worse.

Or is your point that implementing progressive taxation for the purpose of helping all members of society have opportunities available to them is even comparable to illegally seizing private property for merely speaking against corruption?

Yes, it is comparable — and increasingly so. First of all, your priorities are screwed up. "Progressive taxation" is a fact of life, because of the principle, that your taxes are based on your ability to pay. This principle existed since long before the politicians recognized, that they can get elected by promising the poor to "take care" of them. It was neither meant to "give opportunities", nor is it achieving that goal. Despite the poorer half of the Americans paying less than 3% of the total tax, the upward mobility in the country has slowed over the decades.

And now back to the validity of comparing to the case at hand... Contrary to your accusations, the guy's property was seized neither illegally (explicit accusation) nor permanently (implicit). In fact, most of his property is still with him, thankfully. He is, by all appearances, being harassed by the government (incidentally — Democratic government) he criticized, which is very wrong.

But the 90% punitive taxes (except, of course, on the government employees), government's takeover of firms (on the Executive's whim), and refusal to release control of the firms willing and able to pay back the government's money are much worse.

Since there are approx 1043 natural gas and oil rigs already in the U.S, could they not piggy-back off these. This may not provide enough power to supply all the demands, but maybe as a supplement. The windmills could also power some of the rig, thus reducing the amount of emissions by from the diesel-power generators mostly used on rigs.

Google News currently links to 43 related stories.

Here's the WSJ's take.

Unlike the iPhone, there is more than one market for the Android platform.

Wrong. With a jail-broken iPhone, you can buy apps from the new Cydia Store. If you have 10 minutes and can press two buttons at once, you can jailbreak an iPhone.

Or if it is, the Alternative Press, Reuters, and Wall Street Journal are all in on it.

At the same time the NSL's are being curtailed, the current administration is seeking expanded powers for the IRS to go after imagined "tax cheats". The IRS will have broader and sweeping powers to go after people who are guilty of not paying their taxes until they prove themselves innocent.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123802635823642761.html

Some things on tap: requiring small businesses to use bank accounts for all transactions, implying that the IRS can scan your bank. Having the government track all your transactions - even internationally.

This administration doesn't see any attack on personal freedom when the IRS rifles through your bank accounts or papers. Nor does it see any attack on personal freedom when guns are regulated and fire is essentially taxed until banned and all of our interactions with the environment are monitored.

But... if you call someone overseas in Iran, and the government listens in, now THAT's when the government crosses the line. What a token joke! Civil rights in the Obama administration is like having a choice of a dildo to get ass raped with.

While there are guys like this around, spam is going to remain a problem. http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB107930537384354969-IhjgINplaR3n5ypaX2HcKqDm4.html

A scheme failing to work doesn't mean it wasn't a scheme. As for the alternative energy sources making a profit, that generally only happens when energy costs are artificially high which would be the case with cap and trade in the EU as well as the bubble that busted last fall.

The EU has experienced about a 3% inflation rate over the last year. This is a little disturbing when you consider that Euro dollar is worth about 1.5 US dollars. Actually today it is 1.32 but on average over the last few years, it has been more to the point of 1.5 or so. That means the 3% inflation is more like 4.5% in the US. In contrast, the US inflation rate typically runs around 3% even though 2008 saw a 3.8% rate. Now the EU rates actually vary from member nation to member nation and I took the current average rate expressed by the HICP data availible which is measured in and adjusted to 2005 Euro dollars.

Anyways, the EU imposed several different energy tariffs and actually had a consumer rights deal worked out because their energy costs were too high for their poor to afford. Sadly, if the Obama Cap and trade system is put in place, we will see that in the US too. And yes, the US is already eyeballing tariffs to place on imports to ensure that we pay as much as possible.

Anyways, despite what you think is exculpatory evidence simply because something failed to materialize, all you have to do is ask a few questions and you can clearly see the idea isn't to stop global warming as much as it is to siphon money and alternative political agendas.

The first question might be, if global warming is so problematic and it is the human contributions to GHGs,- then why is the focus solely on limiting what people can do or by taking a sum of money from them instead of creating an international research group that does nothing but explores technology to reduce emissions, make alternative energy sources affordable, advance the state of plug in electric vehicles or perhaps small but efficient power generating systems like Fuel cells of hydrogen peroxide "on demand" charging systems, and then make those discoveries availible to any industry wishing to implement them while eventually phasing older systems out or retrofitting them as repairs become necessary.

Another question would be why aren't caps imposed on all Kyoto signatories instead of just the wealthy ones? Even if the caps settled on an over all larger amount of emissions on a world wide scale, the developing countries would be benefiting from advancements in efficiency and emissions controls from industrialized nations and we would be on a world wide effort to reduce emissions instead of attempting to punish just the rich nations.

