"Gema is now hoping that Google will finally agree to a new bilateral licensing treaty whereby the collecting society would not get an annual lump sum for the contested videos, but a fixed fee each time copyright-protected videos are watched."
1. Get YouTube to give you two cents each time one is watched 2. Go to a third world country/botnet and pay a penny per click to get viewers 3. Profit!
Seriously, pull out of Germany and let the people tell their politicians how they really feel. I imagine they will be welcomed back when a few rules are tweaked.
"even though you can't see it through the giant SUV directly in front of you"
Give me a break. You shouldn't be depending on seeing through cars or SUV's period. Keep your distance and keep your opinions about what I want to drive to yourself. My large SUV is much safer than your car. Don't tell me that I'm responsible for making smaller cars unsafe. If we were on a level playing field, I might agree. However, we're not going to get rid of semi trucks, so I want to be driving around in the safest vehicle I can as long as we share roads.
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Vehicles/VehiclesAllVehicles.aspx will show you that your 4-Door Sedan, Hardtop had 13,100 fatalities last year. Large Utility had just 1,504. Maybe it's because there are so many more 4-Door sedans on the road or maybe it's that the vehicle is safer. All I know is that statistically I'm safer in my vehicle. Don't pull out the old "yeah, but they roll over" canard either. Same link will show you that more passenger vehicles roll over than SUV's in fatal accidents as well.
Now then, as for the technology, I think it makes sense. Admittedly it will be a bit strange having things "just happen" for you, but it was strange to fully engage brakes once ABS became the norm (I'm old enough to remember quickly tapping the breaks under certain circumstances).
"Amazon Drops California Associates to Avoid Sales Tax"
Should read:
Amazon Drops California Associates to Avoid COLLECTING Sales Tax ON BEHALF OF A GREEDY STATE GOVERNMENT.
Option 1: Amazon should spend millions of dollars on programmers, accountants, tax compliance attorneys, and so forth so that they can continue paying commissions to 25,000 affiliates (many of whom do report their income and provide taxes to the state of CA).
Option 2: Find affiliates in states that are friendly and don't employ mob-style tactics. When will these pols get it? There is not an endless supply of OPM (other people's money).
Semi-OT: Doesn't Netflix already limit the number of simultaneous logins and/or do some kind of IP monitoring? I'm a subscriber and I know in the past I've gotten warnings when I was trying to watch something while travelling (and confirming that my kids were watching Jimmy Neutron or whatever at home).
I see some flawed analogies in the responses. Giving your password already violates their terms. When you sign up and pay for the service, you said you weren't going to share your password. So comparing this to borrowing your friend a car or having someone stay in your house is not the same thing. It is unlikely your purchase agreements for those assets included anything about sharing.
I think this is closer to "stealing" phone service. Where you have a line coming into a house (a single private line, not a party line), and then use several splitters and long runs of cat 3 to connect up your neighbors. If you read your terms and agreements that come with your phone service, I think you'll find that you can't do this. Likewise, you can share your cell phone with anyone - that's a different subscription model with different terms.
N.B. Making a law over the matter... well that is ridiculous and is clearly being done to appease the industry.
I have a hammer and a cordless drill. The hammer cost 1/10th of the drill, can be used to pound nails, break sheetrock, tap things into place, pull nails, strike a chisel, and much much more. My drill basically has two uses. So is the hammer a lot better because it is cheaper and can do more? No, because it sucks at drilling holes and screwing fasteners.
Now, I have a desktop, laptop, and tablet. You know what? I like all three. Depending on what I'm doing, I pick the right tool. A desktop with a couple 24" monitors and full size keyboard/mouse is great for editing/managing photo and music libraries, writing code, etc. The laptop is great for banging out some emails while I'm on the couch. The tablet is great when I just want to read, watch a show in bed, or share pictures at a family gathering.
Making these tablet vs laptop comparisons is beyond juvenile. Do we really need this on/.?
While I can respect your opinion, I do disagree. Many (most?) of the pictures I take are not for my personal consumption, but those of my family and especially my children. Recently I made a montage of photos using animoto for my mom's 60th birthday. I used photos taken by my parents over the years. The process of looking through them, thinking of the memories they provoked, asking questions (after the fact) about some of the events I didn't recognize (or happened before I was alive) was a great experience for me. It also brought mom to tears.
My grandmother recently passed along hundreds of photos (many dating back 70+ years) to her children and grandchildren. These photos are priceless. They spurred some wonderful conversations with my grandmother, mother, and my own children. Photographs are like icebreakers - they naturally get people asking questions.
I sincerely hope that some day my kids will do the same sort of thing for me and that I can give pictures to them. I'd like to think they will get a similar satisfaction reflecting on great past experiences.
