Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Pong, Economics, Stability

Slashback with updates and clarifications from several previous stories -- read on below for updates on connecting continents, mechanical pong, Microsoft's ASP fix, and more.

That was fast. jsin writes "Microsoft has provided a patch for the ASP.NET exploit mentioned [on October 7th] on Slashdot, among other outlets. From the article: "To aid customers in protecting their ASP.NET applications, an HTTP module has been developed that implements canonicalization best practices. By applying this module to your web server, all ASP.NET applications on the server are protected against canoncalization problems known to Microsoft as of the publication date.""

Warring academics , never pretty. DAldredge writes with news of another side to the economic debate in academia over the plans of this year's two leading presidential candidates, pointing to this "statement Wednesday by 368 economists, including six Nobel laureates: Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell, and -- the winner of this year's Nobel Prize in Economics -- Edward C. Prescott. The economists warned that Sen. Kerry's policies 'would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth.'"

The steel cage match with the members of the Harvard Business School opposed to Bush's economic policies has yet to be announced.

Hey Pal, would you please Pay? Daemon writes "eBay made an official announcement stating that they are stabilizing their Paypal services after a few days of problems: 'Most members are now able to log in to the PayPal site to access account information, use shipping functions, use PayPal debit cards, and pay for items online with no difficulty.'

Again, it seems there are still problems on the horizon (or hidden under?) since they say: 'Should you encounter any errors when attempting to log in or use different PayPal functions, please try again.' The full announcement can be viewed on their System Status Announcement Board."

Do please try this at home. adelayde writes "Here we have an article on a wireless IP link between Europe and Africa. It documents the full details about the 802.11b link between the two continents, traversing the Gibraltar Strait, as part of the Transacciones / Fadaiat project and with it placed within the geo-political context of immigration and freedom of movement. The announcement was originally posted to Slashdot in June 2004."

What I want to see is a mechanical Ping-Pong! yathosho writes "German magazine Spiegel Online has posted an interview with art-student Niklas Roy, creator of Pongmechanik, an electromechanical conversion of the classical game Pong."

(We mentioned this amazing looking device last month.)

176 comments

  1. PayPal woes by The+Swedish+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    eBay made an official announcement stating that they are stabilizing their Paypal services after a few days of problems: 'Most members are now able to log in to the PayPal site to access account information, use shipping functions, use PayPal debit cards, and pay for items online with no difficulty.' Again, it seems there are still problems on the horizon (or hidden under?) since they say: 'Should you encounter any errors when attempting to log in or use different PayPal functions, please try again.' The full announcement can be viewed on their System Status Announcement Board."

    I can't help but wonder how many eBay transactions have ended in negative feedback for both sellers and buyers, how many transactions have simply been lost in the digital void, and what kind of responsibility (if any!) PayPal will take. I know I have had several PayPal payments recently that I'm not sure whether they have been sent, or if they've just been swallowed by the system, and would certainly like some sort of information from PayPal's side. I did receive one just a couple of hours ago, though, which seems to indicate that the PayPal system does indeed function somewhat normally now.

    1. Re:PayPal woes by eddy · · Score: 1

      I had a payment pending with Jinx.com. After PayPal drew the funds from me, they never told Jinx about it (they apprently expect to get some sort of confirmation email or another). Luckily, when I contacted Jinx, they were able to look in to it and discover that I had indeed paid for my wares, so it looks like "no big deal", but is a bit irritating.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    2. Re:PayPal woes by wang33 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You got ripped off man, everyone knows warez are supposed to be free ;-)
      wang33

      --
      PAGERANK++ Robsell.com
  2. Since when.... by Bequita · · Score: 1, Funny

    Since when did /. start using M$ servers??

    --
    Yes, there are women on Slashdot. Deal with it.
    1. Re:Since when.... by BobPaul · · Score: 1

      What the heck are you refering to?

  3. Which is the dupe by Neppy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The real question is which is the dupe now? Where do I post my cynical remarks?

  4. Thanks for bringing back slashback by aardwolf204 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I for one would like to welcome our full page slashback overlords.

    I think I speak for all of us when I say thank you for bringing back slashback.

    --
    Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    1. Re:Thanks for bringing back slashback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah slashbacks are good. Now who wants to join me in an email campaign to bring back the quickies?

    2. Re:Thanks for bringing back slashback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is this quickies you speak of? I had one today between classes but I dont think thats what your talking about.

      Yes, with a girl

    3. Re:Thanks for bringing back slashback by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      Yeah, just a shame about the anti-Kerry propaganda.

  5. PHB invasion! by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It's called 'increased corporate effeciency'.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  6. DUPE by Staos · · Score: 0

    topic

    --
    In Soviet russia, only old Koreans profit from pictures of Natalie Portman stored on Beowulf Clusters.
  7. Re:Ahhh... beta test.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, after todays performance, it still doesn't seem ready :)

  8. Is it just me by floydman · · Score: 0

    or is this story posted twice, with one of them leaading to an error page. I think the old editors got them a bug here.. something to keep them busy.

    --
    The lunatic is in my head
  9. Re:Dupe? by feagle814 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    My bad, must have been a rendering hiccup or something. I totally saw two copies of Slashback on the front page.

  10. About the dupe by Ignorant+Aardvark · · Score: 2, Informative

    If anyone missed the few minutes when the dupe was running rampant, then you probably won't know what the next 100 or so comments are referring to. So here's a screenshot.

    1. Re:About the dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone doesn't know how to turn anti-aliasing on.

    2. Re:About the dupe by Hooded+One · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that would be Windows. In my experience with XP, standard anti-aliasing rarely worked. I was actually shocked the first time I booted my computer and fonts looked nice.

      ClearType always worked properly, but looking at it for just a few seconds gave me a headache. To this day I'm not sure why, especially since I don't particularly notice a problem with sub-pixel hinting in KDE. (I've only used it for testing though, since regular anti-aliasing actually *works* and I'm not on an LCD so I have no need for it.)

    3. Re:About the dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or how to run his web browser unmaximized.

      Dude, 1600x1200 and you run your browser full-screen on a news site? Now that's just stupid!

      And not even turning up the font size.

  11. Request to Slashdot editors by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can you please not post dupe stories so fast. Normally for dupes I like to have a quick scan of the original to pilfer some highly moderated comments as part of my on going karma whoring policy. Obviously this is process is made much more difficult by you posting the dupes in such quick succession.

    Please allow at least a day between dupes co I hate having to make up my own posts.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Request to Slashdot editors by drkhwk · · Score: 1

      Normally for dupes I like to have a quick scan of the original to pilfer some highly moderated comments as part of my on going karma whoring policy.

      Sir, may I point you to the Jihad database tool?

    2. Re:Request to Slashdot editors by rm+-vrf · · Score: 1

      You must've copied that from the last slashback, since it's been a while.

  12. the economist letter about Kerry by fireduck · · Score: 5, Informative

    shouldn't the link be to the actual letter; rather than an analysis by a former assistant of VP Cheney?

    And who cares. A quick google search turned up a poll conducted by The Economist, where academics gave just the opposite opinion: low marks for Bush and high marks for Kerry.

    1. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by The+Pim · · Score: 3, Informative

      The article that goes with the poll.