Another question which I think is the most telling is with the caps, why isn't there a provision for one nation to implement changes in another as a means of capturing part of the carbon allotments. If the UK could contract with corporations in the US or Germany or France or China or whoever to upgrade to cleaner or more efficient systems, they should have the ability to claim ownership of some of the carbon offset by those upgrades. Lets say they can upgrade a facility and save 200 m-tons of emissions a year, and they can do that upgrade for $1000 per ton, that may be cheaper then purchasing 100 metric tons of carbon units from Tuvalu or the economic losses from exporting industry to India or China or where ever the hot spot might be that isn't restricted by carbon caps.

Finally, why isn't the goal to stop emissions. Sure, people think that is a goal but it has never been expressed in any political solution presently or previously at the table for consideration. All political solutions to date have contained only a reduction of emissions, most of them were reductions in increased emissions, and they all contained a way to buy your way out of obligations.

Is the Wall Street Journal authoritative enough?
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122143317323034023-lMyQjAxMDI4MjExNTQxMzUzWj.html

This is a major blow to an industry with an outdated business model. Scientific publication is starting to move beyond the need for the middleman, and I am extremely glad to see it happen.

That said, the major publishers will scramble to try and patch this hole in the business model, and they will probably make the overall situation worse before it really starts to improve.

Oh well. Got to start that process at some point. Go MIT.

Nothing personal to you, sir or madame. I see "outdated business model" time and time again on Slashdot as an euphemism for basically saying "not offering something for free".

First of all, business models do not become outdated. They may become worthless because someone has started doing business another way that eliminates one from making money from their current way of doing business. For example, in the beginning of the Internets, folks were charging for content. Then, someone had the brilliant idea that they don't have to charge and they'll have advertising. Thereby making most sites who charged the consumer for the content "outdated" and thereby making everyone else lose money. Then again, tell that to these guys

Now consider this, many folks are becoming independent contractors and doing crafts and whatnot at home to make a living - just like the pre-19th century factory system. Outdated indeed.

There's no such thing as an outdated business model. MIT is financing these publications by other means, that's all. Also, exactly how much does it really cost to publish this stuff online? The authors aren't paid. What are the costs associated? I don't think this is such a sacrifice for MIT or any other institution that does this.

Making tasty ice cream in an old gas station for your friends and neighbors to buy and eat is a hell of a lot more intrinsically motivating than exchange rates, tariffs, multi-national labor costs, questionable human rights practices in low cost source countries, etc. etc.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Another tough area Mr. Toyoda must tackle promptly is the excess manufacturing capacity in Japan. In the late 1990s, when a strong yen made Japan a costly place to make cars, Toyota slashed capacity at home and added production overseas.

But the yen reversed its direction, weakening to as low as 120 to the dollar between 2005 to 2007. Toyota decided to take advantage and do more of its manufacturing at home, since a weak yen has the effect of making exports more profitable. By 2007, it was producing 4.23 million vehicles in Japan -- a million more than it made just eight years before.

That move was directly at odds with Toyota's long-held philosophy not to make long-term decisions on where to put factories, based on short-term currency-exchange rates, which can swing rapidly.

It's best not to worry about these things and concentrate on the product. Due to the decisions made above, Toyota lost money for the first time in 59 years.

The article also notes:

Akio Toyoda has long preached a traditional Toyota practice called genchi genbutsu, a leadership maxim that boils down to get out of your office and visit the source of the problem. For the past year, Mr. Toyoda has been practicing genchi genbutsu to quietly collect evidence that the company had strayed, according to people familiar with the situation.

A CEO that will go out into the factory and make some ice cream is exactly what Ben and Jerry needed.

"... Pittsburgh Steelers bars are the visible cultural artifact of a kind of economic diaspora. People in those bars are the refugees who looked at high taxes, union dominance and lousy schools and voted with their feet. ..." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123214881023691891.html

...the campaign and the actual end direction of the Obama admin, they will find another word to use meaning bait and switch.

Obama, really should be careful to be genuinely fair, otherwise he only puts more weight on the public camels back.

Otherwise its gonna break and the civil out break against the government that has been analyzed by economists and reported as a real possibility, will happen. Its predicted to happen next year.

The current laughability level is that of what it was before the Soviet Union collapsed, bu the laughability of this at one time, did not stop it from happening.
Even I find the map laughable but tax payers are getting very tired of footing the bill for billionaire bull shit.

Read the Declaration of Independance for an example or awareness of the public.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123698935539126273.html

----
Among the reasons for Nebraska's economic strength is a long history of strong executive leadership and an independent legislature. But mainly these factors exist because we have an inquiring public that demands to know how tax dollars are spent. That's called accountability, and it was the inspiration behind my effort to create NebraskaSpending.com, a searchable, public database that discloses every aspect of state government spending. By allowing the public to examine how its money is spent, we are equipping Nebraskans with great tools to hold their government accountable.

Kentucky, Missouri and other states also have established, or are establishing, similar Web sites. These sites have cost states millions. We did ours for $38,000.

----

Nebraska sets a great example to follow when it comes to open government. While what they did did not specifically cover the format of said documents they did present expenditures in a method by which citizens of their state and others can see where the money is going. That is far more important to me than what format the information is in.

Look, presentation is key, not the format of which it is stored. Yes, it would good if the data was stored in a truly neutral format it does guarantee access to it or easy access.