I don't have a photographic memory. I can't remember every little place I've been to. But it always seems that viewing a picture unlocks those memories. More to your point, when I watch my daughter dance or my son test for his next belt in Taekwondo, I consciously think about taking a few pictures, maybe a small bit of video, and then get my eye out of the viewfinder to remember the rest. If I'm someplace on my own, there is a certain join in taking some time to get just the right shot *and* get the shot in my memory.
Like so many tools and shiny gadgets in life, a camera can be used in many ways.
You're right - it doesn't create a need. I fills a need.
My wife and kids spend 95% of their time on our laptop surfing the web, watching movies, emailing, etc. While our PowerBook is tiny compared to the laptops of the mid-90's, they are still relatively big and get very warm on your lap. Batteries seem to need charging on a regular basis. A PowerBook costs a lot. I can see this being a device that each member of the family could have (and I could afford). While not everything Apple touches turns to gold (Apple TV comes to mind), I believe this will be a winner.
There's going to be some amazing apps for this. I would love one in the kitchen. A laptop takes up counter space. This thing can sit in the cookbook holder as geek cooks have imagined for years. Play some music, pull up your recipe, can be a slideshow picture frame when not in use... You know there will be some great accessories for this. I predict a picture frame dock that hangs on the wall. It can recharge and show photos in style.
With regards to the Kindle... would you really take a grayscale eBook reader with a text browser (yay Lynx!) for $489 or an iPad with HD resolution, Safari, email, iphoto, itunes, 140K apps, etc., etc., for $499? The Kindle is marginally smaller and may have one or two very minor benefits for book readers, but c'mon... really?
If the iPad delivers on performance/battery life, this is a winner.
I like your jab at Bush, but here's a couple of facts:
An appropriations rider was passed by Congress in 1996 (the Dickey Amendment) forbidding federal funding for any research that creates, injures or destroys human embryos. Clinton signed it into law. Bush sought to relax that law.
"The President's answer was that there ought to be no restrictions on the private sector but that federal subsidies should be limited to lines that had already been harvested and should not be used to encourage the destruction of embryos. In short, it was a reasonable middle ground. It's worth noting that other countries, such as Germany, Ireland and Austria, ban even the private sector from creating embryos for stem cell research." (WSJ 7/12/2004)
If you care to check with the Office of Management and budget, you'll also find out that bush was the first (and only) president to fund Human Embryonic research. During his first four years in office (I didn't see newer numbers) the NIH budget for Embryonic research increased every year.
Regardless of the "moral" issue - why should the government be researching stem cells anyways? I thought their job was to secure the country and make sure we can freely go about our business. The gov't is supposed to give us health care, social security, welfare, and now stem cells? Just what we need.
I'll take issue with the "you can't rush good cooking" bullet.
Many dishes are best when done quickly and often at high heat. Think of fajitas, calamari, tuna steaks, shrimp, stir-fry, and the list goes on. Likewise, leave your steak, burgers, chicken, veggies on the grill for 3 hours (hey, you can't rush good cooking right?) and you'll have charcoal.
There is a balance in all things. Cooking and software are no exceptions.
Google has a great setup for the business they're in. The company I'm at doesn't have the luxury of doing whatever we please. Our customers depend on us to deliver certain things on time. We like to think that we do have a core group who get to work on some "fun stuff" that doesn't have a fixed timeline (though we like to at least know what year we might get it out). I think Google can do things they way they are due to a LOT of cash on hand combined with the fact that they're really trying to find cool ways to attract people to their ads and attract ad buyers to their cool products.
I think this is great. Long-term electronic voting that is open and can be inspected by anyone seems to make sense, but we're not there yet. Besides, I'm less concerned with how the vote is taken than who is voting these days. Frankly I believe there is enough safeguards available in the process to generally get the count right. What concerns me is when the dead and non-citizens start to vote.
Just yesterday in the house one party (if you don't know which one, RTA) unanimously voted against requiring voter ID. WTF? For you non-Americans, do you think it is okay for me to stop in to your voting booth while I'm vacationing in your country? Because apparently you can stop in to many of our polls and vote without being asked for any ID or proof of citizenship.
Oh, the recommendation for voter ID came from a bipartisan study headed by former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a Republican. Neither of these guys is a friend to the other party.
While there are always "signs" that point to "weaknesses" in the economy, most of what is out there is FUD spread by the mainstream media. The reality is that the current administration picked up the pieces of the.com crash and 9/11 and has done a remarkable job energizing the US economic engine through tax cuts. I encourage you to read the following piece by respected economic advisor Lawrence Kudlow: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/ the_bigbang_story_of_us_privat.html
Here's a few points:
- Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent?
