To, Somewhere in the universe there is likely to be intelligent life.

Nice planet.Primary Indigenous lifeforms leave a bit to be desired.

Most scientists I've met and I worked with them every day, were not the most adept at anything outside their realm and would be the next to last choice. Last choice would be religious leaders. Many religions including Christians teach good concepts that if we all lived by them, the world would be a better place. Their basics OTOH leave much to be desired, while some are downright violent In basics and practice. "Join us or die" might not be a good greeting for a species most likely more advanced than our own. Then again as in sci-fi, they may just be looking for a place filled with useless critters that would never be missed, so they could eliminate them and settle in.

Sorry, but people and even large multinational corporations are staying with XP as it does all the want and does it well. When you take the cost of the new OS, the cost of peripheral soft ware, down time for training,cost of thousands of PCs, cost of installing PCs, reconfiguring networks, the cost runs into many millions of dollars The individual will need to purchase a newer, faster computer with more RAM and more disk space. New computers are cheap but they will likely not only need new software, but new printers as software support for those old printers is no longer available. New printers are cheap, but ink costs a fortune.Those people will stick with XP and spew crap as long as they run. I was a project manager and consultant. I do know how these people think. If it saves me a buck, I'll stick with it and screw the rest of the world. They could care less as to what happens because MS tried to force them to change. They will just blame MS for any problems. If they have to upgrade, it will not be to MS!

There will be hundreds of thousands of copies still running..if not millions. That leaves a hole to infect other more modern systems. XP does all those user need, they shouldn't have to update to protect some one else. There is only one responsible for infections via XP and that is MS.

That is, IF the programmers and administration are willing to spend the money and take the time to bulletproof the code. to do so, would take at least a second team to do nothing but debug the code as in FDA validation. Every step had to be proven and probably cost as much or more than the original programming. This is far from what hey required for the ACA, Had we tried to pass off that kind of code, the fines and jail sentences would have been huge. The Govt violated their own FDA requirements for rolling out that code,

It's no wonder why science is failing. Students "in general" take the easy courses. They earn degrees the would have been better off financially had the went to work right out og high school. I taught while working as a GA on my quest for a masters. This was intro to CS. The lack of knowledge was ...difficult to describe. That these people were going to vote4 with equal weight to intelligent people is scary. The came out of college or a university with an education, but in many cases no more intelligent than when they went in. The old saying about sending a Jackass to college and you get an educated Jackass. Gone are the days when a degree helped. No t5he degree needs to be in a specific field and specifically a science field. They need to make passing a tough money management course a prerequisite for entering college to prevent these huge tuition loans. Can't get a job with a degree so borrow another 50 - 75 thousand for an advanced degree in the same field?. It's hard to imagine people like that ever getting out of high school. Sure college is expensive. I quit a well above average job to earn a degree and earned a full ride GA for a masters. I figured $60,000 a year was probably on the low side, but I paid for it (up front). If you can't afford it, wait till you can and make certain you are cut out for college! This approach would have kept tuition at an affordable level and a lot of people out of debt!

I have to ask myself, what does each have to gain? We know the Kotches are after money and that creates jobs, lots of jobs. What does soros gain? Remember what he said his hobbies were in an interview? Playing wit the the currencies and economies of countries. He bragged about having caused the collaps of economies of countries. Think of the misery that caused. He bragged that his next target was to cause the colapse of the US economy. Think of that the next time he offers help. How the kotches can boost coal as it's on the way oun by natural selection? Any coal increases would only be temporary. Gas is better for the utilities and consumers. Natural gas has become very cheap! and is far less poluting than coal. NG is only 10% of what it was a little over a decade ago, or so. Wind generation of power is approaching par with conventional power. Particularly the newer installations. The Gratiot County (Michigan) wind farm has apparently been making money without subsidies since its inception. So renewables are approaching the point where they dont't need subsidies. Last year, we reached the point where China replaced the US as the #1 importer of energy and the US passed Saudi Arabia as the #1 exporter. AND, many renewables reached parity with fossile fuels. There are still many renewable companies left to go under, but we've reached some major milestiones. Solar is still very expensive. Other than coal, the interests of thr kotch Brothers are more in line with middle class Americans. Their standars of living may be different, but their overall goals benefit us as well as it does them. Soros? From his own statements in that interview, "Not so much!" It's on the net, if it, like many documents hasn't been scrubbed.