      --

      The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
    2. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I found both the letter and the Economist article disturbingly lacking in information, but they were opposites. I saw lots of names, but few specific details in the letter, as it mostly used vague assertions and tried to back them with a few numbers. The Economist article had lots of details, but no names, relying on the source of the names to provide it with backing.

      Both come across as about equally useless to me.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    3. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by mc6809e · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And who cares. A quick google search turned up a poll conducted by The Economist, where academics gave just the opposite opinion: low marks for Bush and high marks for Kerry.

      It's important to point out two things about the results:

      1) They only polled academic economists. There are plenty of economists working in the private sector that weren't polled.

      2) Many economists didn't even bother to respond. Why? It's entirely possible that economists with political hostilities towards Bush were more likely to respond to the poll than other economists thus skewing the results.

    4. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The Economist generally does not use bylines, on theory that content is more important than who wrote it.

    5. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by odin53 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember that Economist article and poll. You have to remember that the article itself says that it was an informal poll and that there was probably some bias. More importantly, though, the letter was signed by 368 economists; in contrast, the Economist poll was completed by only 56 economics professors, some of which did not even answer every question.

      You can't seriously say that the Economist poll is as representative of economists' views of Bush's/Kerry's economic plans as the letter. The Economist wouldn't even say that.

    6. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by js7a · · Score: 5, Informative
      As somone whose sig deals entirely with economics, I feel that the Republicans are only pretending to debate in order to continue their merciless subjegation of the lower class.

      My Slashdot journal contains many additional details, including a recent letter from 160+ business professionals and academics.

      The facts are clear: Democrats get a four percent GDP bonus. Therefore Kerry is more likely to be able to balance the budget than either of them, even if they were saying the exact same things.

    7. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by fireduck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I absolutely agree that the Economist letter isn't the be all and end all of the discussion (I did notice it was informal and had a fairly low response rate). But the idea that Bush has 360 economists on his side is laughable. No where in the letter does it say the 360 endorse Bush's plan. Chances are many would be against it as well. (or you could easily turn up just as many different economists who are against it)

      My point was that no matter what one side says, within 30 seconds one can find a somewhat credible opposing view using google.

    8. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Cryogenes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the other hand, the Economist at least did a poll. The letter presented here was probably written by someone in the White House, and then the White House tried to get as many economists as possible to sign it. There is no indication how many economists were asked to sign and refused.

    9. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      What is the average lag time between economic policy changes and those changes having an effect?

      Please provide sources.

    10. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by geekee · · Score: 1

      Kerry's economic policies are so stupid, even George Bush can figure out they're bad for America. Kerry wants to increase social spending in every catagory, including defense and homeland security (not traditional places for Democrats to increase spending), cut the defecit in half, and only increase taxes on those making $200K. Unless theres a huge economic boom around the corner, or another bubble, Kerry will not be able to keep all his promises.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    11. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Gee, what gave it away, this bit?
      "It is no secret that John Kerry wants America's foreign policy to be more like that of Germany and France. But perhaps even more disturbing..."
      Sloppy linking at its sloppiest.
    12. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Goonie · · Score: 1
      I remember that Economist article and poll. You have to remember that the article itself says that it was an informal poll and that there was probably some bias. More importantly, though, the letter was signed by 368 economists; in contrast, the Economist poll was completed by only 56 economics professors, some of which did not even answer every question.

      The Economist straw poll was done by randomly selecting the authors from economics journals. You are correct that it may not be representative of economists' views as a whole, as it represents only those economists who publish in those journals, and not everybody responded.

      However, your argument that 364 self-selected economists is more representative than a survey of 56 (sort-of) randomly selected ones is just idiotic. If I asked 100 random Americans if they supported Kerry, that's not a terribly good way to judge who's going to win the Presidential election . But it's sure as hell better than asking the 2,509 delegates to the RNC.

      --

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
      --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
    13. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by odin53 · · Score: 1

      However, your argument that 364 self-selected economists is more representative than a survey of 56 (sort-of) randomly selected ones is just idiotic.

      Um, I never said the letter was more representative than the survey. I said that you can't say that the survey was as representative as the letter (given the small, probably biased sample). Whether the letter is actually statistically representative of economists is a different question. My only point is that whatever the survey and the letter are worth in terms of their persuasiveness as a statistical matter, I don't think that one can use the results of the poll to automatically dismiss the letter.

    14. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by js7a · · Score: 1
      Usually, when the government announces a policy, the markets react to it often on the same day and usually within a week. See any financial news sources' articles on daily market performance.

      Do you have any sources to the contrary?

    15. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Not when the stock market reacts, what is the lag between the policy being passed and the economy reacting to those changes.

      Day to day stock market movements are not based fully on economics, they are based more on what people are fealing and what they think they know.

    16. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by js7a · · Score: 1

      GDP cycles are usually limited to half a year. When was the last recession that lasted longer than a year? If you examine the articles linked from my sig, you will find that lagging the statistics one year gives the Democrats an additional advantage.

    17. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Here's my take on the whole poll issue: For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    18. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by deanpole · · Score: 1

      Luckily Kerry would face a Republican majority in the House and Senate, so he will not get what he wants. Bush on the other hand has suceeded at more deficit spending that any other president in history. Some would argue that Reagan's genius was deficit spending, which hand-tied a democratic president from social spending even twelve years after Reagan left office.

    19. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      They asked 100 academics. The amount responding was about half, and many didn't answer all the questions. Compare that to several hundred recognized leaders in the field of economics.

      There was clearly bias in the answers. For while a large majority thought Bush's plan was better on social security when asked specifically about it, when asked which was better in an either or, they said Kerry was better on it.

      Not to mention "Would you rather work for Bush or Kerry?" 81% Kerry. People, when government academics (people who do not work the private sector) prefer to work for given political figure, it generally means they expect more benefits for themselves.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    20. Re:the economist letter about Kerry by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      My issue isn't with the lack of a byline, to which I rarely pay much attention anyway. My issue is that there seems to be no identification whatsoever on who responded to the survey, or where they're from. I can look up the credentials of, say, Charles Baird of CSU Hayward or James Gatti of Univ of Vermont, and then decide whether to trust them. I can't look up the credentials of unnamed, unsourced economists who replied to a survey.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  13. Uhhhh... by disbaldman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Who cares about dupes? Who HASN'T made a mistake in their life?!

    1. Re:Uhhhh... by _xeno_ · · Score: 3, Funny
      Who HASN'T made a mistake in their life?!

      <easy-shot>George W. Bush</easy-shot>

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    2. Re:Uhhhh... by d3ity · · Score: 2, Funny

      But this is slashdot, this is entirley diffrent. Like for instance, when someone at NASA installs a washer backwards, and stuff blows up, wasting billions of dollars and killing several astronauts. Who HASN'T made a mistake in thier life. With Slashdot, thousands of geeks may feel emasculated by not having anything to say about a said topic, simply because they already said it. So I suppose its akin to wasting billions of dollars and killing people.

    3. Re:Uhhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many times have you seen a newspaper run yesterday's headline again?

      Slashdot pays wages. It's not unreasonable to call for professional standards.