- In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy. (so much for the "China is going to surpass us anytime soon theory - ed.)
- Since the 2003 tax cuts, tax-revenue collections from the expanding economy have been surging at double-digit rates while the deficit is constantly being revised downward.
Housing MAY cause some short-term pressures (though I think this will be more isolated than is being reported) but it certainly isn't going to cause the economy to come to a halt. Maybe Yahoo should take a look at Google's numbers which, if I'm not mistaken, are doing just fine on the ad revenue side. Perhaps Yahoo should take a look in the mirror before proclaiming this is a US economic problem. When all the indicators show that online advertising rates industry-wide are down for multiple quarters I'll listen. Until then, this looks like short-term CYA by a CEO to help explain why his SG&A and EBITDA are not meeting the numbers the analysts want to see next quarter.
I can't believe how many comments there are (and have been modded up too) that think M$ should have given them money and left the teaching to the same old union-backed teachers and administrators. We've been trying to solve this problem with more money for years and there has not been any significant return (i.e., increased learning) on that investment. The following numbers are from the US Dept of Education statistics site (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/tables/dt0 4_365.asp) (in thousands of current dollars)
Note that this is federal spending. There are billions more collected at the state and local level. For example, the estimate in 2003 was nearly $450 billion nationwide. That's just for K-12. FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS.
Democrats and Republicans alike have both tried to throw money at this problem for a loooong time. Increases in education spending far exceed inflation or personal income. The problem is not money! You can google those facts all day long.
Microsoft may or may not be an answer to the problem, but the fact that they're getting in there and trying to fix the problem should be embraced.
I encourage you to poke around www.schoolmatters.com, which is a free service provided by Standard & Poors. They specifically ask that you don't take numbers out of context, so I won't post anything here. It's better to see then in context anyhow.
First off, the link says, "Dicks was arrested in New York late on Wednesday at JFK Airport on a warrant from Louisiana" nothing about Dallas. What's up with the warrant from Louisiana? Sounds like some small-timer that wants to stir things up. There's got to be more to the story.
I'm a big-time outspoken conservative and I love to play no-limit hold 'em (and hi/lo omaha). I'd like to state that I am very diappointed that republicans are backing this and I believe this really is just for votes this fall. There are democrat supporters on this as well, so it isn't completely one-sided. Everyone interested in keeping internet gambling alive needs to talk to their representative.
The good news is that this was tried in the late 90's and failed. It passed the house in 2003 but the senate didn't take up the issue. With the rate at which poker in particular is gaining popularity, this should be an issue that can be defeated. I see the senate again not taking up this issue in 2006. Post 2006 elections, it should disappear for a while again. Apparently big money doesn't buy all the votes as online gambling is worth bilions of dollars. AFIAK, as long as we have state lottos and Indian casinos, I don't want to hear anything from the state about why online gambling should be illegal.
Now as for the gentlemen who have been arested... the only good thing is that maybe they can sue and further clarify the law. The fifth circuit says the law only applies to sports. It would be great to see additional courts back this up as I believe they would.
FTFA: "Because it also sells DVDs, Amazon has agreed to studio demands that digital wholesale prices not undercut those of DVDs. As a result, Amazon.com's digital download prices are expected to range from $9.99 to $19.99..."
"Initially, Apple was pushing to sell all films for $9.99, just as it sells songs for a flat price of 99 and all TV shows for $1.99. But due to studio pressure, it will launch with two price points: $9.99 for library titles, $14.99 for new pics in the DVD window."
Neither of these companies will get my business. Why the hell would I pay retail for a download when I can have it in a day or two on physical media with a case and an insert? $4.99, maybe - after all that would compete with "buying" a new release on DirecTV which I can save on my Tivo. This one I really don't get.
I still don't purchase (complete) CD's online - I'll take the packaging. Individual songs make sense since I might only care for a couple tracks on a disc. I've never had the desire to download specific chapters of a DVD. Music downloads are a whole different thing than video. Oh well, I hope the market takes care of this.
I'm late to the thread, but would there be a problem with this scenario:
Use Diebold or whatever computerized machine. After you confirm your intentions and commit, a receipt would be printed. (maybe two - one for the person to take home?) You confirm the printout and drop it off with an election official. Random precincts and/or areas that contest the results could manually count the printouts versus the computer results. If the printouts don't jive, something is either up with the machines *or* officials are corrupt.
I'm not so sure we can just say "We shouldn't use computers for this". If we could guarantee that the machine was 100% accurate and unhackable, then it would make a lot of sense. I think the problem is getting close to that 100% mark and there are probably ways to do it. I can guarantee that humans have never been 100% accurate and have never 100% honest on a national scale.
