I am surprised it took this long to happen, but it was inevitable since the industry switched their ATM's over to Windows:

IBM bids OS/2 farewell

When will people learn ... windows is bad for you !

I think you meant to post this on DailyKos or HuffPo instead of Slashdot comrade

Notice that the exploit is not so much an adobe one as it is a windows one (http://www.symantec.com/business/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2009-121422-3337-99).

Badly designed OS's let badly designed apps, do bad things.

What is surprising is that an Operating System vendor (Microsoft) has so poorly designed it product to allow an application (often running in user space) to access proctected resources.
This violates the very definition of an Operating System, and what worse is that MS has done absolutely nothing to address these issues despite the vast resources at their disposal.

Interesting, but I don't get your point about #10, the way I read it, its not so much about scaling up to a large physical country (or population for that matter), but rather balancing a large number of varying opinions (ie. factions) an trying to give them a more equitable voice via a representative government.

As for your point about Adam Smith and the sub-prime mortgages, this is clearly the fault of the government for not properly safeguarding the mortgages via oversight, which it has a very poor track record in doing in general, which gives me one less reason to trust them with overseeing health care.

As for your last point, the middle class in the 50's payed somewhere around 20% income tax. Adding mandatory health care to the mix (still waiting for you to sight the constitutional authority on this) is still yet to be seen, but I would venture to guess it will be an extra 10%, and as will only get higher, yielding an average tax rate of about 30% (top rate of 70), which is what we had in the mid 1970's, and we all know how good it was for the middle class back then. And don't forget all the fees, state income taxes, sales taxes, etc added on to that.
And I believe the middle class was financially at its strongest from the mid 1980's to the mid 2000's, with a maximum income tax rate of around 35% for the period !!!

In good faith, I will retract my racism assertion, and apologize for calling you an idiot.

In order to move forward on this issue, distractions such as this must be off the table.

As to you second point, I am glad to see that we agree on a more reasonable number of uninsured. This fact alone just chopped the projected cost in half.

In general, I agree with you that it looks bad for even that many people to be without insurance, but here is the catch: What constitutional power does the government have to force anyone to get insurance (hint: a number less than one). And even worse, how many of the uninsured DO NOT WANT insurance at all ? Can you legally force them to take it, even if they don't want it? For those who need it but can't afford it, we can start with income tax credits to make it more affordable.

Lastly, back to my last point, most companies value their employees, so they will tend to keep them happy, if not they tend to go out of business (by the way I have worked for more than one company that switched carriers due to employee complaints, I only mentioned the one above because I was closely involved with a dispute with the carrier).

So to sum up single payer is a supremely bad idea for the US. Sure it may work in some European countries, but they have populations vastly smaller than most states here, and often have extremely strict immigration policies. But lastly, I encourage you to read the Federalist Papers and Adam Smith instead of Krugman.

The only hope for a lasting democracy is a vibrant middle class, which will be buried by a single payer system.

I will be blunt only be cause your post deserves it:

Both you and Paul Krugman are idiots.

1. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with race. My circle of friends have an informal rule about arguing in which you automatically loose when invoking Nazis to bolster your position. This should also apply to bringing up racism as well (P.S. Just so you know, I am not white).
2. About half of the 40-50 million uninsured your are talking about are foreign nationals, the vast majority of which are Illegals.

I will split the difference with you about your last point. I have personally had problems with a carrier which did not properly honor it's claims, but my company was able to switch to another one because we had a choice. Single payer WILL (as admitted by many democrats including Barney Frank and Mr. Obama) eventually drive out all private sector carriers.

What was left out of the article is the obvious, virtually all of these platforms run some variation of MS windows .... tick, tick, tick .....

Sorry, but Google have lost their CompSci mind on this one, most likely to placate MBAs who have taken the place over.
I specifically have issues with the following statement from the Google OS Blog:

"However, the operating systems that browsers run on were designed in an era where there was no web."

Yeah. And most OS's in use today were also designed when there were not graphics cards as well. The exception to this is Microsoft, who tightly coupled the OS to a GUI.
Now any decent CompSci grad knows tight coupling is an extremely bad thing, so the decision to pursue an OS tightly coupled to the web (which we all know means Google's version of the web), will be a disaster.

In the flamebait but true category, this is further evidence why scripting languages are not suitable for most application development ... because they are much more brittle than a traditionally compiled application. True you can site examples of traditionally compiled applications breaking due to missing dependencies, in which (like with this Perl example) the underlying deployment platform is a fault, but this type of problem is much more common with scripting languages (Perl, PHP, Python, etc), and vastly harder to debug and defend against.