      I don't care to get hardass on them about it, but I'll agree it doesn't look good that they don't fix that problem. It's not hard.

    4. Re:Uhhhh... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Making a mistake is one thing, making the same mistake over and over again is something typically saved for those with a learning disability. Which doesn't make you a bad person, but, you know, get help.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Uhhhh... by BigDave81 · · Score: 0

      i've never made one cingle mistake in my life!

    6. Re:Uhhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, real funny. Who moderated this crap up?

      Bush actually believes in what he's doing. Kerry doesn't believe in anything.

      Mod the parent down. It isn't funny, it's just insulting.

    7. Re:Uhhhh... by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      They don't need help, you insensitive clod.

      they don't need help, you insensitive clod.

  14. Those are some heavy thinkers by RealAlaskan · · Score: 4, Informative
    ... "statement Wednesday by 368 economists, including six Nobel laureates: Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell, and -- the winner of this year's Nobel Prize in Economics -- Edward C. Prescott. ... warned that Sen. Kerry's policies 'would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth.'"

    That's some pretty heavy artillery. Becker, Buchanan, Mundel, Friedman, Prescott ... if those guys agree on something, there's probably fire behind the smoke.

    It's no surprise to hear that from Friedman, but some of the others on that list aren't so consistantly against government involvement in the economy. Here is the statement itself, with a list of the folks who signed it. There are a few names I recognize, but the noticable thing is these guys are from all over.

    Quote of the letter itself, since it's likely to get /.ed.:

    To whom it may concern:

    We, the undersigned, strongly oppose key aspects of the economic agenda that John Kerry has offered in his bid for the U.S. presidency.

    John Kerry says he "is committed to balancing the budget," but he has proposed additional spending that some analysts have estimated could cost as much as $226.1 billion annually ($2.261 trillion over ten years). He promises to "end corporate welfare as we know it" by implementing the "McCain-Kerry commission on corporate welfare," but he also proposes to provide additional "tax credits and subsidies to manufacturers" that meet his criteria.

    Entitlement reform is the most important fiscal challenge facing the country, yet Kerry's approach has been to deny that any fix is needed. Indeed, Kerry criticized the recent Medicare expansion for not being large enough.

    John Kerry has proposed tax increases that threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth. Specifically, Kerry proposes to "restore the top two [income] tax rates to their levels under President Clinton." He would also, among other things, "restore the capital gains and dividend rates for families making over $200,000 on income earned above $200,000 to their levels under President Clinton." Kerry's stated desire to balance the budget and to boost federal spending substantially would almost certainly require far higher and broader tax increases than he has proposed.

    John Kerry boasts that his economic policies will lead to the creation of 10 million jobs in his first term as president. As Martin Sullivan wrote last April in the strictly non-partisan Tax Notes, no one "has presented any analysis to relate the Kerry plan to the creation of 1 million jobs, much less 10 million jobs." In fact, we believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth.

    John Kerry has expressed a general reluctance to reduce trade barriers. He has promised, if elected, to "review existing trade agreements." He vows not to "sign any new trade agreements until the review is complete and its recommendations [are] put in place." That's a prescription for political gridlock. Given the widespread benefits of unfettered trade, Kerry's trade policies would harm U.S. producers and consumers alike.

    All in all, John Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard of living for the American people.

    Note : Affiliations are provided for identification purposes only. The organizations listed below should in no way be considered as endorsing the views of the individual.

    1. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by mc6809e · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting, isn't it, that the slashdot editors only granted to give this letter brief mention in a slashback, while the letter critical of Bush gets it's own article.

      Of course, Slashdot readers are so interesting in balance that metioning this bias will be met with negative mod points.

    2. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by mc6809e · · Score: 1

      That didn't take long.

    3. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Hell, it was held up in the article queue for 36+ hours just so they could throw it in this and leave it out of the politics section.

    4. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't even see why this is so anti-kerry....so the economists agree kerry's policies will damage the US economy in the long run. bush's policies are destroying the US economy right now. Your deficeit for 2004 is almost as big as Canada's entire debt. I guess I should thank Bush though. Thanks to him my Canadian dollars are the strongest they've been vs the US dollar in decades.

    5. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's some pretty heavy artillery. Becker, Buchanan, Mundel, Friedman, Prescott ... if those guys agree on something, there's probably fire behind the smoke.

      These guys are all well-known right-wing economists who are from the far-right monetarist policy camp as championed at UChicago. They are hardly a broad cross-spectrum of economists....

    6. Re:Those are some heavy thinkers by crabpeople · · Score: 1

      John Kerry has proposed tax increases that threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth. Specifically, Kerry proposes to
      "restore the top two [income] tax rates to their levels under President Clinton." He would also, among other things, "restore the capital gains and
      dividend rates for families making over $200,000 on income earned above $200,000 to their levels under President Clinton." Kerry's stated desire to
      balance the budget and to boost federal spending substantially would almost certainly require far higher and broader tax increases than he has proposed.


      how can rasing taxes make the economy worse off? seems like the oposite is closer to reality. Raise taxes = government has more money = debt decreases instead of increasing at 1.71 billion USD per day.

      also, hes taxing the very rich - who can afford it the most. Do you live in bizaro world where this is somehow going to lead to the fall of the economy? Taxes are a part of life. I don't think they shoyuld ever be lowered, except maybe for people that make less than 30k or so a year. they are the ones that cannot afford a tax increase and will be hurt the most.

      you want the rich to get richer and the poor to get well um poor'er? where is the sense in that?

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
  15. That brings up a new phenomena by CrazyJim0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Slashbacks of Slashbacks. Imagine a BeoWulf cluster of Slashbacks.

    God spoke to me:

    www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA/love3.html

    1. Re:That brings up a new phenomena by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.geocities.com/linzeecoble/TaoTeChing.ht ml

  16. Re:Ahhh... beta test.... by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

    They're currently planning on having a conquerent release with Duke Nukem Forever.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  17. Re:Dupe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah well I saw three copies. But being an adult, I figured it was a mistake and would be corrected in due time, so I resisted a childish urge to post yet another lame comment about dupes. I just reloaded the front page and sure enough, it was fixed.

  18. Kerry's plan sucks. ...And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So Kerry's economic plan is bad. Big news, so's his foreign policy plan.

    The question is: are his plans better than Bush's. I'd rather vote for a candidate who will cause problems we CAN solve later than for a candidate who'll cause problems so bad we may NEVER be able to solve them!

    Statements of absolute worth are useless in discussing policy. You must always compare it to the policy it's REPLACING.

  19. Re:Sure this statement...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice screenshot, but get some real bandwidth you 56k'er!

  20. Re:wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is everyone seeing triple or is it just me?

    Its just you. Now shut the fuck up.

    - Timothy

  21. OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those fonts are UGLY. You must be running Linsux.

    1. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      timothy?

    2. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes?

    3. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, sorry. That's definately XP. Try again, troll.

    4. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, its that shitty Firesox browser then.

    5. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're confusing it with the Boston Red Sux. Try Firesux, I think that's what you're going for.

  22. I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that you could probably also find just as many economists willing to sign something in favor of Kerry's policies, and that several of them would be high profile influential people in the field.

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    --
    What?
    1. Re:I have a feeling by TheSync · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wouldn't say that...

