Slashdot Mirror

What are you talking about? The link is right in the summary, as always.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120578961450043169.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Not so, Russia instituted a 13% flat rate on income in 2001 and other former Soviet countries have followed.

I don't know why you jumped to the conclusion that I supported the FAIR tax. I wanted to know what HE thought. I asked the question in the most straightforward and unbiased manner possible. Unlike a lot of people, I didn't couch my personal feelings on a subject--pollitians love that--you tip your hand and they spoon-feed you what you want to hear.

Actually, because you asked, I HATE the so-called FAIR tax. By the time you add it on to city/state taxes (you know those aren't going anywhere) it will be a 30% tax on goods. I also don't believe for a minute that because companies are saving money (via having to deal with payroll taxes(!?)) they're going to graciously turn around and lower their prices! Ha! I think it will lead to black marketing and there is no real way to have a cut-off point for lower income families. I think some like it because they feel the only way to get the government to stop spending so much is if people see how much is actually coming out of their pockets. Me, I think it would just turn into a VAT-type tax, rolled into the price, like in the UK. And I haven't seen their taxes going down.

A flat tax would be a lot more sensible than the mess we have now (of course a lot of accountants and tax lawyers lobby against it because a whole industry--theirs--would be largely out of business.)

Thanks for the heads up - the article is here, no registration or cookies required.

Original Wall Street Journal Article

I've posted about this topic before. The Wall Street Journal had an article a while back on the topic. It's under the blog section, so I think non-subscribers can read it. It basically says that adjusted for inflation Gone With the Wind is the highest grossing film of all time, and ticket sales have in fact remained flat. Slate also has several articles.

You are correct. The Wall Street Journal's Numbers Guy has a great article on how box office records don't include inflation. Surprisingly, if you factor in inflation, Gone With the Wind is the best selling movie of all time.

I love how I have to read other country's news reports to find out what's going on in my own country...

I don't know if you've heard of this judicial world premiere; a 26 years old Moroccan engineer was kidnapped, tortured and thrown out in jail for creating a Facebook profile using the name of the king's brother. He was charged with "villainous activities" although the only thing he did with the account was send a smiley.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080310/lalami
http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545

Anyway, Facebook denied handing out his data to the Moroccan government, but in this so-called "terror-age", I don't buy that for a second.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120424448908501345.html?mod=technology_main_whats_news

ExxonMobil was fined $5 Billion for Exxon Valdez, later halved, but so far not paid.

Lots of things are property. If the naked cowboy can sue for unauthorized use of his name and likeness, should he have to pay property tax on his name? Or what about a research paper? I don't want my papers plagiarized or sold in unintended ways, but I shouldn't have to pay just to publish a paper, either.

Ok.... um no. Your argument is that as an empire weakens it places additional demands on its out-lying states in order to support is overbearing military, and your examples of our "clients" are Venezuela and the vague "middle east".

Sure, we have a huge military, but that is only because we have pushed ourselves into the "police" role for much of the world. But the question is, how much are we spending? Looking at this chart http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120217127801742577.html?mod=hps_us_at_glance_opinion from the WSJ shows that, percentage wise, our expenditure has gone down over the years (with a recent upturn).

And where does this money come from? Trade mostly, then taxes, then foreign investment [Note: This is my conjecture, but I am sure it will bear scrutiny] Sure, we have a HUGE debit to the collected world. Most people will scream that we are being invaded through the markets, but do you know anyone who buys a house then sets it on fire? (Insurance fraud aside) And most of these sovereign wealth funds (the source of foreign investment) are silent partners in almost all respects.

We don't tax our partners directly, which is what was happening in almost all the examples you cite above (Rome, Spain and Britian). The Soviet Union collapsed from within, it wasn't much more than a facade by the time the Cold War really heated up, plus a little help from US proxy wars.

Taking a look at South America, almost all of the governments are pro-US and supported though some means of economic aid (Much of which comes from the US). Venezuela is a rouge state led by a crazy, and supported by few (Cuba? Iran? North Korea? no big surprise). Hugo's own people are under much of the same restrictions as Kim Jong'Il's. Did you know that one of the major restrictions is that citizens cannot leave the country with more than $500(US)? See how far you make it in the world with that. And the middle east? Go ask Dubai how much they hate the US.