More info on this...
on
Tibet's Mesh
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The submitter of this article said, "I would love to see a free wireless mesh that's not dependent on any government or corporation take over the world."
I'd love to see everyone in their dream house with a luxury car getting 250 MPG that's not dependent on any government or corporation.
I think both those statements have the same likelyhood of coming true.
I'd guess that 98% of Americans consider sewer, water, and electrical essential no matter where they live. I would guess that internet access still falls below those three. Fat-pipe internet access may eventually be a true utility that is natuarlly expected to exist anywhere, but it isn't there yet. Even when it does, why would anyone think it wouldn't depend on any government or corporation? All major utilities require BOTH government and corporations. If anything, it will move further away from small local ISP's (like internet and electricity started with). Huge infrastructure with high reliability and reasonable cost demands this type of change.
Having recently come out of a community planning meeting, our small town of 600+ has determined that wireless internet access for all could be a big another way to try and lure younger folks (like myself) that are choosing between other small towns in the area. I'm in the very first stages of feasabiltiy - looking at all the options. The problems of course come down to who pays for it. In the case of our aging community, a lot of folks don't see the need or even want access. That means they don't want any of their tax dollars going to fund it (never mind that my tax dollars fund their senior center and senior bus). On top of that, the local telco isn't very excited to see their individual DSL subscriptions go away either. Then there is the issue of hardware and support. With a town of this size, it is nearly impossible to have 24x7 support. These are just a few of the things that go into the hopper when you're looking at building the infrastructure of small towns which at the end of the day really are what make up the mesh between the 2-5 metro locations in each state. Doing this without local government or a corporate sponsor will be difficult. If this article has any detail (when it's available again!), I hope I can learn some slick new tricks.
Has anyone disected the questions in the poll? It is so easy to twist the numbers by asking carefuly worded questions. For instance, if I were asked if I believe in evolution, I would say, "Yes". I would argue that most people would interpret my response as a vote for science and against creation. Now if the poll follows-up with, "Do you believe in God and that he is responsible for evolution?" or "Do you believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution?" you can interpret my answer in a very different way.
What the hell does science have to do with this anyways? Not really of course, but there are over a million pages of scientific evidence that the government had nothing to do with 9/11 and a third of Americans still believe that the whole thing was a conspiracy. (Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll) The point is that polls are overrated and designed to evoke emotion and shape opinion. Get the facts and decide.
I've read a lot of replies that say we should legalize all drugs. While I haven't made up my mind on this one (seeing the History Channel show on Opium, Morphine and Heroin made me think about this recently) I do have a legitimate question.
If we legalize "hard drugs" why wouldn't we extend this to all drugs. That is to say all prescription drugs such as anti-depression, heart meds, erectile enhancers, and the like? Where do we draw the line. I personally think it is dangerous to have people self-medicating, so I want to konw if there is a legitimate answer to thisi. Maybe it falls back into the category of, "Yes, make them all legal and let the dummies kill themselves but smart folks will still see their doctor for a proper prescription that will tell them how to administer the drugs." That kind of makes sense.
Personally I get some allergy problems in the summer and have taken a prescription drug for years. At this point I know the dose and that one pill should be taken every 24 hours when I'm experiencing problems. I suppose it makes some sense that I should be able to refill as many times as I like right?
So how does this trickle down to kids I wonder? When I was 15, I imagine I would have tried some hard drugs had they been legal. Seeing a rock of crack next to the hard candy would make it seem like trying an atomic fireball or sour gummy. (There's no reason to think they wouldn't be presented like this if all are legal). The fact that they were illegal made me wonder why and that's when I did some research and talked to my parents. Now maybe the "legalize drugs" crowd would say it was my parents fault for not talking to me proactively. In their defense, my parents taught me right and wrong. Doing something illegal was wrong, therefore taking hard drugs was wrong. Maybe legalizing drugs is only for 18 and up?
Slashdot Mirror
"Gema is now hoping that Google will finally agree to a new bilateral licensing treaty whereby the collecting society would not get an annual lump sum for the contested videos, but a fixed fee each time copyright-protected videos are watched."
1. Get YouTube to give you two cents each time one is watched
2. Go to a third world country/botnet and pay a penny per click to get viewers
3. Profit!
Seriously, pull out of Germany and let the people tell their politicians how they really feel. I imagine they will be welcomed back when a few rules are tweaked.
FTA: "The very bottom floors of the Earthscraper are for all of the technical parts of the building."
Sounds like several of the offices I've had while working in IT over the years.