      I'd say that you could also find 300 qualified economists who are against both Bush's and Kerry's policies.

      For example, Bush has torpedoed his own free trade plans with hikes on imported steel, shrimp, and bras.

      Plus economists know that Bush did not do a tax cut. By raising the deficit through higher spending, he actually raised taxes, but just not in this year.

    2. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing to see here, move along.

      "What? Something on Slashdot that doesn't boost my candidate?! Quick, brush it under the carpet! No dissent allowed!"

    3. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just out of curiosity, have you any proof of that, or does it simply make you feel better about the candidate you support?

      AC, and proud! Vote Libertarian!

    4. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Considering there are probably thousands of economists throughout the country, it doesn't seem very unlikely at all that it could be possible, does it? Most of the people that signed this thing probably just looked at it and said "Hey, it supports Bush, I support Bush, sure I'll sign it!" I bothered to look into a few of the professors and a number of them have next to no research qualifications in the field, or teach only entry level courses in economics at their university.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's clearly what I intended. I was merely pointing out that this says nothing more than a petition from 1,000,000 citizens saying they support one candidate over the other, because you could find just as many willing to do the opposite.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly, you could probably find:

      300 qualified economists that support Bush('s policies)
      300 qualified economists that support Kerry('s policies)
      300 qualified economists that are against Kerry('s policies)
      300 qualified economists that are against Bush('s policies)

      ad infinitum

      That they found 300 to say something bad about Kerry is no surprise at all.

      --
      What?
    7. Re:I have a feeling by youknowmewell · · Score: 1

      What about the weight of said Bush-supporting economists' opinions?

    8. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for letting me know!

      Because I know that whenever I vote, I always try to take Penya (14792)'s feelings into consideration.

      ;-)

    9. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean? Most of the people on that list are two-bit professors from two-bit schools.

    10. Re:I have a feeling by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can. It is in the politics section of /.

      See they gave the pro kerry article its own story yet the bush one gets put into a slashback. I may be just that the editors don't like me (random IP bans, total removal of my ability to mod) but it doesn't look like the politics section of /. is as fair as they said it would be.

    11. Re:I have a feeling by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Funny, you didn't post that when /. covered the economists backing kerry.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=124945&cid=105 30622

    12. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 1

      I don't usually go beyond the front page. You'll notice I posted the comment that you linked just a few minutes ago. The story is too stale to bother posting anything else there.

      --
      What?
    13. Re:I have a feeling by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      The fact remains that you found issue with the article that support bush yet failed to find anything wrong with the pro kerry one.

      Why is it so hard for people on /. to be consistant?

    14. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Just to appease you, I'll go and post the same comment I posted here, modified to fit that article. Honestly, I probably would have posted the same thing if that article actually made it to the front page.

      Oddly enough, since I bothered to read that article you'll notice they only had 2 Nobel laureates sign their article. ("neenerneener, we had more Nobel laureates sign our paper than you!") I don't know how anyone could fail to see that these two "open letters" aren't worth any more than the paper they are printed on.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=124945&cid=105 31166

      --
      What?
    15. Re:I have a feeling by Peyna · · Score: 1

      I don't know how many people take my feelings into consideration when voting, but apparently I did something in the past 24 hours that led to my "fans" list increasing tenfold. I'm easily amused. If any of those "fans" would like to donate to my college fund, just contact me at the address above.

      Thank you very much.

      --
      What?
    16. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on, and the Nobel Laureates we'll just sweep under the rug!

    17. Re:I have a feeling by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Then we should see that coming soon, right? Fact is, it doesn't get any more "heavy hitter" laden than this one. As a prior poster mentioned some of these guys are not exactly anti-government types.

      Even the poll mentioned earlier made to be pro-Kerry says Bush has better trade policies than Kerry.

      Either way, they are both big government candidates. These guys are just saying which one is presenting a bigger big government "plan".

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    18. Re:I have a feeling by bluesnowmonkey · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that you could probably also find just as many economists willing to sign something in favor of Kerry's policies, and that several of them would be high profile influential people in the field.

      And yet that hasn't happened, despite the huge stakes. I wonder why.

    19. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that they're economists, you could probably find at least 100 names appearing in all 4 lists...

    20. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok- you go find 300 economists to say something good about Kerry's policies - then I'll beleive you.

      Seriously. You attempt to trivialize the statement by saying that it is no surprise. These are well respected economists. If you honestly think you can find 300 well respected Economists that support Kerry's economic policies - go do it. Saying you "could probably do it" and that it's "no surprise at all" - what does that even mean?

    21. Re:I have a feeling by supersnail · · Score: 1


      Well one of those heavy hitters seems to be Friedman. Who not only won the Nobel prize but had the opeertunity to test his theoreys in practice -- twice.

      The first time was as economic advisor to Pinochet in Chile. This was moderatetly succesful in economic terms -- if you were not one of the n thousand Chileans who were tortured, imprisioned killed or just plain diappeared.

      The second time as "Reagonomics" mark 1. ('trickle-down' anyone?) which on the whole was a miserable failure (even the rich got poorer) and was swiftly abandoned for Mark II reagonomics where at least the rich got richer and the middle class got poorer but didn't realise it.

      --
      Old COBOL programmers never die. They just code in C.
  23. OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those fonts are UGLY!!! You must be running Linsux??

  24. Re:Dupe? by feagle814 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I'm a jerk. Let me go kill myself now.

  25. My gues: Nada. by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Informative
    and what kind of responsibility (if any!) PayPal will take.

    Read their EULA. I'm expecting them to do their best to avoid any fiscal responsibility unless there's a massive user uprising. Nothing special about PayPal... it's just a side effect of being a corporation.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  26. Let's /. MS! WOOHOO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DDoS time! yea!

  27. Kerry's policies suck.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ..but I can't vote for Bush after the Iraq war. I'd rather live in poverty than give Bush another term.

    Though when it comes to health care I'm almost ready to hand it over to some big socialist system because the private system sure isn't working for the average Joe (malpractice suits, big powerful drug companies that are more interested in expensive *treatments* rather than *cures*, and more interested in money-makers like Viagra, and more interested in paying money for TV ads than research and development.. if a person is sick, they'll need medicine, why on earth *advertise*, it's not like people choose on their own.. yada yada)

    It's not like Bush is going to take government out of our lives, he'll just put it in a different place.

    We're all screwed, that's all it comes down to. If it wasn't for the war I would just stay home on election day. Or maybe vote for the Libertarian guy. Same difference either way.

    1. Re:Kerry's policies suck.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather live in poverty than give Bush another term.

      Did you see those stats awhile back on employment rates under Dem vs Rep presidents? And Bush is the worst of the Rep presidents in the last half century, so you are way more likely to live in poverty with Bush in office. And even if you live in poverty under Kerry, at least you would be more likely to get healthcare, which makes the poverty less bad.

      Heck, it's Ashcroft/ Rumsfeld/ Cheney that need to not be given another term... The war in Iraq is just one of many problems that team has created.