One last thing...The OH-SO-TERRIBLE weakening dollar? HUGE boost for American trade. We are at an multi-decade high, go listen to the news (REAL news, not CNN or FOX) Pick up a paper or listen to the radio once in a while. Here's some helpful links to get you started: www.nytimes.com & www.bloomberg.com

Here's some of the problems you can have when the confidentiality of your medical records is compromised.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06362/749444-114.stm

WSJ, 26 Dec 2006, Medical dilemma: spread of records stirs patient fears of privacy erosion; Ms. Galvin's insurer studies psychotherapist's notes; a dispute over the rules; complaint tally hits 23,896, Theo Francis.

(My notes, for people who are too lazy to even click on the link:)

In 1996, after her fiance died suddenly, Patricia Galvin left New York for San Francisco and was hired by Heller Ehrman LLP.

In 2000, Galvin began psychotherapy sessions at Stanford Hospital & Clinics with clinical psychologist Rachel Manber, who discussed her problems at work, her fiance's death, and her relationships with family, friends and co-workers. Manber assured Galvin that her notes would be confidential.

"I would never have engaged in psychotherapy with her if she did not promise me these notes were under lock and key."

In 2001, Galvin was rear-ended at a red light and suffered 4 herniated disks, which worsened.

In 2003, she applied for long-term disability. Her employer's carrier, UnumProvident Corp., said it would deny her claim unless she signed a release.

Manber assured Galvin her therapy notes would not be turned over. 3 months later, Unum denied her claim, because of psychotherapy notes about "working on a case" and a job interview in New York, which, Unum said, showed she was able to work. Galvin says they misinterpreted the notes.

In 2004, Galvin sued Manber, Stanford and Unum for malpractice and invasion of privacy, under California law. Galvin said "my most private thoughts, my personal tragedies, secrets about other people" were exposed.

In 2005, Galvin learned that Stanford had scanned Manber's notes into its system, making them part of her basic medical record. Stanford sent this file to Unum and the other driver.

Stanford said that "psychotherapy notes that are kept together with the patient's other medical records are not defined as 'psychotherapy notes' under HIPAA." It would be "impracticable" to keep them separate.

The health-care industry is scanning documents into electronic record systems. HIPAA gives psychotherapy notes special protection, but not when mixed in with general medical records.

Peter Swire, law professor, Ohio State U., explains why they wrote the rule giving confidentiality only to separate psychotherapy notes.

Stanford refused to separate her psychotherapy notes from other medical records. "Any time anybody asks for my medical records, my psychotherapy notes are going to be turned over."

In 2006, DHHS rejected Galvan's HIPAA complaint. From Apr-Nov 2003, DHHS had 23,896 privacy complaints, but hasn't taken any action. HIPAA exceptions allow release in connection with "payment" or "health-care operations."

Galvan, 51, is representing herself, because she couldn't find a California attorney with privacy experience.

Deborah Peel, Austin TX, psychiatrist and head of Patient Privacy Rights, says, "How many women want somebody to know whether they are on birth control?"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116709136139859229.html

NYT, 26 Dec 2006, Costs of a crisis: Diabetics confront a tangle of workplace laws, N.R. Kleinfield.

Some companies fire diabetics for ostensible safety reasons, even though there's no evidence that they're unsafe. Courts nationwide have split on whether diabetes is a disability under the test that a "major life activity" is "substantially limited".

John Steigauf, 47, was a truck mechanic for United Parcel Service, but UPS put him on leave because of his diabetes. UPS claimed his blood sugar might plummet while he tested a truck, causing an accident, and he couldn't get an interstate commercial driver's license with insulin-dependent diabe

According to the WSJ they use hydrogen.

The electronic gear they carry, encased in a small Styrofoam box, then drifts gently back to earth on tiny parachutes.
[..]
While the balloons are cheap and disposable at $50 a pop, the transceivers they carry are worth about $1,500. Once a transceiver is released from its balloon to parachute back to earth, there's no way to predict where it will land. So Space Data has hired 20 hobbyists with GPS devices to track them down.

Yesterday, Deputy National Security Advisor James Jeffrey said the satellite's tank full of hydrazine rocket propellant was the main reason the military was planning to blast the orbiter. There's a small but real risk that the hydrazine tank could rupture, releasing a "toxic gas" over a "populated area," causing a "risk to human life."

