It was state of the art; recommended by IBM; and was reporting successful backups to the AS/400 without errors.
The only way to be sure is to restore something. Then you know. If your entire company (or personal financial life) is literally at stake on the backup, based on experience, I recommend you restore items from the backup to confirm success. It's a lot of risk mitigation for a couple minutes extra work.
U.S. currency is backed by full faith and credit of the united states.
Bit coin is backed by full faith and credit of people who participate in bit coin.
Bit coin is just one of (last time I looked) almost 60 crypto currencies.
BTW, he doesn't call himself a libertarian.
From the wiki... --- There has been some disagreement over whether or not Paul is a libertarian. He has stated that he is "not quite" a libertarian, including in an op-ed article published by USA Today in 2010.[2] He has received criticism from prominent libertarians such as Gary Johnson,[3] Adam Kokesh,[4] and Jesse Ventura.[5] He considers himself to be a Tea Party follower, who wants smaller government. [6] [7] Paul has said that he identifies as both a "constitutional conservative"[2][8] and a "libertarian conservative."[8]
---
From what I can see, Paul is fairly principled compared to most politicians. I agree with his fiscal policies and strongly disagree with his social policies. Net, net... I probably wouldn't vote for him for president but it's close.
The emperor was a god on earth and japanese ground was sacred. Propaganda in schools was comprehensive. Many japanese civilians and military were suicidal and didn't view non-japanese as entirely human. (Rape of nanking, bataan death march, etc. etc. etc.).
Were there exceptions in a population of tens of millions- absolutely. There were thousands of pro american japanese- some who fought reluctantly- some who refused to fight (Jehova's Witnesses are mentioned specifically). However- when you look into them- MOST of them had to flee for their lives early during or before the war.
Even being japanese didn't protect you from being killed or tortured if you didn't get with the program. Even conscientious objectors were imprisoned and sentenced to be executed.
By 1944 what was left was pretty toxic and united.
b) the civilians (not just the military) were prepared to fight to the death (with regular training with improvised weapons in school) and commit suicide if they couldn't win (there are movies of japanese civilians in okinawa raining over the cliffs like lemmings). Point is- the number of japanese deaths from an invasion would have been much larger than the deaths from the nuclear attacks.
c) the military in japan wasn't going to follow the normal rules of war and had already told the american prisoners that they would be killed when japan was invaded (only the use of nukes stopped them).
d) the japanese stated strategy was to fight until the americans suffered so many casualties that the american's gave up without the need for japan to surrender
e) Based on experience fighting other japanese island strongholds, the invasion of japan was estimated to be 1.7â"4 million American casualties, including 400,000â"800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities.
g) The firebombing of Tokyo ALONE killed 100,000 people. It would have been repeated many times in every other city during an invasion.
h) The americans at the time had no real clue about radiation. They were buying radioactive tonics and glassware for their houses; they were walking through and standing in radioactive wastes after the tests. The A Bomb was functionally just a "big bomb" to them.
I'm sure there is an i) thru z) too.
The japanese military was more akin to the SS than to the Weirmarct. And the japanese emperor was much more akin to a deity than Hitler was. And japanese soil was *sacred* to the civilians.
If you don't restore at least one file after every back up, you are going to discover (as a company I worked for found) that your tape is blank when you need it most.
became a reporter or was selling his video footage to news outlets, he might be able to resume looking for buried earthquake survivors with his drones.
Fundamental conflict between safety and reporting here.
I think reporting is going to lose but maybe we'll end up with reasonable altitude and geographical limits* on drones instead.
* i.e. under 250' and not within a few miles of active airports or heliports.
There are a lot of good independent films. Possibly more than you could ever watch at this point.
They are not focused on profit as much as having something to say or even just a novelty project for those involved.
I usually find them less entertaining and sometimes even distopic... Because they don't have "hollywood" endings.
A "good" hollywood ending makes you feel good despite yourself. A "bad" hollywood ending can ruin a movie. Too cheesy- so obviously tacked on it feels ridiculous. But a bad ending where the hero loses a leg and her boyfriend just feels bad.
See... this is an advantage of growing up 50 years ago.
There were... no.. repeat.. no.. portable phones for anyone who wasn't rich enough to have a chauffeur.
You could be out of contact for hours or even days at a time.
There is literally NOTHING so important that it can't wait a few hours. The world got by for centuries with more than a few hours lag.
Oh... and...