Reminds me Richmond's office: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqqggfGRQQI
"even though you can't see it through the giant SUV directly in front of you"
Give me a break. You shouldn't be depending on seeing through cars or SUV's period. Keep your distance and keep your opinions about what I want to drive to yourself. My large SUV is much safer than your car. Don't tell me that I'm responsible for making smaller cars unsafe. If we were on a level playing field, I might agree. However, we're not going to get rid of semi trucks, so I want to be driving around in the safest vehicle I can as long as we share roads.
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Vehicles/VehiclesAllVehicles.aspx will show you that your 4-Door Sedan, Hardtop had 13,100 fatalities last year. Large Utility had just 1,504. Maybe it's because there are so many more 4-Door sedans on the road or maybe it's that the vehicle is safer. All I know is that statistically I'm safer in my vehicle. Don't pull out the old "yeah, but they roll over" canard either. Same link will show you that more passenger vehicles roll over than SUV's in fatal accidents as well.
Now then, as for the technology, I think it makes sense. Admittedly it will be a bit strange having things "just happen" for you, but it was strange to fully engage brakes once ABS became the norm (I'm old enough to remember quickly tapping the breaks under certain circumstances).
"Amazon Drops California Associates to Avoid Sales Tax"
Should read:
Amazon Drops California Associates to Avoid COLLECTING Sales Tax ON BEHALF OF A GREEDY STATE GOVERNMENT.
Option 1: Amazon should spend millions of dollars on programmers, accountants, tax compliance attorneys, and so forth so that they can continue paying commissions to 25,000 affiliates (many of whom do report their income and provide taxes to the state of CA).
Option 2: Find affiliates in states that are friendly and don't employ mob-style tactics. When will these pols get it? There is not an endless supply of OPM (other people's money).
Semi-OT: Doesn't Netflix already limit the number of simultaneous logins and/or do some kind of IP monitoring? I'm a subscriber and I know in the past I've gotten warnings when I was trying to watch something while travelling (and confirming that my kids were watching Jimmy Neutron or whatever at home).
I see some flawed analogies in the responses. Giving your password already violates their terms. When you sign up and pay for the service, you said you weren't going to share your password. So comparing this to borrowing your friend a car or having someone stay in your house is not the same thing. It is unlikely your purchase agreements for those assets included anything about sharing.
I think this is closer to "stealing" phone service. Where you have a line coming into a house (a single private line, not a party line), and then use several splitters and long runs of cat 3 to connect up your neighbors. If you read your terms and agreements that come with your phone service, I think you'll find that you can't do this. Likewise, you can share your cell phone with anyone - that's a different subscription model with different terms.
N.B. Making a law over the matter... well that is ridiculous and is clearly being done to appease the industry.
I have a hammer and a cordless drill. The hammer cost 1/10th of the drill, can be used to pound nails, break sheetrock, tap things into place, pull nails, strike a chisel, and much much more. My drill basically has two uses. So is the hammer a lot better because it is cheaper and can do more? No, because it sucks at drilling holes and screwing fasteners.
Now, I have a desktop, laptop, and tablet. You know what? I like all three. Depending on what I'm doing, I pick the right tool. A desktop with a couple 24" monitors and full size keyboard/mouse is great for editing/managing photo and music libraries, writing code, etc. The laptop is great for banging out some emails while I'm on the couch. The tablet is great when I just want to read, watch a show in bed, or share pictures at a family gathering.
Making these tablet vs laptop comparisons is beyond juvenile. Do we really need this on /.?
"Many say the hobby is dying"
They've been saying the same thing about Apple for years...
While I can respect your opinion, I do disagree. Many (most?) of the pictures I take are not for my personal consumption, but those of my family and especially my children. Recently I made a montage of photos using animoto for my mom's 60th birthday. I used photos taken by my parents over the years. The process of looking through them, thinking of the memories they provoked, asking questions (after the fact) about some of the events I didn't recognize (or happened before I was alive) was a great experience for me. It also brought mom to tears.
My grandmother recently passed along hundreds of photos (many dating back 70+ years) to her children and grandchildren. These photos are priceless. They spurred some wonderful conversations with my grandmother, mother, and my own children. Photographs are like icebreakers - they naturally get people asking questions.
I sincerely hope that some day my kids will do the same sort of thing for me and that I can give pictures to them. I'd like to think they will get a similar satisfaction reflecting on great past experiences.
I don't have a photographic memory. I can't remember every little place I've been to. But it always seems that viewing a picture unlocks those memories. More to your point, when I watch my daughter dance or my son test for his next belt in Taekwondo, I consciously think about taking a few pictures, maybe a small bit of video, and then get my eye out of the viewfinder to remember the rest. If I'm someplace on my own, there is a certain join in taking some time to get just the right shot *and* get the shot in my memory.