It took more than two months, but the White House has finally found a new deputy national security adviser. And in the end, the administration didn't have to look very far.
President Bush will appoint Ambassador James Jeffrey, a high-level State Department official who coordinates its Iran policy, according to people familiar with the matter. Jeffrey's appointment will be made later today, these people said.
In his new post, Jeffrey will be National Security Adviser Steve Hadley's No. 2 and run most of the day-to-day operations of the National Security Council. The administration's new war czar, Deputy National Security Adviser Army Lt. Gen. Doug Lute, will take part in regular deputy's meetings chaired by Jeffrey.
Jeffrey, a blunt-spoken and often-profane diplomat, will replace J.D. Crouch, an architect of the administration's controversial Iraq surge who resigned in May. Jeffrey has spent more time in Iraq than any other senior administration official. Prior to assuming his State Department post, he was the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad from June 2004 to March 2005, and as U.S. charge d'affaires to Iraq from March to June 2005.
A colleague of Jeffrey's said that the White House would likely prove to be a better fit than the State Department had been. The colleague noted that Jeffrey is a staunch neoconservative, which left him often sharply at odds with other high-level State Department officials. Most of the neocons who once populated the administration left their posts in recent years as the Iraq war went off the skids. At the White House, though, Jeffrey will be able to work closely with two of the other surviving neocons: Deputy National Security Adviser Elliot Abrams and David Wurmser, one of Vice President Dick Cheney's top foreign policy staffers.

You'll see stock prices are random. Study after study proves it. It's not a mystery but there isn't a formula either.

You'll see that cutting tax rates leads to increased Gov't revenues by growing the economy. (Don't give me the crap about Reagan, he spent it and then some but it busted the Soviet Union..not a bad use of the money).

You can't blame long term problems on groups who haven't been in control of the process.

You'll see a failure to increase a program budget by the proposed X% is called a "cut". If your boss didn't give you that 10% raise did your salary go down?

A link to the WSJ article would have been nice, as some of us do have subscriptions - Yahoo Board to Reject Microsoft Bid.

And to your point, I would have agreed that #3 is the most likely, although the final paragraph in the WSJ indicates that Yahoo has taken the "poison pill" in order to prevent a hostile takeover and that Microsoft may have to oust the entire board to do it.

I find that particularly interesting - either they (Yahoo) are very desperate and are hoping for a miracle, or they really do believe in what they say.

Oh, I don't know, I think that the geniuses at the Wall Street Journal editorial page did a great job of capturing a beautifully smooth Laffer Curve that obviously fits the data points perfectly. Something I learned from that piece was that apparently, Norway is at exactly the optimum taxation rate for maximum tax revenues. Who knew?

[The rich] should pay the most, they earn the most.

At least Romney hasn't advertised he'll put Steve Ballmer on his cabinet like McCain has. Gak! You think we have it bad NOW?

WSJ writer Chris Rhoades has a nice summary article in the Jan15 online edition: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120035979165090009.html (free trial sub required for full article) In the article, Rhoades reports a telling statement from NSI about a change they've made in reaction to criticism of their name-seizing scam. NSI says that it will make sure names held in reserve won't be made public, a revelation that completely unhinges NSI's argument for "protection". If nobody can detect domain names searched through NSI (thanks to NSI's curious "NOW they won't be made public" fix), then searched names will be completely safe without holding. If, however, someone can detect domain names searched through NSI, then names run the same risk of front-running whether held or not, since NSI will cheerfully sell the name to anyone.

• Someone actually managed to open that pdf and quotes from it here.
• An official blog on the Wall Street Journal website talks about the forthcoming article.
• And the New Yorker has an abstract up for the article which is apparently set to publish on the 21st.

I honestly don't understand what the problem is.
OK.
The set of things that licenses are required for is not changing.
Well, yes, it is.
Once upon a time, driver's licenses were for driving (and social security numbers were for social security.)
In Hiibel v Nevada, Hiibel was arrested for not showing his standing-by-the-side-of-the-road license.
In Indianapolis, they won't let me vote anymore, because I won't show my voting license until they get a warrant.
They like to pretend that you need an airline passenger license, although you really don't.
Gilmore v Gonzales, papersplease,org.
In Indiana, they are trying to say that my right to drink expires every 4 years; that I can't go into the bar till I renew my going into the bar license.
In Denver, some lady was asked for her bus-riding license.
In Chicago, I wasn't allowed to go up to Judge Posner's office because I didn't have a going-up-to-judge-Posner's-office license. (I paid some guy $20 to run the paperwork upstairs for me.)