2) If your CAR is on fire- it's probably not the time to answer the phone and start having a conversation on it.:-)
---
One of the worst possible accidents in my entire life that I barely avoided was a lady on a cell phone. What made it worse was she froze and came to a complete stop in front of me when she realized she had pulled out in front of me while talking on the phone. Her face was a mask of terror. One of the few times my ABS have kicked in. She had pulled in front of me from a side street when I was about 80 to 100 feet away while I was doing about 35 mph. If I hadn't been paying attention (say -- on my cell phone), I would have T boned her with a combined speed of 45 to 50 mph.
I think the phone is somehow more risky. I'm not even sure how. But I suspect it is that your eyes literally shut off when the person is talking about certain subjects. They've done studies that showed - even people good at driving and talking - that their field of vision narrows considerably while they are on the phone. The problem is not the 97 out of 100 situations where that doesn't matter. It's the 3/100 situations which require your full attention and you didn't have it to give.
I'm not arguing against you using the cell phone. I'm saying, it's like Heavy Metal (the movie). If you are on the cell phone- be aware you are fucked up and take that into account by driving slower, more cautiously so you have more time to react and more time to see things.
After 35 years of driving I also have one other rule of thumb to pass on. If you start feeling "cool" while you are driving- you are headed for an accident soon.
The cable habit is sneaky. $120 a month is $14,400 dollars over 10 years.
You can get a lot of DVD's free at your local libraries (for now).
In my case, I have enough money to justify internet (also free at the library) and decent cable is only another $30 dollars. And I drop another $14 for Netflix. And $75 now $95 a year for Amazon Prime (which I use less and which seems difficult to use- it steers me too hard towards paid content and away from free content).
Movies are much cheaper on matinee- but gasoline prices figure into it more as a single than a family. I pay $2.50 in gasoline and $4.50 for a movie.
Gasoline has become expensive enough now that I try to route multiple trips together. So I might go to movie, then the gym next door, then to taco cabana, and finally do some shopping at target or walmart before heading home.
You can choose to watch Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea now for 89 bucks for 26 episodes.
I wouldn't. Seems very pricy to me.
But since there are literally thousands of other episodes and movies which I do want to see, I'll watch them first.
It's your choice if you choose to pay a lot of money to legally see one particular show right now.
I consider something this old (30 to 34 years) to be a good target for torrenting since I consider anything over 28 years to be fair game. I think Disney has corrupted our copyright system. On a related note, I also believe in jury nullification for bad laws too. OTH, I've paid for good quality versions of material that old. I consider about a buck an episode to be fair for content like this.
I might have torrented a 1950's time travel movie I really liked when I was younger after trying to buy it and getting an unplayable, unreturnable dvd so who am I to judge.
But you have to realize you are breaking the law if you do so and not whine too much if you get caught and fined. The odds are lower for something like this than for something currently in the theatres. But your number might still come up.
In my experience most torrented items are being torrented while they are in the top price bracket. People want to see them "now" but won't (or can't) afford to pay current prices for them now.
Except for Demonoid. Man I loved that site. It had so much out of print but still in copyright stuff on it. Too worthless to reprint but many items that were part of my childhood. I'm glad it was up as long as it was.
And pennies on a cable station two years from now.
You can save a lot of money by falling back a year on the entertainment curve. And there is more entertainment than you can consume. I've been retired a year... do things like watching 14 episodes of DS9 (in between episodes of "TheNewBoston" android development... which is interesting because I may finally be regaining interest in recreational programming)... uh.. anyway... and more entertainment comes out every day than I can keep up with. I have to prioritize-- and cost is one way i do that.
This is a challenge of the content industry. There is too much content now. And as income inequality grows- I don't think 10% of the people are going to buy enough content to support the current model.
Say it was 50 cents per gigabyte you download from them.
So $2 for a DVD. $15 for a Blue ray. 50 cents on your mobile device unless you want to run it at "retina" level resolution in which case you might be paying $4.
The higher their share of all the income, the higher their share of taxes will need to be, especially if we have a deduction on the first $3400 people make which essentially wipes out taxes paid by people making under $12000 per year.
According to taxfoundation.org
The top 10% paid an average income tax RATE of 20.46%. And with an income tax RATE of only 20.46% they are managing to pay 70% of the taxes.
I.e. you are repeating a specific talking point pushed by the media. (Who owns the media? And I'm not just talking Fox- you can see the embedded pro wealthy messages on CNN and MSNBC too).