Like so many tools and shiny gadgets in life, a camera can be used in many ways.
You're right - it doesn't create a need. I fills a need.
My wife and kids spend 95% of their time on our laptop surfing the web, watching movies, emailing, etc. While our PowerBook is tiny compared to the laptops of the mid-90's, they are still relatively big and get very warm on your lap. Batteries seem to need charging on a regular basis. A PowerBook costs a lot. I can see this being a device that each member of the family could have (and I could afford). While not everything Apple touches turns to gold (Apple TV comes to mind), I believe this will be a winner.
There's going to be some amazing apps for this. I would love one in the kitchen. A laptop takes up counter space. This thing can sit in the cookbook holder as geek cooks have imagined for years. Play some music, pull up your recipe, can be a slideshow picture frame when not in use... You know there will be some great accessories for this. I predict a picture frame dock that hangs on the wall. It can recharge and show photos in style.
With regards to the Kindle... would you really take a grayscale eBook reader with a text browser (yay Lynx!) for $489 or an iPad with HD resolution, Safari, email, iphoto, itunes, 140K apps, etc., etc., for $499? The Kindle is marginally smaller and may have one or two very minor benefits for book readers, but c'mon... really?
If the iPad delivers on performance/battery life, this is a winner.
And don't tell anybody but I think Obama's coffee mugs are ... MADE IN CHINA! Just like yours and mine! The horror!
In fact, most, if not all the China being used by Obama is produced by Lenox or Pickard here in the USA.
Lenox provides more information on this.
But your point is taken nevertheless.
I like your jab at Bush, but here's a couple of facts:
An appropriations rider was passed by Congress in 1996 (the Dickey Amendment) forbidding federal funding for any research that creates, injures or destroys human embryos. Clinton signed it into law. Bush sought to relax that law.
"The President's answer was that there ought to be no restrictions on the private sector but that federal subsidies should be limited to lines that had already been harvested and should not be used to encourage the destruction of embryos. In short, it was a reasonable middle ground. It's worth noting that other countries, such as Germany, Ireland and Austria, ban even the private sector from creating embryos for stem cell research." (WSJ 7/12/2004)
If you care to check with the Office of Management and budget, you'll also find out that bush was the first (and only) president to fund Human Embryonic research. During his first four years in office (I didn't see newer numbers) the NIH budget for Embryonic research increased every year.
Regardless of the "moral" issue - why should the government be researching stem cells anyways? I thought their job was to secure the country and make sure we can freely go about our business. The gov't is supposed to give us health care, social security, welfare, and now stem cells? Just what we need.
The DOW is up today. Can't you at least get the most basic facts right? The drop was yesterday.
I'm not sure I see why this is a "If you can't beat 'em - Join 'em" deal. Was Apple trying to beat Wal-Mart?
Seems to me that they're just looking to a different channel to market their product since the first channel wasn't interested.
I'll take issue with the "you can't rush good cooking" bullet.
Many dishes are best when done quickly and often at high heat. Think of fajitas, calamari, tuna steaks, shrimp, stir-fry, and the list goes on. Likewise, leave your steak, burgers, chicken, veggies on the grill for 3 hours (hey, you can't rush good cooking right?) and you'll have charcoal.
There is a balance in all things. Cooking and software are no exceptions.
Google has a great setup for the business they're in. The company I'm at doesn't have the luxury of doing whatever we please. Our customers depend on us to deliver certain things on time. We like to think that we do have a core group who get to work on some "fun stuff" that doesn't have a fixed timeline (though we like to at least know what year we might get it out). I think Google can do things they way they are due to a LOT of cash on hand combined with the fact that they're really trying to find cool ways to attract people to their ads and attract ad buyers to their cool products.
I think this is great. Long-term electronic voting that is open and can be inspected by anyone seems to make sense, but we're not there yet. Besides, I'm less concerned with how the vote is taken than who is voting these days. Frankly I believe there is enough safeguards available in the process to generally get the count right. What concerns me is when the dead and non-citizens start to vote.
Just yesterday in the house one party (if you don't know which one, RTA) unanimously voted against requiring voter ID. WTF? For you non-Americans, do you think it is okay for me to stop in to your voting booth while I'm vacationing in your country? Because apparently you can stop in to many of our polls and vote without being asked for any ID or proof of citizenship.
Oh, the recommendation for voter ID came from a bipartisan study headed by former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a Republican. Neither of these guys is a friend to the other party.
While there are always "signs" that point to "weaknesses" in the economy, most of what is out there is FUD spread by the mainstream media. The reality is that the current administration picked up the pieces of the .com crash and 9/11 and has done a remarkable job energizing the US economic engine through tax cuts. I encourage you to read the following piece by respected economic advisor Lawrence Kudlow: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/ the_bigbang_story_of_us_privat.html
Here's a few points:
- Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent?