I'm not sure we have the right take on what this item of news is about. Here's the wall street journal TFA
TFA.
I'm not sure I'm reading it right, but it looks like the feds semi-caved,and are putting off till tomorrow what they can't get away with today. But they are tricky, and we should look for analysis from somebody who knows this stuff - maybe EFF or EPIC.

Above post is insightful and informative.

This article on Wall Street Journal seems to say that 43% in a survey are planning to download music during the year. It doesn't say whether the question specified downloading copyrighted material illegally, and I don't know how many of those that responded negatively are not computer users.

See http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10436089 and http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119941453085566759.html The Journal article is more pertinent and includes a nice plot of the price of oil in euros, dollars and gold over the last few years, but isn't free.

I think this is because most people don't care about the news, unless it involves a celebrity in rehab or something equally stupid.

Been done. Here's an article about a "black" projection screen for daylight use:

      http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB108742977261939595-IRjg4Nllal3nZyva3qHbqyCm4.html

And a picture:

      http://gizmodo.com/archives/better-picture-of-sonys-black-backed-projection-screen-016964.php

More googling revealed these are now sold under the ChromaView brand. Check out the price on that puppy:

      http://www.tvcity.tv/productview.aspx?ID=1274

-- Marcio

An additional benefit is that it has a rather sobering effect on local know-it-all's when they see that their work is in fact inferior to what we can get from a third world sourcing partner. After this sort of ego bruising they are more ready to accept modern and mature practices.

1. Stan O'Neal at Merrill Lynch walked away with no explicit severance, but with salary, stock, and retirement benefits, left with 160+ million after steering the company to at least a 4-5 billion dollar loss (source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&refer=home&sid=aPxzn5U8zNBo/).
2. Mitchell Caplan cost E*Trade billions, and they had to get a 2.5 billion dollar cash infusion (for 17% of the company). Can't find an exact severance, but he was paid over 14 million in total compensation in 2003 alone (source: http://swz.salary.com/execcomp/layouthtmls/excl_execreport_103364.html/, so I don't feel too badly for him.
3. Citigroup is writing down billions in assets. Chuck Price left, but according to the WSJ (Link here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119403363814780742.html/ will walk away with about $31 million or so.

Take charter flights. Either hired by yourself or your employer.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118705417794296758.html

Or get a pilot's license and rent an aircraft.

Mossberg is a tech journalist for the Wall Street Times. He's famous for always giving very favorable reviews to Apple products, so this is somewhat of a departure for him.

That would be the Wall Street Journal.

The truly unfortunate part here is that our Government has now seen fit to reward (by strong arming the lenders into relaxing the rates) those who should not be rewarded [...]

Dude, there's no strong-arming here. The servicers are working out distressed loans because it's in the best interest of the lenders; better to have the borrowers continue to make payments at the present rate than to raise the rates and have massive foreclosures. Do you seriously think that lenders will be interested in raising rates if it makes them lose money? It's better get 7% of $300,000 than 9% of $200,000, and that's what the lenders are shooting for.

Really, all the Bush plan does is help the servicers set some common standards for working out the loans, set up a 1-800 hotline for borrowers to call, and publicize it very prominently (with no less than the President involved) so that people will call it. Yes, the government is helping mortgage lenders, which raises a number of issues, but by calling this "strong-arming" you're fundamentally misunderstanding what's going on.

Keep in mind that the private can reject these government arrangements if they want, and have done so in another case.

In another comparison reported by the World Health Organization that used a different set of health indicators, the U.S. also fared poorly with a ranking of 15 among 25 industrialized nations

In that same report, it is noted the if accidents were removed from the statistics, the US would have the number one lifespan in the world.

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/11/beyond-those-health-care-numbers-us.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/does-the-us-lead-in-life-expectancy-223/
http://firstfriday.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/world-health-organization-rankings-distort-us-position/

The press has analyzed this to death. Most recently, Friday's Wall Street Journal had an article about the Wii shortages. Wired also had an article last month. In a nutshell, Nintendo was screwed by poor forecasting which is key to their just-in-time manufacturing model.