It's like "50% of the country pays no taxes" when the statement should really be "50% of the country pays no FEDERAL income taxes". But they do pay 12% of their income in state and local taxes while the top 10% pays roughly 2% (and the top 1% pays.03%). And they do pay 15% of their income in social security taxes (which starts on the 1st dollar earned) while the top 10% pays about 3% (and the top 1% pays less than.03%). This is another specific talking point.
The reason the top 1% and the top 10% pay so much of the total income tax is that they have most of the total income. And they have almost ALL of the "wealth" and property (well over 90%).
When they have 90% of the income- they'll probably pay 95% of the taxes. Because you can't successfully tax people who are so poor that they can't eat if they pay taxes. So the rich have to make up for everyone who is that poor. And with the shrinking middle class- that poor section is getting bigger as time goes on.
That lilly livered liberal group, the heritage organization says
The top 1% alone earned 19% of all the income in the country in 2010. The top 10% alone earned 55% of all the income in the country in 2010 The bottom 50% earned only 12% of all the income in the entire country in 2010.
Even if we DID NOT give them a deduction- at most the bottom 50% would only pay 12% of the taxes. The instant we give them a deduction- many are so poor that they pay no taxes.
You could maybe argue that it's unfair that the 10% earning over half the income pays about 3/4 of the taxes. But the instant you put any kinds of deductions into the system, you are not going to be able to avoid this.
And realize that only a VERY MODEST tax increase- to where this top 10% was paying a rate of 30% would essentially fix every problem the country has. They'd still be rich beyond the dreams of avarice. And the rest of the population would be much happier -- which reduces the risk of a bloody revolution.
I'm not even an expert but knowing they can look at your market order 20 milliseconds before your order executes and buy the equity and sell it to you at a profit is clearly frontrunning you for profit.
However- simply buying and selling fast isn't front running. That's a different kind of manipulation which may be legal.
But being able to see your orders and execute their orders faster. And being able to see your limit orders and executing false orders (and cancelling them before they execute) to force the price temporarily down below or above your limit order should be illegal if it isn't already.
A lot of these things would be illegal if a human did them. It's because it's "plus computers" or "on the internet" that it's not recognized. And because of the revolving door between the SEC and wallstreet firms. And.. sigh.. probably because of millions of dollars available to slosh around by the HFT traders to smooth things over or to pay fines that are 1/10th the size of the profit they made.
If you took all the money from the wealthy it wouldn't pay off the debt.
In one year.
But if you took 50% of their income for 20 years tho, it would more than pay it off.
Especially with people like Romney paying 13% tax rates on over a hundred million in income.
The challenge these days is that companies and the wealthy are leaving the country for tiny countries like switzerland, singapore, and monaco. As long as international law holds up, they get to skate on defense spending and just rely on others to pay those costs. If we do get a world war tho- you could see those areas plundered by larger nations.
Not sure. Good android tablets have gotten really cheap. Like $135 for more capability than a $300 android tablet only two years ago.
Meanwhile apple and surface have remained expensive.
I own two android tables and have given two as gifts. Because they are inexpensive.
My daughter owns an apple-- because her company bought it for her.
I do have a couple friends who own an apple they bought with their own money. It's cool. They have Apple TV too. But as a couple, they earn close to $250k per year and live in a $400k house and have new cars. They are not rich- but they are very far from the average americans standard of living.
I know getting all the books for 5th edition will be expensive but I still can't see D&D costing 640 million dollars-- even with a redone Vault of the Drow module.
While my original post was merely on the effectiveness of rubbing alcohol to eliminate body odor, I do use snopes and agree that its points are valid (for now).
However, we already have a hundredish chemicals (including rocket fuel) in our bodies from polluted ground water and the skin is a semi permeable organ and it seems logical that if you rub aluminum salts on the surface and dampen it with sweat in your underarm that some aluminum salt is going to be carried into the body.
If it's not all that effective, and it's not really well studied yet (studies are still underway as of 2013) then why take the risk?
Slashdot Mirror
It was state of the art; recommended by IBM; and was reporting successful backups to the AS/400 without errors.
The only way to be sure is to restore something. Then you know.
If your entire company (or personal financial life) is literally at stake on the backup, based on experience, I recommend you restore items from the backup to confirm success. It's a lot of risk mitigation for a couple minutes extra work.
But hey, your funeral, eh?
U.S. currency is backed by full faith and credit of the united states.
Bit coin is backed by full faith and credit of people who participate in bit coin.
Bit coin is just one of (last time I looked) almost 60 crypto currencies.
BTW, he doesn't call himself a libertarian.
From the wiki...