Our education system has been failing a lot more subjects than IT. Although I know the majority on here are liberals, school is not a place for indoctrination into any political belief as that is time taken from learning the important subjects like science, history, and English. We need history to prevent redoing the mistakes of the past. We need to be able to construct our writing into logical order, so people will understand what we are talking about and to get our point across no matter what your political beliefs. Being able to out shout the opposition wins no argument and loses converts. "Common core" is far worse than bad. Their approach to math makes it overly complicated, they are weak on science and strong on political correctness. IOW they teach kids to be meek and obedient little elves. They kill creative thinking which is essential for science. Get hold of a teaching guide for common cor. Don't listen to either side. Read the manual and decide for your self. If our school system is poor with science, it will look great compared to common core. They are dumbing school down to the lowest common denominator and making it a cheering section for the entitlement crowd.

And that is just one of many! I sometime think the average person could not understand science were they given the tools. They do not have the mental make up to understand science. Even when you take them through step-by-step, they get lost. They don't have to do the math. They can accept you do, but given all the numbers, step-by-step they still don't understand. When it reaches that level, it's not only frustrating, but a lost cause.

The point is, the general public has NO reference point on which to judge any particular science topic. No, they don't have to be capable of doing that science themselves, or doing the calculations to believe. If they understand enough science to know how it works then they can have enough of an understanding to evaluate the theory. I got into a discussion about AGW in a blog and made the statement that I understood the theory and data. One woman, who obviously didn't, got upset, claimed she could understand the data as well as I and became downright angry when I asked her why then were her conclusions counter to what I said, and mainstream science had to say. I'm far from being an expert, but my entire education has been based on science, not the liberal arts. I admire artists and musicians, or even business men with MBAs who chose their fields because they like those fields. With the exception of the MBA which has potential they realize and understand the likelihood of their chosen field supporting them in the style to which they'd like to become accustomed to is close to nil. They love their field and understand the prospects. The key words are love and understand. However there is absolutely nothing in these fields to aid in understanding science. Many chose the arts because most of the courses are easier and contain very little math. When asked why she didn't choose science because an OWS demonstrater stated, "because those courses are too hard. I graduated at 50 and earned a full ride for my masters in CS as a GA. Unfortunately a degree does not make a person intelligent, it just shows they have been educated. For many years you only needed a degree. This ended up in many useless degrees that taught very little useful information. Gone now are the days of "any degree". The degree needs to be in a specific field, or closely associated field. Still. students run up horrendous debt, earning these useless degrees. No jobs? Continue on and earn an advanced degree in the same useless field and double the debt! I think they need to make practical decision making and basic economics mandatory before allowing entry into any college, or university. I taught many students as a GA, I wondered how many of them ever made it into the university.. Their ability to solve practical problems was abysmal. Out of 200, mostly business students, I had maybe 10 who could type. This was intro to CS, something most on here would find very boring. It was hoe to turn 'em on, turn 'em off, load a program, run a word processor, spread sheet, paint program, and combine the results into a paper. IOW an add for a job with some imaginary company. The best one was for a condom company. The guy was a good writer and understood the assignments. He received a "A". There were probably 10 in there who weren't going to make it. A course, most 5th graders could ace and I had 10 college students who were going to fail. I had one Einstein who took a girls disk out of the computer and turned it in as his own work...with out even changing the name on the paper. He sat between my boos and me in a small, hot room. I'll swear we could have put a drip pan under him and got enough grease to make candles, but he never cracked, so all we could do was dock him (and her) a grade, Her for sharing homework, and him for mistakenly turning in the wrong disk. So, I can well understand why far more than the majority do not understand science.

I hired in as a sys admin. In a year, I was a Developmental analyst ( fancy name for programmer), and after a total of less than 3 years I was a major project manager. (about 5 pay scales above programmer) As I understood the work flow, I never had to go the call center route, nor did I hire in at starting wage scale. So I was 3 years ahead on the pay scale when I started Most places want people who have a broad skill set and do not want someone who is a programmer and wants to stay a programmer. They want some one with the broad skill set, who is a fast learner, has the desire and ambition to move up the food chain as rapidly as possible. If you want to stay a programmer there are only a few locations where that is possible and in most industry, programmers are a long way from the top pay scale. Be careful of "burn 'em and turn 'em" companies. They milk you for all your ideas, then instead of a promotion, show you the door and hire some one new for more ideas...and repeat.

We've known for a long time that ethanol is a polluter. Yes, it lets us recycle CO2, bu that's the only good thing about it. Besides, it takes land out of food production and reduces food for animals, raising meat prices.

I can purchase a 500 Gig SSD for less than a 500 Gig Hd as of 4 or 5 years ago. That's plenty of high speed room for the OS, Program, and mail.

At least to start, the same group the Tobacco companies use to combat the health issues were hired to spread confusion and dissent against AGW. Now some of the oil companies "appear" to be coming around. IOW, they see the science as concrete enough they do not want to be seen on the losing side.