The whole point of JIT is to keep inventory as low as possible in order to lower costs. Unfortunately, their original forecast for the fiscal year was 3.5 million units short of their current forecast. Low inventory on hand means they have to scramble to ramp up production. Even more unfortunate is that all their manufacturing is outsourced which apparently makes it harder to quickly bring capacity online. The WSJ article also mentions difficulties in properly allocating inventory across different markets.

Yet, why would Czar Vladimir Putin go through all this trouble to produce an impressive showing at the polls? He is already quite popular. His party, United Russia, could have easily won control of the Duma without the election rigging.

"The Economist" has finally provided an answer to this puzzling question. "The answer almost certainly lies in the ever more vicious--and open--rivalry among the Kremlin's political clans. Perhaps Mr Putin upset so many rich and powerful people that the prospect of losing control over the transition of power may simply have been too dangerous for his inner circle, and for himself. For all his talk about foreign threats and domestic enemies, what Mr Putin really fears is his entourage and a war among the clans. Winston Churchill once described the Kremlin's political tussles as being like a fight among bulldogs under a carpet: outsiders hear plenty of growling but have few clues about the victor's identity until it emerges."

Renegade political factions (run by former and current members of the FSB, successor of the KGB) operate within and outside the Kremlin. Each faction is like a gang, and the gangs kill each other. They answer to no one. So far, Putin has used his power to keep the factions under control.

Putin needed an impressive showing in the election in order to demonstrate his political power -- to the siloviki. He controls the United Russia party. Since the party won more than 66% of the seats in the Duma (due to the rigged election), the party -- and Putin -- can alter the constitution at will.

Of course, Putin is gambling that his scheme will work. He may lose the gamble. One of the renegade factions may assassinate him.

In this context, you can understand the comments by Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev won the Nobel Peace Prize for releasing the Eastern Europeans from the yoke of Soviet oppression. He has criticized the steadily eroding freedoms that he initiated in Russia in the late 1980s, but he has refrained from directly criticizing Czar Vladimir Putin.

Putin is indeed a czar, but he is a far better ruler than one of the thugs in the siloviki. These thugs likely killed both Alexander Litvinenko and Anna Politkovskaya. Even if Putin wanted to solve their murders, he has no power to do so. If he attempted to find the killers, then he may be killed.

P.S.
"The Economist" seems to provide much better analysis of Russian politics than Washington provides. What exactly are our Russian "experts" in Washington doing?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119586754115002717.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Actually there just a story on the 'Net about Classmate demolishing OLPC.

Wallstreet Journal-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119586754115002717.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Sadly it may be too late, HD-DVD isn't holding up that well right now it would seem

What do they know that we don't know? Are they trying to shift the ban from % of local ownership to national ownership? Are they trying to get this move knocked down in the legal system to set precedent for something else?

No way George W. Bush's FCC is having a change of heart about big business ownership. So what's the scoop on this and other recent anti-cable proposals? And why are they trying to rush a vote on it?

THAT is a damn good question. BUT, would it be cost effective to say... drill a hole to right above the magma layer to run your own power station for your house? Or a small town?

Drilling to the mantle, or anywhere near it, isn't needed. Geothermal New York is about a home that uses geothermal energy to heat and cool the house along with provide it with hot water and they only drilled 1400 feet. While the house is expensive, afterall it's in NYC, there no reason it isn't feasible and can't be done cheaper elsewhere. Use geothermal for heating and cooling, and other energy sources such as solar and wind d for electricity. Even President Bush's house near Crawford, TX uses geothermal energy for heating. Drilling further could very well provide enough energy to generate electricity, however if it's in a sunny location why not use solar or wind gennies in a windy location or any number of other sources of energy?

My personal favorite fantasy geothermal solution has been to go into Utah and just burn/dig an enormous hole through the coal into the depths. I mean like a hole you can drive huge trucks down into corkscrew like around the edges spiraling into the darkness. Once you've excavated all the coal down to a few miles, you can tap the geothermal energy at the bottom of the pit.

You don't need to go to Utah to use geothermal. At least one home in New York City uses geothermal for heating, cooling, and hot water. This one is too expensive though, the asking price is almost $8M.