---
There has been some disagreement over whether or not Paul is a libertarian. He has stated that he is "not quite" a libertarian, including in an op-ed article published by USA Today in 2010.[2] He has received criticism from prominent libertarians such as Gary Johnson,[3] Adam Kokesh,[4] and Jesse Ventura.[5] He considers himself to be a Tea Party follower, who wants smaller government. [6] [7] Paul has said that he identifies as both a "constitutional conservative"[2][8] and a "libertarian conservative."[8]
---
From what I can see, Paul is fairly principled compared to most politicians. I agree with his fiscal policies and strongly disagree with his social policies. Net, net... I probably wouldn't vote for him for president but it's close.
I'm not so sure.
What did it cost Osama to attack us (well under a hundred million dollars-- probably under 10 million dollars).
What did it cost us to find attack Osama?
Close to a trillion dollars.
How much did it cost us to hold up our economy after the Twin Tower Attack?
Several Trillion dollars.
How much have we spent to prevent another attack?
At least a hundred million dollars.
How much did we spend on the middle east war?
2 to 3 trillion.
---
His attack was effective.
The emperor was a god on earth and japanese ground was sacred.
Propaganda in schools was comprehensive.
Many japanese civilians and military were suicidal and didn't view non-japanese as entirely human. (Rape of nanking, bataan death march, etc. etc. etc.).
Were there exceptions in a population of tens of millions- absolutely. There were thousands of pro american japanese- some who fought reluctantly- some who refused to fight (Jehova's Witnesses are mentioned specifically). However- when you look into them- MOST of them had to flee for their lives early during or before the war.
Even being japanese didn't protect you from being killed or tortured if you didn't get with the program. Even conscientious objectors were imprisoned and sentenced to be executed.
By 1944 what was left was pretty toxic and united.
You really need to read up on the japanese.
a) they were not surrendering
b) the civilians (not just the military) were prepared to fight to the death (with regular training with improvised weapons in school) and commit suicide if they couldn't win (there are movies of japanese civilians in okinawa raining over the cliffs like lemmings). Point is- the number of japanese deaths from an invasion would have been much larger than the deaths from the nuclear attacks.
c) the military in japan wasn't going to follow the normal rules of war and had already told the american prisoners that they would be killed when japan was invaded (only the use of nukes stopped them).
d) the japanese stated strategy was to fight until the americans suffered so many casualties that the american's gave up without the need for japan to surrender
e) Based on experience fighting other japanese island strongholds, the invasion of japan was estimated to be 1.7â"4 million American casualties, including 400,000â"800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities.
g) The firebombing of Tokyo ALONE killed 100,000 people. It would have been repeated many times in every other city during an invasion.
h) The americans at the time had no real clue about radiation. They were buying radioactive tonics and glassware for their houses; they were walking through and standing in radioactive wastes after the tests. The A Bomb was functionally just a "big bomb" to them.
I'm sure there is an i) thru z) too.
The japanese military was more akin to the SS than to the Weirmarct. And the japanese emperor was much more akin to a deity than Hitler was. And japanese soil was *sacred* to the civilians.
If you don't restore at least one file after every back up, you are going to discover (as a company I worked for found) that your tape is blank when you need it most.
It's a republican oligarchy! If we care to keep it.
became a reporter or was selling his video footage to news outlets, he might be able to resume looking for buried earthquake survivors with his drones.
Fundamental conflict between safety and reporting here.
I think reporting is going to lose but maybe we'll end up with reasonable altitude and geographical limits* on drones instead.
* i.e. under 250' and not within a few miles of active airports or heliports.
Google the name and "DVD" and it's in the top results.
There are a lot of good independent films. Possibly more than you could ever watch at this point.
They are not focused on profit as much as having something to say or even just a novelty project for those involved.
I usually find them less entertaining and sometimes even distopic...
Because they don't have "hollywood" endings.
A "good" hollywood ending makes you feel good despite yourself. A "bad" hollywood ending can ruin a movie. Too cheesy- so obviously tacked on it feels ridiculous. But a bad ending where the hero loses a leg and her boyfriend just feels bad.
That would wear out my case- and probably the battery cover.
Some other simpler methods that won't wear out the phone include:
1) Put the phone in airplane mode while driving.
2) Turn the sound AND vibration off. Put the phone face down so you can't see it.
I'm serious- I know some people have a serious problem with the cell phone and I'm trying to help and not be snarky.
See ... this is an advantage of growing up 50 years ago.
There were... no.. repeat.. no.. portable phones for anyone who wasn't rich enough to have a chauffeur.