  28. You forgot the signature line by bstadil · · Score: 1
    Sincerely

    The commision to re-elect the President

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  29. Pong Mechanik by euxneks · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The documentary on the website was very informative and interesting. He doesn't use any ICs or computer chips.. It's all relay switches! _very_ cool.. There is also a bit of toungue in cheek in the documentary making it very interesting.

    --
    in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
  30. Re:Hello, world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bones, can you fix it?

  31. Re:Hello, world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn it, Jim, I'm a doctor not a perl programmer.

  32. Whoa, open source! ;) by JanusFury · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hey, Microsoft provided the source for the patch, along with the binary? Perhaps this heralds a new age of full-disclosure and openness, with Linux and Windows users walking hand-in-hand towards a freer, safer new world?

    No, probably not.

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
    1. Re:Whoa, open source! ;) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How earth did this off-topic troll get modded up? Yay moderation and meta-moderation!

  33. Private system? WHAT private system? by Capitalist1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What we have now in the U.S. is NOT a private health-care system. It's a facist - meaning state-run under the guise of nominal private ownership - system. Basically, it's Socialist, but everyone pretends that the entities are still privately owned. Put another way, the entities can do whatever they want, as long as it's what the government tells them.

    The current state of the health care industry is the inevitable result of our movement toward Socialism. Saying we need to Socialize the industry is exactly the same idea as curing someone's headache by shooting them between the eyes.

    --
    One man's religion is another man's belly-laugh. - LL
    1. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by ender81b · · Score: 2, Insightful

      obviously coming from somebody who has never lived in, or been to, a country with a socialized health care system. I was in england for 6 months last year and the US' helath care system is *night and day* compared to what they have over there - socialized health care. We don't have a "facist" health care system - ours is private with strict regulations.

    2. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by servognome · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're confusing socialism with regulation. The health care industry can do what ever they want, unless the goverment says otherwise. And they can get away with alot, like treatment refusals and having english majors decide the best treatment option. The healthcare industry is still beholdent to private stockholders, they just have to work within the confines of goverment regulation that tries to protect patients.
      What you may be referring to is Medicare where the goverment says "we pay x for y treatment" and the hospital has to accept that. This is no different from what health insurance companies do.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    3. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was in england for 6 months last year and the US' helath care system is *night and day* compared to what they have over there - socialized health care.

      What are you trying to say?

      The "night and day" phrase is supposed to be used in a context like this: "The difference in his attitude since he quit drinking is like night and day."

      The way you used it is all wrong, and has botched whatever meaning you were trying to convey. Are you saying that American health care is better or worse?

    4. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by ender81b · · Score: 1

      I was simply trying to point out that the two health care systems are totally different. Each has its good points but I do believe I would trust American hospitals more than English (than again, free healthcare is pretty nice).

    5. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by ces · · Score: 1

      Frankly at this point I'll take even a crappy socialized system over no health insurance. If I get sick right now I'm screwed.

      For that matter whenever anyone proposes any sort of insurance reform or subsidies in this country why does every single critic automaticly assume it means a system like the NHS in the UK?

      First of all there are any number of ways of doing health care reform from having everything private including insurance companies but with subsidies for lower income folks (Australia), to a mix of public and private insurance (Germany), to single payer but private doctors (Canada), to doctors and hospitals all being run directly by a national agency (UK).

      Typically the most extreme proposal I ever hear for the US is a single-payer system like Canada's. I will say I've some experience with the Canadian health care system and I don't see it being any worse than here. In fact in many ways it is better.

      BTW the US health care system is already partially socialized. Roughly 60% of all health care spending in the US comes from taxpayer dollars.

      I would also like to point out that according to the WHO the best medical system in the world is the French. They spend roughly the same percentage of GDP on health care as the government portion of health care spending in the US. They also spend less per-capita.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    6. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by gerf · · Score: 1

      And they can get away with alot, like treatment refusals and having english majors decide the best treatment option.


      And then promptly get sued for malpractice.


      The healthcare industry is still beholdent to private stockholders


      No, they're beholdent to themselves. Believe it or not, the healthcare industry is not an oligarchy, ruled only by big business and profit. To claim that the entire industry is owned by stockholders is just ignorant.


      they just have to work within the confines of goverment regulation that tries to protect patients.


      There are literally thousands of pages of regulations on how to deal with patients. It's impossible to think that physicians know all of this information, plus the ungodly amount of knowledge required by the profession itself.


      This is no different from what health insurance companies do.

      Wrong. With Medicare, the government sets the price, and pays the bill, with the patient paying pretty much nothing, excepting prescriptions. With health insurance, the hospital sets the price, the insurance company says "we pay x for y treatment," and the patient pays the rest.


    7. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 1

      When, exactly, did you last see some dying in front of a hospital. If you get sick, you CAN get the help you need. Please provide links of those turned away.

      Because you are not setting money aside to pay for health insurance or setting enough aside to pay the bills is not the government's concern.

      Please provide a link validating your 60% figure.

      --

      To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

    8. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by ces · · Score: 1

      When, exactly, did you last see some dying in front of a hospital. If you get sick, you CAN get the help you need. Please provide links of those turned away.

      The problem is your condition has to be life threatening before you can get treatment. Also many hospitals will refuse even emergency patients without insurance coverage, only treating them to the point they can be safely transfered to another hospital.

      In addition I don't know if you've ever used the emergency room when you've not had health insurance (and no money to pay out of pocket), but you will get a bill. If you can't pay the bill you will end up with collection agencies after you. Given the cost of medical care these bills can be quite high.

      Because you are not setting money aside to pay for health insurance or setting enough aside to pay the bills is not the government's concern.

      It is the government's concern because many conditions that are relatively cheap to treat early on can become quite expensive later. Somebody still has to cover the cost of medical care for people who show up in the emergency room with life-threatening conditions. For example take diabeties. It is fairly cheap and easy to treat it in the early stages, however it becomes quite expensive when it advances to the point of causing serious health problems like kidney failure or gangrene.

      Furthermore I don't know if you've priced individual health insurance policies lately, but they are quite expensive. For many the choice is eating and paying the rent or paying for health insurance. You can hardly set aside money you don't have. Furthermore given the cost of medical care to expect most people to be able to have anywhere from $10k to $100k set aside in a savings account for medical bills is unrealistic.

      Please provide a link validating your 60% figure.

      No link sorry, I'll go look for my source.

      However if you think about it this really isn't that out of line, consider the following categories of health care spending by Government at all levels:

      Typically most figures you see will include the following three categories:
      Federal Medicare spending
      Federal and State Medicaid spending (sometimes state spending is omitted)
      VA health care spending (sometimes this is omitted)

      This category is sometimes omitted and sometimes included, occasionally it is lumped in with Federal employee benefits:
      DoD medical spending for active duty military, dependants, and retirees.

      This category is sometimes omitted and sometimes included as well, especially since much of this isn't direct spending but is financing overhead and capital costs:
      Misc. Federal, State, and local health care spending (indigent care grants, trauma center funding, rural hospital grants, city hospitals, county hospitals, university hospitals, etc.)

      Frequently this category is omitted because it uses private insurance, however the premiums are still paid by taxpayers:
      Federal, State, and local employee and retiree health insurance benefits.

      This category is almost always omitted because it is an indirect subsidy, however it is a major factor in the health care market.
      Federal, State, and Local tax exemptions and credits for employer provided insurance, personal medical expenses, and the self-insured.