- In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy. (so much for the "China is going to surpass us anytime soon theory - ed.)
- Since the 2003 tax cuts, tax-revenue collections from the expanding economy have been surging at double-digit rates while the deficit is constantly being revised downward.
Housing MAY cause some short-term pressures (though I think this will be more isolated than is being reported) but it certainly isn't going to cause the economy to come to a halt. Maybe Yahoo should take a look at Google's numbers which, if I'm not mistaken, are doing just fine on the ad revenue side. Perhaps Yahoo should take a look in the mirror before proclaiming this is a US economic problem. When all the indicators show that online advertising rates industry-wide are down for multiple quarters I'll listen. Until then, this looks like short-term CYA by a CEO to help explain why his SG&A and EBITDA are not meeting the numbers the analysts want to see next quarter.
I can't believe how many comments there are (and have been modded up too) that think M$ should have given them money and left the teaching to the same old union-backed teachers and administrators. We've been trying to solve this problem with more money for years and there has not been any significant return (i.e., increased learning) on that investment. The following numbers are from the US Dept of Education statistics site (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/tables/dt0 4_365.asp) (in thousands of current dollars)
1970 4,625,224
1975 7,350,355
1980 13,137,785
1985 16,701,065
1990 23,198,575
1995 31,403,000
2000 34,106,697
2002 46,324,352
2003 57,442,854
2004 62,864,595
Note that this is federal spending. There are billions more collected at the state and local level. For example, the estimate in 2003 was nearly $450 billion nationwide. That's just for K-12. FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS.
Democrats and Republicans alike have both tried to throw money at this problem for a loooong time. Increases in education spending far exceed inflation or personal income. The problem is not money! You can google those facts all day long.
Microsoft may or may not be an answer to the problem, but the fact that they're getting in there and trying to fix the problem should be embraced.
I encourage you to poke around www.schoolmatters.com, which is a free service provided by Standard & Poors. They specifically ask that you don't take numbers out of context, so I won't post anything here. It's better to see then in context anyhow.
First off, the link says, "Dicks was arrested in New York late on Wednesday at JFK Airport on a warrant from Louisiana" nothing about Dallas. What's up with the warrant from Louisiana? Sounds like some small-timer that wants to stir things up. There's got to be more to the story.
I'm a big-time outspoken conservative and I love to play no-limit hold 'em (and hi/lo omaha). I'd like to state that I am very diappointed that republicans are backing this and I believe this really is just for votes this fall. There are democrat supporters on this as well, so it isn't completely one-sided. Everyone interested in keeping internet gambling alive needs to talk to their representative.
The good news is that this was tried in the late 90's and failed. It passed the house in 2003 but the senate didn't take up the issue. With the rate at which poker in particular is gaining popularity, this should be an issue that can be defeated. I see the senate again not taking up this issue in 2006. Post 2006 elections, it should disappear for a while again. Apparently big money doesn't buy all the votes as online gambling is worth bilions of dollars. AFIAK, as long as we have state lottos and Indian casinos, I don't want to hear anything from the state about why online gambling should be illegal.
Now as for the gentlemen who have been arested... the only good thing is that maybe they can sue and further clarify the law. The fifth circuit says the law only applies to sports. It would be great to see additional courts back this up as I believe they would.
FTFA: "Because it also sells DVDs, Amazon has agreed to studio demands that digital wholesale prices not undercut those of DVDs. As a result, Amazon.com's digital download prices are expected to range from $9.99 to $19.99..."
"Initially, Apple was pushing to sell all films for $9.99, just as it sells songs for a flat price of 99 and all TV shows for $1.99. But due to studio pressure, it will launch with two price points: $9.99 for library titles, $14.99 for new pics in the DVD window."
Neither of these companies will get my business. Why the hell would I pay retail for a download when I can have it in a day or two on physical media with a case and an insert? $4.99, maybe - after all that would compete with "buying" a new release on DirecTV which I can save on my Tivo. This one I really don't get.
I still don't purchase (complete) CD's online - I'll take the packaging. Individual songs make sense since I might only care for a couple tracks on a disc. I've never had the desire to download specific chapters of a DVD. Music downloads are a whole different thing than video. Oh well, I hope the market takes care of this.
I'm late to the thread, but would there be a problem with this scenario:
Use Diebold or whatever computerized machine.
After you confirm your intentions and commit, a receipt would be printed. (maybe two - one for the person to take home?)
You confirm the printout and drop it off with an election official.
Random precincts and/or areas that contest the results could manually count the printouts versus the computer results.
