Sure, the wording makes a big difference. Support for the "public option" drops significantly when you call it the "government" option. But "definition" is not the problem. For example, "Medicare buy-in" polled at the same level as "public option."
Or to take a more recent example, more than 70% support raising taxes on the rich to help address the debt/deficit crisis, including around 90% of Democrats and 50% of Republicans.
The environment vs. economy numbers have slipped in the last couple of years, as the economy fell off a cliff. But before that, they were just as I said.
In fact, I think this takes the cake. Can anyone remember a lamer story ever appearing on this site before? Granted, the competition is stiff, but this has got to be the numero uno.
Over 70% of the electorate supported the public option. About 2/3rds are pro-choice. Over 3/4ths support environmental conservation. (I don't the breakdown for immigration, school vouchers or teacher tenure.) But a majority also self-identify as moderate-to-conservative. Go figure.
When polled on individual issues, about 60% of the electorate tends to support the "liberal" position. But when asked about their political orientation, about half claim to be moderates, while the other half splits about 30/20 between conservatives and liberals. So a solid majority tends to self identify as conservative-leaning moderates, despite holding "liberal" views on most issues.
My point is that the people registering on the site may "look" more liberal simply because they answer the individual issue questions that way.
The problem with gold as a currency base is that it's too easy to monopolize. Even silver is susceptible... back in the 70's there was a pair of investor brothers (can't remember their names off hand) who caused a bit of havoc in that market. The best option IMO is a fiat currency which is pegged (by statute) according to population growth.
Furthermore, the way governments calculate the inflation rate is somewhere between hokus-pokus and a shell game. Since Clinton's day, the USA has been using the Boskin Commission guidelines which include such "creative" ideas as substitution, weighting, and hedonics.
For example, last year you bought a 27" flat-screen TV for $295. This year the same model has a higher resolution screen but has the same price. So they calculate the price as $245, since you're getting more "value" for the same price. They also have ways of fudging the numbers the other direction, and may even go both ways on the same product in different contexts (say, inflation vs. GDP).
And if the shuttle program had worked out as planned, it might actually have turned out that way (absent Kennedy's race-to-the-moon challenge of course). But the shuttle ended up being many times as expensive at promised, and due to "Congressional lock-in" we were stuck with it for 30 years.
Yeah, it's a bummer that we don't have any man-rated launchers for a couple of years, but it's high time we took space flight out of the hands of politicians.
According to the CBO, the ACA (Obamacare) goes most of the way toward solving the medicare problem. If you revise Part-D to allow negotiating lower prices for prescription drugs, that would put Medicare in the black for... well basically forever. It you remove the "Social Security Cap" that would do the same for SS. (Currently, you only pay FICA deductions -- "payroll" taxes -- on your first $100k or so of income. So the hedge-fund manager who makes $20m pays the same FICA as a guy who makes $100k.) Eliminate or raise that cap, and SS is rock solid as far as the eye can see.
Heck, just rolling back the "Bush Tax Cuts" on people making more than $500k/yr would wipe out nearly 2/3rds of the deficit. Pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan would come close to matching that.
Yeah, that caught my eye too. Also noted that all the "paperwork" screens were actual scans rather than the TTL "text screen" display that became popular in the mid 70's. One almost gets the impression that they envisioned this "future" network as analog rather than digital.
One gets the impression that this new hack is a direct response to the arrest reports. It certainly makes the feds look foolish claiming to have nabbed them.
The SLS is a perfect example of that. It's sometimes called the "Senate Launch System" because of all the design constraints written into the funding legislation. For instance, they require that it use a certain kind of fuel so that a company in somebody's district will be sure to get some pork out of the deal, that sort of thing.
The first manned flights of SpaceX's Falcon/Dragon craft can't come soon enough for me.
That would also be an opportunity to experiment with some way to steer its course. If it could be controlled precisely enough and reliably enough, it might be possible to eventually capture it in a useful orbit.
Or is that triplicity? Either way, I'm stumped by this. I find it hard to believe the FBI would actually expect Anonymous to fall for such an obvious honeypot, and only slightly easier to believe Anon would expect the same of the G-men. Seems like a fishing (or phishing) expedition by someone, hoping to snag something useful. All I know for sure is I'm not going to register an account there.
"Dr. Seth Jones is a specialist in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and al-Qa'ida, and he will be speaking to us about the latest developments in Afghanistan following the recent death of bin Laden. Dr. Jones is a political scientist at the RAND Corporation, and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and the US Naval Postgraduate School."
We already had augmented reality, but I guess this takes it to the next level somehow. Personally I don't use augmented reality much, so maybe that's why I'm not swept off my feet by this innovation.
Sorry, I don't mean to diss it. Yes, I did watch the video, but that was just a game. I'm wondering what useful applications will be made with this. I'm sure there are some, but the video did not impress me that much.
I'm sure there are lots of useful applications for this tech, but I doubt it will be popular in the cell phone market. A cell phone is not exactly a "precision" instrument to begin with, so how would you use such data in the real world?
I suspect this will find a lot of cool niches to fill in other devices, but phones? Not so much.
Also from TFA: initially, its behavior is almost totally random.
I have no idea what constitutes a "win" in this game, but if a "totally random" strategy can win 46% of the time it sounds a little cheesy. Sorta like life, I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the size, it's how you use it. ;-)
Public option; abortion; environment.
[laziness indulged]
> scientists saying things like 'this does not need to be investigated further it is fact'
That's not exactly what they say about the evolution/creation controversy. Scientists are keen to investigate evolution and learn more about it.
A closer approximation of the scientific viewpoint would be: "This (creationism) doesn't need to be investigated further, it is bullshit."