      I don't believe that last category was included in the 60% figure I cited as I believe that only included direct budget outlays.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    9. Re:Private system? WHAT private system? by servognome · · Score: 1

      And then promptly get sued for malpractice.
      No there is an MD who rubber stamps everything... err reviews. Sometimes it's decisions as to course of action other times it's decisions as to treat or don't treat, at least in the insurance company "doctor's" opinion.
      Believe it or not, the healthcare industry is not an oligarchy, ruled only by big business and profit.
      And to claim there is no profit motive is also ignorant. I'm talking about the industry as a whole, health insurance, hospitals, medical supplies, drug makers. At the individual physician level it's not so much profit driven, but everything else is, and can have great influence on their decisions/costs.
      There are literally thousands of pages of regulations on how to deal with patients. It's impossible to think that physicians know all of this information, plus the ungodly amount of knowledge required by the profession itself.
      That's what lawyers and insurance is for. Once again I'm talking about the industry as a whole, not the individual physicians.
      With health insurance, the hospital sets the price, the insurance company says "we pay x for y treatment," and the patient pays the rest.
      Not necessarily, depends on the insurance provider's contract with the physician. That's why some physicians refuse some insurance because of the "you'll accept x for y and like it" contracts. I've had instances where the price the hospital asked was several thousands of dollars higher than what the insurance company paid for, however, the way the contract was written up by the insurance company meant I didn't have to pay the difference, the hospital had to deal with getting just what the insurance company commands.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  34. Absurd! by youknowmewell · · Score: 1

    How can the parent get modded insightful for a post so lacking in facts, yet completely filled with speculation (as well as some wishful thinking, I bet)? Stupid moderators.

    1. Re:Absurd! by Peyna · · Score: 2

      I have no doubt that you could find 300 experts in any of the issues at debate in the presidential election and get them to sign an open letter stating that one of the candidates is right or wrong, and find just as many for the opposing side.

      Is it really that hard for people to see this? It's not that difficult to find 300 professors in the same field that will sign something supporting one candidate over the other, (or attacking the policies of the other).

      In short, I would take this open letter with a grain of salt and nothing more.

      --
      What?
  35. Um... hello? by Guppy06 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The steel cage match with the members of the Harvard Business School opposed to Bush's economic policies has yet to be announced."

    You know, they could both be right. Neither group seems to say X is better than Y, just that X sucks.

    Justification to vote third-party if I ever saw it...

  36. You don't need a nobel prize to figure that out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The economists warned that Sen. Kerry's policies 'would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally. The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth."

    I thought that was obvious, and I've never even taken an economics course.

  37. When I first wrote the above.. by IBitOBear · · Score: 1

    Well, that's better...

    When I first wrote the above, I was getting three copies of this story on the front page. Don't know why...

    The comment is far less funy now that the error is gone...

    8-)

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
    1. Re:When I first wrote the above.. by IBitOBear · · Score: 1

      I am, however, still having all sorts of problems with this article...

      Must be windows fault... 8-)

      --
      Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
      --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  38. Bushitonomics by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "The end result would be lower U.S. employment and real wage growth."

    Gee, that sounds like what we have had under Bush, with no signs of letup (except for Halliburton). Bush was blessed with the shortest, shallowest "recession" in history, ending in November 2001 *after 9/11/2001*. The economy that Clinton managed into unprecedented wealth generation was also benefited from the Clinton/Rubin/Reich "soft landing", despite the enthusaistic pessimism of the Milton Friedman school of economic bandits signing this attack on Kerry. Bush got a ripe economy for robbing, and a mediagenic excuse for his failure.

    There is more than one economy in America. Most of us have been stuck in the longest "recovery" malaise in our memory, possibly ever - it's not over yet. Some lucky few, many of them rich enough to employ economists like Friedman and his Chicago ilk, have feasted on record corporate profits that keep the contrived Wall Street Dow Jones Industrial Average barely stable to avoid discrediting the entire system. The economists signing this propaganda know on which side their bread is buttered. And they know Kerry represents real changes in the management of their corporate welfare system. So they're manufacturing FUD as fast as they can: their only saleable product.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Bushitonomics by Down8 · · Score: 1

      The recession that we theoretically came out of after 9/11, was only bolstered by the auto-makers' huge deals. W/o those, the economy was still in the crapper.

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
    2. Re:Bushitonomics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The recession that we theoretically came out of after 9/11, was only bolstered by the auto-makers' huge deals. W/o those, the economy was still in the crapper."

      Bah the auto market was moving toward "huge deals" before 9/11. Read any of the big three's annual reports and projections for 2001 and 2002. They were all moving to greater incentives anyways, they just got the benefit of "buy American" and "Keep America moving" tied to a national feeling. Remeber before 9/11 the American auto industry was still ignoring cars and the imports were gaining ground in even the SUV segment.

    3. Re:Bushitonomics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your assessment of Bush's policies is dead on, but why does that make Kerry the good guy? And why does that make the statement about Kerry's economic plan FUD? I understand your universe is black and white, but there are other possiblities in such a complex thing as economics than "the Bush plan" or "the Kerry plan".

      Have you considered the possiblility that both Bush's and Kerry's plans suck? And that they're both just different flavors of fucked up?

      Don't be a sheep. The system is designed so that you will think that Democrat and Republican are your only choices. If those are your only choices, your choice has already been made for you. Enjoy the tyranny your simplistic thinking has brought you and all of us.

    4. Re:Bushitonomics by Down8 · · Score: 1

      That they were moving towards it already has no effect on my comment, but it is interesting to note.

      -bZj

      --
      .sig
  39. There's all sorts of lies - both sides by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    news of another side to the economic debate in academia over the plans of this year's two leading presidential candidates

    Truth is that the economic policies of both candidates are estimated to add to the deficit. From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, October 14:

    The Bush campaign points to a study by a conservative think tank, which concludes that Kerry's plan would add as much as $ 2.5 trillion to the deficit. But Bush's wish list is pricey too: at least $ 1.5 trillion to create private Social Security accounts and $ 1 trillion to make all his tax cuts permanent, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and other analysts.

    Higher deficits lead to higher interest rates, since the government borrows from the same sources as everyone to pay interest on the debt. Higher interest rates lead to less expansion in business. Less expansion leads to less new jobs. Neither one of these candidates will do anything to lower the deficit and, thus, neither one is going to promote business expansion or more new jobs in the US.

  40. Let's Play Ball by The-Bus · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Two things I want to mention about this:

    First is the saying that if you ask all the economists to lay down on the ground and point towards north you would find a pile of people pointing in all different directions.

    The second (more serious) statement is regarding the Hawley-Smoot Act which is Wiki'd to say:

    Another factor contributing to the Great Depression was America's position in international trade. Protectionist impulses would drive nations to protect domestic production against competition from foreign imports by erecting high tariff walls. The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act of June 1930 raised U.S. tariffs to unprecedented levels. It practically closed U.S. borders and, with retaliatory tariffs from U.S. trading partners, caused the immediate collapse of the most important export industry, American agriculture. American foreign trade seriously declined, and the volume of world trade steadily decreased. Prior to the Great Depression, a petition signed by over 1000 economists was presented to the U.S. government warning that the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act would bring disastrous economic repercussions, however, this did not stop the act from being signed into law.