You could be out of contact for hours or even days at a time.
There is literally NOTHING so important that it can't wait a few hours. The world got by for centuries with more than a few hours lag.
Oh... and...
2) If your CAR is on fire- it's probably not the time to answer the phone and start having a conversation on it. :-)
---
One of the worst possible accidents in my entire life that I barely avoided was a lady on a cell phone. What made it worse was she froze and came to a complete stop in front of me when she realized she had pulled out in front of me while talking on the phone. Her face was a mask of terror. One of the few times my ABS have kicked in. She had pulled in front of me from a side street when I was about 80 to 100 feet away while I was doing about 35 mph. If I hadn't been paying attention (say -- on my cell phone), I would have T boned her with a combined speed of 45 to 50 mph.
I think the phone is somehow more risky. I'm not even sure how. But I suspect it is that your eyes literally shut off when the person is talking about certain subjects. They've done studies that showed - even people good at driving and talking - that their field of vision narrows considerably while they are on the phone. The problem is not the 97 out of 100 situations where that doesn't matter. It's the 3/100 situations which require your full attention and you didn't have it to give.
I'm not arguing against you using the cell phone. I'm saying, it's like Heavy Metal (the movie). If you are on the cell phone- be aware you are fucked up and take that into account by driving slower, more cautiously so you have more time to react and more time to see things.
After 35 years of driving I also have one other rule of thumb to pass on. If you start feeling "cool" while you are driving- you are headed for an accident soon.
But the problem wasn't stated as, "my teenager is using the phone".
Clearly, you are expanding scope.
So I'm either going to need more money, more resources, or more time to solve the problem.
You press and hold it and the phone turns off.
It's free.
The cable habit is sneaky. $120 a month is $14,400 dollars over 10 years.
You can get a lot of DVD's free at your local libraries (for now).
In my case, I have enough money to justify internet (also free at the library) and decent cable is only another $30 dollars. And I drop another $14 for Netflix. And $75 now $95 a year for Amazon Prime (which I use less and which seems difficult to use- it steers me too hard towards paid content and away from free content).
Movies are much cheaper on matinee- but gasoline prices figure into it more as a single than a family. I pay $2.50 in gasoline and $4.50 for a movie.
Gasoline has become expensive enough now that I try to route multiple trips together. So I might go to movie, then the gym next door, then to taco cabana, and finally do some shopping at target or walmart before heading home.
You can choose to watch Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea now for 89 bucks for 26 episodes.
I wouldn't. Seems very pricy to me.
But since there are literally thousands of other episodes and movies which I do want to see, I'll watch them first.
It's your choice if you choose to pay a lot of money to legally see one particular show right now.
I consider something this old (30 to 34 years) to be a good target for torrenting since I consider anything over 28 years to be fair game. I think Disney has corrupted our copyright system. On a related note, I also believe in jury nullification for bad laws too. OTH, I've paid for good quality versions of material that old. I consider about a buck an episode to be fair for content like this.
I might have torrented a 1950's time travel movie I really liked when I was younger after trying to buy it and getting an unplayable, unreturnable dvd so who am I to judge.
But you have to realize you are breaking the law if you do so and not whine too much if you get caught and fined. The odds are lower for something like this than for something currently in the theatres. But your number might still come up.
In my experience most torrented items are being torrented while they are in the top price bracket. People want to see them "now" but won't (or can't) afford to pay current prices for them now.
Except for Demonoid. Man I loved that site. It had so much out of print but still in copyright stuff on it. Too worthless to reprint but many items that were part of my childhood. I'm glad it was up as long as it was.
Actually, your tequila example is pretty close.
And we do charge for temporal value.
You pay $15 to watch the movie NOW.
But $10 in 3 months.
And $5 in a year.
And pennies on a cable station two years from now.
You can save a lot of money by falling back a year on the entertainment curve. And there is more entertainment than you can consume. I've been retired a year... do things like watching 14 episodes of DS9 (in between episodes of "TheNewBoston" android development... which is interesting because I may finally be regaining interest in recreational programming)... uh.. anyway... and more entertainment comes out every day than I can keep up with. I have to prioritize-- and cost is one way i do that.
This is a challenge of the content industry. There is too much content now. And as income inequality grows- I don't think 10% of the people are going to buy enough content to support the current model.
I mean then it's a straight data / cost ratio.
Say it was 50 cents per gigabyte you download from them.
So $2 for a DVD. $15 for a Blue ray. 50 cents on your mobile device unless you want to run it at "retina" level resolution in which case you might be paying $4.