Nice that this comes three days after the Wall Street Journal discloses various financial info on OLPC. See the article at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119586754115002717.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Is it really a surprise, when you look at who the people are that draft these laws? Is it fair of us to expect them to be in touch? Perhaps what democratic governments need is a non-political, not-for-profit group that can propose some framework for national government tech policy? They could even propose different flavours for governments with either progressive or conservative agendas. At least then we may have some body of tech legislature that is based on informed analysis of what is being regulated. Easy to say, I guess...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119532412570596991.html
"Sen. Clinton's Push to Double Autos' Average Fuel Economy Is Possible but Complicated"

I do take your point, but I guess my argument was kind of a bit different - not that there should be no research, but that all the number crunching and so forth does consume a fair bit of power. Computers and associated components already account for 3% of energy expenditure and something like two thirds of office computers are never switched off. I guess you could say "use the switched on ones for folding @ home", but why not switch them off instead?

Why shouldn't drug companies provide the computing power instead? They make the biggest investment in research but also get the economic benefits.

I do empathize for anyone who has a chronic / terminal illness, the sacrifices they have to make and how it can devastate families, and that, knowing there are no true cures, people who have had cancer are always having a cloud over their head. But denying them a cure was never my point.

Ok, when even the person who made the statements calls the claims of cover up "ridiclous" you can't give them much weight.

And I love the attempt to blame Bush and Global Warming for the forest fires in California when in fact the leading contributors have been arson (now that's a form a man-made global warming we can all protest against) and the myriad of legal blockades various environmental groups have put up to prevent all levels of government from properly managing California's forests.

It's also a little telling about how much Ms. Boxer cares that she couldn't even spell Dr. Gerberding's name correctly throughout her letter.

A Nobel Economist Analyzes the Strategies Of the Deadly Serious Games Nations Play, Jon E. Hilsenrath, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 7, 2005. Interview with Thomas C. Schelling.

Schelling: "With the exception of the Twin Towers in New York, terrorism is an almost minuscule problem. [John] Mueller, at Ohio State University, estimates that the number of people who die from terrorist attacks is smaller than the number of people who die in their bathtubs. If you take the Trade Towers, we lost about 3,000 people. Three thousand people is about 3 1/2 weeks of automobile fatalities in the U.S. If you rank all of the causes of death in the U.S. or around the world, different kinds of accidents, drowning, falling down stairs, automobile accidents, struck by lightning, heart attacks, infections acquired during hospital surgery, terrorism is way down at the bottom."

(He also said that global warming is a problem; if the West Antarctic ice sheet melts, sea level could rise by 20 feet.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113132305200889621.html (subscription)

and to reply to myself (stupid submit button... stupid):

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116182858175204222-hQdPgEpkAYLfclS_PCCvtIVQvSo_20071025.html?mod=blogs

Both MySpace and Facebook lost visitors in September, according to Nielsen/NetRatings, a Web-tracking service. The number of unique U.S. visitors at MySpace fell 4% to 47.2 million from 49.2 million in August, and the number of visitors to Facebook fell 12% to 7.8 million from 8.9 million.

Now, instead of RIAA, I have to worry about the Secret Service and the NSA when I'm browsing pirate bay looking for some mus

Your search for muscle building is probably not going to raise any eyebrows. The fact you are sharing your entire My Documents folder with your Turbo Tax records is of a bigger concern. Go to any P-P site and do a search for common applications extensions. .doc, .xls, .ppt, are just the tip of the iceberg. Try searching for .pwl.. enjoy.

Many people just don't get the fact they shouldn't use their home directory as a place to download their goodies. It is what they share without even knowing is what is dangerous.

Here is a WSJ article detailing the problem..
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118134946950829716-QWDmBwH_qAgisaepbCCMoT_4cPA_20070710.html?mod=fpa_editors_picks
Compuerworld article;
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9012961
and an article regarding an ID theft and arrest
http://www.smh.com.au/news/security/man-used-filesharing-program-to-steal-data-money/2007/09/07/1188783469524.html

They are not interested in your searches for marginal photos. They are interested in the security leaks.

So just where are you pointing your downloads? Just what are you making available?

As mentioned in TFA, Fox is planning to start a new business news channel, to compete with CNBC. Interesting that TFA makes no mention of her anticipated role in the new organization.

The man they hired to run the new news channel, Roger Ailes, also helped start CNBC.

The WSJ has an agreement with CNBC to provide content. The WSJ also just got bought by Rupert Murdoch's empire, which also owns Fox. Ailes says that there won't be a conflict.

Ailes also gives a lot more info here in this interview:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119160938630350371.html

Should be interesting.