All large companies do this. From Google to Proctor & Gamble to Microsoft. Microsoft takes much of their revenue in Reno, Nevada to avoid taxes in Washingon.

Tax havens exist from the Cayman Islands and beyond --- Ireland until recently.

Any jackass modding the above ignoramous up is doing so on being completely gullible and is a complete shit-fer-brains.

Amazon would be incompetent to not attempt to avoid taxes.

And the above ignoramous no doubt works for a company whose companies strive to avoid taxes --- you cannot compete in the economy by offering more expensive products than the competition --- not in a global market.

Interesting. Thanks for info.

How does American Law apply to Europeans and people in Germany --- or do US companies carry the American flag with them when they provide services in Europe and such?

I was going to mention Linus Torvalds living here. Damn. Opportunities reduced by increment of 1.

Sound logic ++ The observation the "strict constructionists" made it worth reading. The law should be interpreted literally. Additionally, the prosecutors didn't ask for 20 years --- just one year.

I think understanding what goes viral would be very valuable.

What is the objection to this? Since clearly there is some objection to the study ...

I read the article and do not understand what the objection is.

Job candidates get paid exactly what they are worth. (Possibly more.)

The job candidate decides whether or not he/she will accept the position at the terms presented.

Employment-at-will means you can leave at any time.

I wasn't consciously thinking about media megacorp ownership of tv outlets, radio stations and newspapers. Great point!

You got it, but large media companies would censor YouTube videos too.

You would do a search for a Disney product, film or character and it would come back with maybe 15 results grand total.

Because they wouldn't show YouTube results or fan pages because those could be copyright violations.

Most megacorps --- if they had their way --- would actually destroy their own product and attack their own consumers and fans.

1) PDF version http://devbio.wustl.edu/InfoSo...
2) Commentary, 2004: http://www.jbc.org/content/280...
3) Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

"The Lowry protein assay is a biochemical assay for determining the total level of protein in a solution. The total protein concentration is exhibited by a color change of the sample solution in proportion to protein concentration, which can then be measured using colorimetric techniques. It is named for the biochemist Oliver H. Lowry who developed the reagent in the 1940s. His 1951 paper describing the technique is the most-highly cited paper ever in the scientific literature, cited over 200,000 times."

The method combines the reactions of copper ions with the peptide bonds under alkaline conditions (the Biuret test) with the oxidation of aromatic protein residues. The Lowry method is best used with protein concentrations of 0.01–1.0 mg/mL and is based on the reaction of Cu+, produced by the oxidation of peptide bonds, with Folin–Ciocalteu reagent (a mixture of phosphotungstic acid and phosphomolybdic acid in the Folin–Ciocalteu reaction). The reaction mechanism is not well understood, but involves reduction of the Folin–Ciocalteu reagent and oxidation of aromatic residues (mainly tryptophan, also tyrosine). Experiments have shown that cysteine is also reactive to the reagent. Therefore, cysteine residues in protein probably also contribute to the absorbance seen in the Lowry Assay. [3] The concentration of the reduced Folin reagent is measured by absorbance at 750 nm.[4] As a result, the total concentration of protein in the sample can be deduced from the concentration of Trp and Tyr residues that reduce the Folin–Ciocalteu reagent.

The method was first proposed by Lowry in 1951. The Bicinchoninic acid assay and the Hartree–Lowry assay are subsequent modifications of the original Lowry procedure.

Which is what this boils down to.

There aren't any mysteries here at all.

Then problem goes away!

And the funny thing is, super-complicated password are an anti-security measure.

Because if the password is hard to remember, chances are the user has it written on a piece of paper or a note somewhere..

Normal passwords don't tend to suffer from this problem.

If the super-complex password requires causes the user to write it down or store it on their phone or such, it is hurting security --- not helping it.

Good points. It is has been so long I didn't recall it wasn't Boot Camp pre-Intel and it was slow.

I can't imagine a more vapid and informationless article with no context of history.

That bar graph of a spike starting in 2007 would more likely be related to the release of the iPhone.

Developing for the iPhone required a Mac. That was Apple's "killer app" for the Mac. Anyone wanting to get in to iPhone development had to have a Mac and it started mainstreaming the Mac.

Without the development of the iPhone it is hard to see an particular strong reason for Mac marketshare to start growing (sure you have the characteristic that it is very hard to get malware on a Mac, but that alone doesn't make up for the lack of apps or games, which was more far severe back in 2007 and not quite as bad today. The selection of software on a Mac is okish today, but in 2007 it was downright terrible.)

Pre-Intel (2007 +/-), the Mac did have Bootcamp (the ability to load and boot Windows on the machine) and software development was about the same before Intel and after, it isn't like casual developers are writing in assembly language --- the compiler (usually) takes care of all the fine details and endianess really only enters the equation when reading files with specific byte ordering of values.