    This was, to remind everyone, at the beginning of the Great Depression. Protectionism did not help. I don't think we're repeating the same mistake, but pay attention...
    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  41. Mod this guy up! by Down8 · · Score: 1

    Glad I'm not the only one to notice that.

    -bZj

    --
    .sig
  42. Pong interview translation by Grond · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (note: I'm not a native german speaker, but this is probably better than the fish would do.)

    "Table tennis from the computer Stone-age"

    A Berlin art student has reverse-engineered the classic videogame 'Pong' as an electro-mechanical device. He spent hundreds of hours assembling the monstrosity, that realistically pings and pongs via two wood blocks. In an interview with Spiegel Online the builder, Niklas Roy, explains was motivated him to do it.

    Spiegel Online: How did you come up with the idea to build such a curious toy?

    Roy: I wanted to react against what's happening these days in the games and film special effects industries. There virtual realities are made which copy the real world. My goal was to turn the tables and transport a virtual world into reality.

    Spiegel Online: How much work is inside this big box?

    Roy: A whole lot. From the idea to the finished machine took about a year. In total the project took about 900 hours of work.

    Spiegel Online: Why of all things did you pick this Ping-Pong game?

    Roy: Because it's a symbol. It's one of the first computergames, and definitely the first commercially successful one. And it's a virtual world that's calculated by a computer in real time. Although it's an imitation tennis game, it's nevertheless immediately recognizable as a video game. At the same time it's simplicity was well suited to my purposes.

    Spiegel Online: Did you buy (new) all the parts from which you built it?

    Roy: Yes, everything but the telephone relays. Those are from an Internet auction. I got them from an auction of a 50s telephone system. The parts together cost about 2500 Euros.

    Spiegel Online: Where is the game now?

    Roy: At the moment at my house. But it was exhibited at the 'Garage' festival in Stralsund this summer. Pongmechanick will probably be shown at the 'Viper' art festival in Basel and definitely at the hacker congress of the Chaos Computer Club in December in Berlin.

    Spiegel Online: Was were the greatest technical challenges?

    Roy: Without a doubt the mechanical parts. The whole thing consists of two parts: the relay controls and the mechanical display with collision detection. The mechanical part was the most complicated because it's naturally the most error-prone.

    Spiegel Online: You tried several approaches for the mechanics before it worked...

    Roy: In the beginning I wanted to set the moving parts on coasters and move them on carts. DC motors would've pulled the carts back and forth with strings. But it didn't work like I'd imagined. So I used chains instead of strings, and they move gliders instead of carts. The gliders simply slide along rails.

    Spiegel Online: You hear it when the ball hits the flipper. How was that solved technically?

    Roy: The original Pong had just two sounds: one high and one low beep. I wanted a one-to-one translation as much as possible. So I bought two wood blocks from a percussion store, one high and one low sounding. These are hit by electromagnets that came from door bells.

    Spiegel Online: Where did your affinity for computer games and tinkering with relays come from?

    Roy: Wenn you're 30 years old, like I am, then Pong is almost certainly the first video game that you played. And as a child I always tinkered a lot. I built an alarm system for my room and experimented with electricity. I always had a knack for it.

    Spiegel Online: Do you believe that mechanical games in general have a future?

    Roy: I can imagine that (note: I'm not a native speaker, but this is probably better than the fish would do.)

    "Table tennis from the computer Stone-age"

    A Berlin art student has reverse-engineered the classic videogame 'Pong' as an electro-mechanical device. He spent hundreds of hours assembling the monstrosity, that realistically pings and pongs via two wood blocks. In an interview with Spiegel Online the builder, Niklas Roy, explains was motivated hi

    1. Re:Pong interview translation by nczempin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Flipperautomat = Pinball machine. And although I would have phrased a few things differently (for example, simply "unreliable" instead of "accident-prone"), all in all this is an excellent translation. And I *am* a German native speaker.

  43. Suggestions please? by Bryan+Gividen · · Score: 1

    Really, I am going along those lines... but I've been having an insanely hard time finding a candidate in the third parties. I've looked through everything and most are tad too "radical" for me. Case in point, the Constitutional Party. I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints (Mormons) and even I think these guys are radical nut-job religious fanatics. Then there's the Green party which I'm outrageously against. Liberterian Party is the closest thing I've found to even remotely liking, and even then they're a bit too much for me.... does anyone have any suggestions on good third-party candidates and reference links?

    1. Re:Suggestions please? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "and even then they're a bit too much for me...."

      I think part of it is that we're all a little too used to both the White House and Congress both getting pretty much exactly what they want, and we're coming up to the end of a presidential term where ther president hasn't vetoed anything.

      No matter what happens, no matter how much of a crackpot a new president may be, they will still have to contend with a gerrymandered Republocrat Congress. Even if Hell froze over and every single national election in the country this year went to a third party, that still leaves the Republocrats in control of 2/3 of the Senate. The President will only be able to do what Congress will let him do, and vice versa.

      If Badnarik got to the White House and started making noises about, say, repealing the Pure Food and Drug Act, Congress won't do much more than laugh at him, and nothing will happen. Conversely, if Congress puts BRIDE OF PATRIOT Act on his desk, he'll veto it. So long as neither Bush nor Kerry are sworn in next January, the federal government will end up stagnating (which, IMO, is a very good thing), with perhaps a slight nudge in the direction the new president wants it to go. Probably the only thing we'd be sure to see in that case is major headway made on a line item veto amendment in an exhausted Congress, desparate to get anything through.

      Don't think of them as crackpots so much as wrenches to throw into the works of government. :)

    2. Re:Suggestions please? by Daengbo · · Score: 1
      So long as neither Bush nor Kerry are sworn in next January, the federal government will end up stagnating (which, IMO, is a very good thing), with perhaps a slight nudge in the direction the new president wants it to go.

      I'm pretty sure that the Constitution was written with that in mind (including the VP being the runner-up in the Presidential election).

      OT: I've always said that
      1. I liked the Libertarian platform, but the individual candidates always seem to be nutcases.
      2. Libertarians could never win, because, by virtue of their beliefs, they can't organize well enough to get a message out. (Two-party rigging aside)
  44. ASP.NET patch by adolfojp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll be the first one to congratulate MS for promptly releasing the ASP.NET fix. I'll also congratulate them for admiting that: "Microsoft is working on a security update for this reported vulnerability". So, Its not a patch, nevertheless, it is a working temporary solution.

    If we criticize them for their flaws, we should praise them when they assume responsibility. Its only fair to be fair.

    Cheers,

    Adolfo

    1. Re:ASP.NET patch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and when somebody rapes you, but doesn't kill you, you should thank them when they leave.

  45. not fast enough by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "That was fast."

    Don't they test this crap before they kick it out the door in Redmond? They've lowered expectations of their shabby, expensive (especially TCO) products so low that some of us are glad when a serious compromise takes Microsoft only weeks after public disclosure/pressure forces them to spend the time and money to debug. Can't they spend some of their tens of billions of dollars in profit on some of the unemployed

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  46. Re:Kerry's plan sucks. ...And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic?