Sure, the wording makes a big difference. Support for the "public option" drops significantly when you call it the "government" option. But "definition" is not the problem. For example, "Medicare buy-in" polled at the same level as "public option."
Or to take a more recent example, more than 70% support raising taxes on the rich to help address the debt/deficit crisis, including around 90% of Democrats and 50% of Republicans.
Here ya go... Abortion, Public Option, Environment.
The environment vs. economy numbers have slipped in the last couple of years, as the economy fell off a cliff. But before that, they were just as I said.
In fact, I think this takes the cake. Can anyone remember a lamer story ever appearing on this site before? Granted, the competition is stiff, but this has got to be the numero uno.
Over 70% of the electorate supported the public option. About 2/3rds are pro-choice. Over 3/4ths support environmental conservation. (I don't the breakdown for immigration, school vouchers or teacher tenure.) But a majority also self-identify as moderate-to-conservative. Go figure.
When polled on individual issues, about 60% of the electorate tends to support the "liberal" position. But when asked about their political orientation, about half claim to be moderates, while the other half splits about 30/20 between conservatives and liberals. So a solid majority tends to self identify as conservative-leaning moderates, despite holding "liberal" views on most issues.
My point is that the people registering on the site may "look" more liberal simply because they answer the individual issue questions that way.
The problem with gold as a currency base is that it's too easy to monopolize. Even silver is susceptible... back in the 70's there was a pair of investor brothers (can't remember their names off hand) who caused a bit of havoc in that market. The best option IMO is a fiat currency which is pegged (by statute) according to population growth.
http://www.themoneymasters.com/monetary-reform-act/
Furthermore, the way governments calculate the inflation rate is somewhere between hokus-pokus and a shell game. Since Clinton's day, the USA has been using the Boskin Commission guidelines which include such "creative" ideas as substitution, weighting, and hedonics.
For example, last year you bought a 27" flat-screen TV for $295. This year the same model has a higher resolution screen but has the same price. So they calculate the price as $245, since you're getting more "value" for the same price. They also have ways of fudging the numbers the other direction, and may even go both ways on the same product in different contexts (say, inflation vs. GDP).
Check shadowstats.com for details.
And if the shuttle program had worked out as planned, it might actually have turned out that way (absent Kennedy's race-to-the-moon challenge of course). But the shuttle ended up being many times as expensive at promised, and due to "Congressional lock-in" we were stuck with it for 30 years.
Yeah, it's a bummer that we don't have any man-rated launchers for a couple of years, but it's high time we took space flight out of the hands of politicians.
According to the CBO, the ACA (Obamacare) goes most of the way toward solving the medicare problem. If you revise Part-D to allow negotiating lower prices for prescription drugs, that would put Medicare in the black for... well basically forever. It you remove the "Social Security Cap" that would do the same for SS. (Currently, you only pay FICA deductions -- "payroll" taxes -- on your first $100k or so of income. So the hedge-fund manager who makes $20m pays the same FICA as a guy who makes $100k.) Eliminate or raise that cap, and SS is rock solid as far as the eye can see.
Heck, just rolling back the "Bush Tax Cuts" on people making more than $500k/yr would wipe out nearly 2/3rds of the deficit. Pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan would come close to matching that.
Yeah, that caught my eye too. Also noted that all the "paperwork" screens were actual scans rather than the TTL "text screen" display that became popular in the mid 70's. One almost gets the impression that they envisioned this "future" network as analog rather than digital.
One gets the impression that this new hack is a direct response to the arrest reports. It certainly makes the feds look foolish claiming to have nabbed them.
The SLS is a perfect example of that. It's sometimes called the "Senate Launch System" because of all the design constraints written into the funding legislation. For instance, they require that it use a certain kind of fuel so that a company in somebody's district will be sure to get some pork out of the deal, that sort of thing.
The first manned flights of SpaceX's Falcon/Dragon craft can't come soon enough for me.
That would also be an opportunity to experiment with some way to steer its course. If it could be controlled precisely enough and reliably enough, it might be possible to eventually capture it in a useful orbit.
Fair enough, but still... what's the use? If the whole thing can be shut down at a single point of vulnerability, then why bother?
Or is that triplicity? Either way, I'm stumped by this. I find it hard to believe the FBI would actually expect Anonymous to fall for such an obvious honeypot, and only slightly easier to believe Anon would expect the same of the G-men. Seems like a fishing (or phishing) expedition by someone, hoping to snag something useful. All I know for sure is I'm not going to register an account there.
> TSA has not stopped anything since 2001, it's been other agencies (FBI, CIA, etc) who have prevented attacks.
That's how Seth Jones puts it in this @Google lecture.
"Dr. Seth Jones is a specialist in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and al-Qa'ida, and he will be speaking to us about the latest developments in Afghanistan following the recent death of bin Laden. Dr. Jones is a political scientist at the RAND Corporation, and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and the US Naval Postgraduate School."
We already had augmented reality, but I guess this takes it to the next level somehow. Personally I don't use augmented reality much, so maybe that's why I'm not swept off my feet by this innovation.
Sorry, I don't mean to diss it. Yes, I did watch the video, but that was just a game. I'm wondering what useful applications will be made with this. I'm sure there are some, but the video did not impress me that much.
I'm sure there are lots of useful applications for this tech, but I doubt it will be popular in the cell phone market. A cell phone is not exactly a "precision" instrument to begin with, so how would you use such data in the real world?
I suspect this will find a lot of cool niches to fill in other devices, but phones? Not so much.
Also from TFA: initially, its behavior is almost totally random.
I have no idea what constitutes a "win" in this game, but if a "totally random" strategy can win 46% of the time it sounds a little cheesy. Sorta like life, I guess.
Oh come on, that's only about 900mph! No problem!
Due to de-crease in revenue?