If the printouts don't jive, something is either up with the machines *or* officials are corrupt.
I'm not so sure we can just say "We shouldn't use computers for this". If we could guarantee that the machine was 100% accurate and unhackable, then it would make a lot of sense. I think the problem is getting close to that 100% mark and there are probably ways to do it. I can guarantee that humans have never been 100% accurate and have never 100% honest on a national scale.
The article seems to be /.'d, so here's some additional information on this.
The submitter of this article said, "I would love to see a free wireless mesh that's not dependent on any government or corporation take over the world."
I'd love to see everyone in their dream house with a luxury car getting 250 MPG that's not dependent on any government or corporation.
I think both those statements have the same likelyhood of coming true.
I'd guess that 98% of Americans consider sewer, water, and electrical essential no matter where they live. I would guess that internet access still falls below those three. Fat-pipe internet access may eventually be a true utility that is natuarlly expected to exist anywhere, but it isn't there yet. Even when it does, why would anyone think it wouldn't depend on any government or corporation? All major utilities require BOTH government and corporations. If anything, it will move further away from small local ISP's (like internet and electricity started with). Huge infrastructure with high reliability and reasonable cost demands this type of change.
Having recently come out of a community planning meeting, our small town of 600+ has determined that wireless internet access for all could be a big another way to try and lure younger folks (like myself) that are choosing between other small towns in the area. I'm in the very first stages of feasabiltiy - looking at all the options. The problems of course come down to who pays for it. In the case of our aging community, a lot of folks don't see the need or even want access. That means they don't want any of their tax dollars going to fund it (never mind that my tax dollars fund their senior center and senior bus). On top of that, the local telco isn't very excited to see their individual DSL subscriptions go away either. Then there is the issue of hardware and support. With a town of this size, it is nearly impossible to have 24x7 support. These are just a few of the things that go into the hopper when you're looking at building the infrastructure of small towns which at the end of the day really are what make up the mesh between the 2-5 metro locations in each state. Doing this without local government or a corporate sponsor will be difficult. If this article has any detail (when it's available again!), I hope I can learn some slick new tricks.
The original big wheel is still available. Just got one at Target for our son. WAY COOL!
My kids' cell phones are our old non-working ones... They're still young enough to think that dead flip phones are cool!
Has anyone disected the questions in the poll? It is so easy to twist the numbers by asking carefuly worded questions. For instance, if I were asked if I believe in evolution, I would say, "Yes". I would argue that most people would interpret my response as a vote for science and against creation. Now if the poll follows-up with, "Do you believe in God and that he is responsible for evolution?" or "Do you believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution?" you can interpret my answer in a very different way.
What the hell does science have to do with this anyways? Not really of course, but there are over a million pages of scientific evidence that the government had nothing to do with 9/11 and a third of Americans still believe that the whole thing was a conspiracy. (Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll) The point is that polls are overrated and designed to evoke emotion and shape opinion. Get the facts and decide.
Link on the left of the new blog pops a "HTTP MS IE File DragDrop Embed Code" in Norton. Is this intentional or not? You decide.
e jad-trying-to-infect.html
Check out http://olehgirl.blogspot.com/2006/08/pres-ahmadin
I've read a lot of replies that say we should legalize all drugs. While I haven't made up my mind on this one (seeing the History Channel show on Opium, Morphine and Heroin made me think about this recently) I do have a legitimate question.
If we legalize "hard drugs" why wouldn't we extend this to all drugs. That is to say all prescription drugs such as anti-depression, heart meds, erectile enhancers, and the like? Where do we draw the line. I personally think it is dangerous to have people self-medicating, so I want to konw if there is a legitimate answer to thisi. Maybe it falls back into the category of, "Yes, make them all legal and let the dummies kill themselves but smart folks will still see their doctor for a proper prescription that will tell them how to administer the drugs." That kind of makes sense.
Personally I get some allergy problems in the summer and have taken a prescription drug for years. At this point I know the dose and that one pill should be taken every 24 hours when I'm experiencing problems. I suppose it makes some sense that I should be able to refill as many times as I like right?
So how does this trickle down to kids I wonder? When I was 15, I imagine I would have tried some hard drugs had they been legal. Seeing a rock of crack next to the hard candy would make it seem like trying an atomic fireball or sour gummy. (There's no reason to think they wouldn't be presented like this if all are legal). The fact that they were illegal made me wonder why and that's when I did some research and talked to my parents. Now maybe the "legalize drugs" crowd would say it was my parents fault for not talking to me proactively. In their defense, my parents taught me right and wrong. Doing something illegal was wrong, therefore taking hard drugs was wrong. Maybe legalizing drugs is only for 18 and up?
This is a delicate subject indeed.