  47. Politicians' promises by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I suppose you think it easy to laugh at the idea of Kerry keeping any political promises, but at least it's just hypothetical, whereas with the incumbent, you can see right out in public view what promises have been kept ...
    • states rights (unless it's something he doesn't like, such as medical marijuana and gay marriage)
    • fiscal conservative (from $325B surplus to $425B deficit in one term)
    • no nation building (but installing half-assed puppets is ok)
    • less government (except for fraudulently described government prescription boondoggles)
    • distrust of Big Brother (unless he gets to be the Big Brother and call it PATRIOT USA)

    So you see it isn't just potential presidents who make promises. The main difference is that whereas Kerry might not keep his promises, Bush has definitely broken his.

    The moral is to always throw out the incumbent. Once incumbents realize that there is no point in campaigning for a second term, some of the chicanery to buy votes might just be replaced by honest corruption.
  48. All To Be Corrected by Coming India-Paki Nuke War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    except the ASP.NET thing, of course.

    Once the Pakistanis oust Musharrif and the mullahs take over, nature will take it's course.

    Weather report _ excessively high temperatures of 10,000 degrees Centigrade and winds of 1200 kph in major cities across the Indian sub-continent will drive people outdoors to watch the fireworks.

    Stock Market report - the Indian stock market will first plummet and later vaporize as IT oursourcing firms such as Tata Industries become shadows against stone walls.

    Wages for IT personnel in the Western world will rise above 1998 levels within 3 weeks.

  49. Economist Jokes by martijnd · · Score: 4, Funny
    The Economist , despite their name, not taking anything for granted, yearly asks a number of prominent economist their opinion on world affairs, and then advises that exactly the opposite will happen. So far they have been right two out of two times.

    Just remember:

    The First Law of Economists: For every economist, there exists an equal and opposite economist.
    The Second Law of Economists: They're both wrong.

  50. 1 point for bashing microsoft... a /. guarantee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how the hell did this get modded up?

    There isnt a shread of intelligent thought anywhere in the post. Its just bashes microsoft, and not very creatively.

    1. Re:1 point for bashing microsoft... a /. guarantee by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      What, an Anonymous microserf Coward bitching about the mod of a post holding Microsoft to account for shoddy software, and a profit hunger that outsources security testing to a vulnerable, dependent public? If you can't understand the simple fact that Microsoft is making money off keeping us insecure, you probably need to buy a Mac. They're easy. Now step off the bitchpedal, Anonymous obtuse Coward.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  51. Needs a rewrite by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Sincerely

    The commission of common fucking sense.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  52. What is the point of mechanical pong? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I mean, if you want it to be mechanical, why not actually play tennis? Or at least table-tennis?

  53. TWO WEEKS by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    I see in only black and white when the lights have dimmed before they go out entirely, and we're left chasing only shadows. There's only TWO WEEKS until the election, and under the tyranny of our duopoly, we have, in fact, only two choices as selfaware voters. One of Bush or Kerry is the next president of the US, and no rhetoric is going to change that. That is all we actually have to work with, like it or not. Where were you all year long, while the Democrats were choosing their candidate? Where were these economists? Where were you for the three, seven, eleven, twentythree years before that, while the duopoly became ever more entrenched, this year even excluding "third party" candidates?

    Get off my back with your counterproductive whining. Kerry can get rid of Bush, and his lethal economics. And Kerry is more subject to the will of the people than is the Bush machine. That's how politics works: lots of incremental work that generates opportunities to make an actual change once in a while. We are not flapping our lips in some theoretical polysci vacuum. TWO WEEKS. To make the only choice possible for any opportunities for survival. After the election, crank up your whining machine to get Kerry's plans to serve your sensibilities, or go to work on creating those opportunities for other parties, or an alternative to that whole crooked 19th Century scam. Vote for Kerry and donate money to the party or organization most effective in generating the changes you want. But don't hassle me when we need to get rid of Bush as the enabler for any possiblity of progress at all. And don't jive me with your fantasyworld of somehow changing the system in the next TWO WEEKS.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  54. Government data shows Republicans are corrupt. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 0, Flamebait


    Responding to your sig: The worst Democrat is better at jobs and growth than the best Republican.

    Here's another possible sig: Government data shows Republicans are corrupt.

    I've done some research and provided links to reviews of 3 movies and 35 books saying that the Bush administration is corrupt: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government.

    On Monday on the Charlie Rose show, author Graydon Carter was talking about his book, What We've Lost. He said something like, "I thought I knew a tenth of extent of the corruption of the Bush administration, but I found that I knew a thousandth." That's my experience, too. I believe that I have a reasonable overview of the corruption, and I discover a new pocket of detail that shows that it is much worse than I thought.

    The most shocking thing I've learned in trying to tell people about my research is that perhaps one U.S. citizen in twenty has any idea of the extent of the corruption.

    1. Re:Government data shows Republicans are corrupt. by DFossmeister · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but your logic there escapes me. If they guy originally estimated that he only knew 1/100th of the corruption, and now says that he only knows 1/1000th of the corruption, then he makes a solid case that he really does not know that much, and that 999/1000ths of his assertions are speculation, not fact or evidence.

      I don't know about you, but a guy claiming to be 999/1000th clueless just does not inspire me--unless its a she and she's blond.

      --
      No Not Again! Its whats for dinner.
  55. Re:Ahhh... beta test.... by Echnin · · Score: 1

    This is as offtopic as your comment, but when I read your sig I was thinking "What? Vote Nazi?" That's a horrible name for a presidential candidate.

    --
    Lalala
  56. Re:wtf? by kazoosandinstruments · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Is everyone seeing triple or is it just me? Its just you. Now shut the fuck up. - Timothy

  57. Re:wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is everyone seeing triple or is it just me?

    Its just you. Now shut the fuck up.

    - Timothy

  58. Good Economics by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    statement Wednesday by 368 economists, including six Nobel laureates:

    Well I do not doubt they have good economics: a swift kick of $50k into thier bank account will make most good economists see the value in saying anything.

    I was unable to compile the story as it was missing a required library: Pinch of salt.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  59. Hoover's Fine Economic Policies by adam1234 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Six of the economists in the letter protesting the Kerry economic plan are listed as members of the "Hoover Institution". Reminds you of the good old days of President Hoover and the economic havoc wreaked by FDR's policies.

  60. Re:Dupe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great idea. Let us know if you need any help.

  61. People just don't want to know. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2, Insightful


    I've found that often people just don't want to know how corrupt the U.S. government has become. Instead of reading the links in the grandparent comment, and making a remark about the subject of corruption, you have changed the subject to talking about the manner of expression of my comment.

    Even though the grandparent comment is supported by data from an official U.S. government web site, the comment is now marked "-1 Flamebait". That's willful denial of reality.

  62. Lower employment/wage growth by mysterious_mark · · Score: 1

    Seems like we've reached record un-employment and negative real wage growth under the Bush administration quite well, maybe a change would be good. Also I think the econimist consider only what's good for the large corp's which is not nescessarily what is good for the country as a whole. If the large corp's had there way every last American job would be sent over seas or given to an H1-B etc.

    M