The higher their share of all the income, the higher their share of taxes will need to be, especially if we have a deduction on the first $3400 people make which essentially wipes out taxes paid by people making under $12000 per year.
According to taxfoundation.org
The top 10% paid an average income tax RATE of 20.46%. And with an income tax RATE of only 20.46% they are managing to pay 70% of the taxes.
I.e. you are repeating a specific talking point pushed by the media. (Who owns the media? And I'm not just talking Fox- you can see the embedded pro wealthy messages on CNN and MSNBC too).
It's like "50% of the country pays no taxes" when the statement should really be "50% of the country pays no FEDERAL income taxes". But they do pay 12% of their income in state and local taxes while the top 10% pays roughly 2% (and the top 1% pays .03%). And they do pay 15% of their income in social security taxes (which starts on the 1st dollar earned) while the top 10% pays about 3% (and the top 1% pays less than .03%). This is another specific talking point.
The reason the top 1% and the top 10% pay so much of the total income tax is that they have most of the total income. And they have almost ALL of the "wealth" and property (well over 90%).
When they have 90% of the income- they'll probably pay 95% of the taxes. Because you can't successfully tax people who are so poor that they can't eat if they pay taxes. So the rich have to make up for everyone who is that poor. And with the shrinking middle class- that poor section is getting bigger as time goes on.
That lilly livered liberal group, the heritage organization says
The top 1% alone earned 19% of all the income in the country in 2010.
The top 10% alone earned 55% of all the income in the country in 2010
The bottom 50% earned only 12% of all the income in the entire country in 2010.
Even if we DID NOT give them a deduction- at most the bottom 50% would only pay 12% of the taxes. The instant we give them a deduction- many are so poor that they pay no taxes.
You could maybe argue that it's unfair that the 10% earning over half the income pays about 3/4 of the taxes. But the instant you put any kinds of deductions into the system, you are not going to be able to avoid this.
And realize that only a VERY MODEST tax increase- to where this top 10% was paying a rate of 30% would essentially fix every problem the country has. They'd still be rich beyond the dreams of avarice. And the rest of the population would be much happier -- which reduces the risk of a bloody revolution.
Absolutely.
I'm not even an expert but knowing they can look at your market order 20 milliseconds before your order executes and buy the equity and sell it to you at a profit is clearly frontrunning you for profit.
However- simply buying and selling fast isn't front running. That's a different kind of manipulation which may be legal.
But being able to see your orders and execute their orders faster. And being able to see your limit orders and executing false orders (and cancelling them before they execute) to force the price temporarily down below or above your limit order should be illegal if it isn't already.
A lot of these things would be illegal if a human did them. It's because it's "plus computers" or "on the internet" that it's not recognized. And because of the revolving door between the SEC and wallstreet firms. And .. sigh.. probably because of millions of dollars available to slosh around by the HFT traders to smooth things over or to pay fines that are 1/10th the size of the profit they made.
If you took all the money from the wealthy it wouldn't pay off the debt.
In one year.
But if you took 50% of their income for 20 years tho, it would more than pay it off.
Especially with people like Romney paying 13% tax rates on over a hundred million in income.
The challenge these days is that companies and the wealthy are leaving the country for tiny countries like switzerland, singapore, and monaco. As long as international law holds up, they get to skate on defense spending and just rely on others to pay those costs. If we do get a world war tho- you could see those areas plundered by larger nations.
Not sure. Good android tablets have gotten really cheap. Like $135 for more capability than a $300 android tablet only two years ago.
Meanwhile apple and surface have remained expensive.
I own two android tables and have given two as gifts. Because they are inexpensive.
My daughter owns an apple-- because her company bought it for her.
I do have a couple friends who own an apple they bought with their own money. It's cool. They have Apple TV too. But as a couple, they earn close to $250k per year and live in a $400k house and have new cars. They are not rich- but they are very far from the average americans standard of living.
I know getting all the books for 5th edition will be expensive but I still can't see D&D costing 640 million dollars-- even with a redone Vault of the Drow module.
While my original post was merely on the effectiveness of rubbing alcohol to eliminate body odor, I do use snopes and agree that its points are valid (for now).
However, we already have a hundredish chemicals (including rocket fuel) in our bodies from polluted ground water and the skin is a semi permeable organ and it seems logical that if you rub aluminum salts on the surface and dampen it with sweat in your underarm that some aluminum salt is going to be carried into the body.
If it's not all that effective, and it's not really well studied yet (studies are still underway as of 2013) then why take the risk?