"I bet you'll have a hard time finding anyone running integrated graphics in a home built machine, certainly not one running a top-tier CPU in it."

As a kernel developer I have scripts running all day that compile new kernels, boot VM's to them, and run some tests. The faster the better. I wouldn't say no to lower utility bills either even if it's not the first thing I look at.

But in any case, for graphics, the integrated stuff is fine. And Intel's involvement in Linux graphics development has meant their stuff has been among the best supported for a while. (Maybe that's changed lately, I haven't kept up). I usually build my own machines (partly exactly because I seem to recall it being hard to find pre-built desktops with higher performance that could get usable graphics without the need for proprietary drivers. Which may not be a factor for others but I want to be able to debug problems on the latest upstream kernel without worrying about what some binary driver might be doing.)

So there's one small counterexample, to your first statement if not the second. (I usually get a better CPU but nothing "extreme".)

Shrug. If it's projected on a screen in a movie theater, it's a movie. If it happens on a stage in a theater, let's call it a play. That doesn't make it a good movie, or good theater. If it's stuck on a pedestal in an art gallery, let's call it art, OK? Why is that a problem?

And personally I think sticking it on a pedestal under a spotlight in an art gallery adds an extra dimension of hilarity to the whole idea. I like it.

Well, this is primarily something to be displayed in a gallery so I suppose it makes sense to make something printable that could be stuck on the wall next to it or included in the exhibit catalog, or whatever. And then why not throw it on the web site. This is a problem for you?

Fair enough. Note, though, that most users get their kernels from their distro, who build them from source that hopefully they got out of git or otherwise verified.

Also in theory it should be easy to verify the tarballs that were distributed. It'll be interesting to see whether that turns up anything.

Open source? I think you overestimate the difficulty of malicious modification of binaries.

Yes, that would explain the record high inflation we've had since the start of the recession:

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?graph_id=50467&category_id=0

Err, wait. OK, but surely exchange rates went off a cliff? Um, OK, I'm not turning up much there either....

Googling.... From http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-dg06132007.html, "In 2003, the most recent year for figures, a total 16,874 U.S. SMEs exported to China." Too lazy to find something more up-to-date.

And if you want to help exports, you could worrying about the dollar being to *low* against foreign currencies....

Compared to other countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

Historical revenues for US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Revenue_and_Expense_to_GDP_Chart_1993_-_2008.png

Not actually true; given steady (across business cycles) income growth, you can keep spending more than you take in while keeping your debt load (hence debt service) a constant percentage of your income. That is in fact what most countries do.

That's not to say the US doesn't have a long-term debt problem: mainly, as I understand it, we need to get health care expenses under control and raise revenues. But it's a solvable problem, which is why people have continued to be willing to loan us money at very low rates (and probably will despite any downgrading); people who are actually betting their money on it think we're extremely likely to figure this out.

But I know the rest of you walk on water...

Uh, no, we just don't answer the damn phone. That isn't next to impossible. It isn't walking on water. It isn't even going on a diet or quitting smoking. It's easy.

Really, I understand that 99.99% of driving is boring as hell. The other .01% includes moments when you see something in front of you that you didn't see a second ago. In a lifetime of driving, eventually one of those moments may coincide with one of the seconds when you were paying attention to your phone.

As long as you're piloting that your 2 tons of car on the public road, the rest of us would appreciate it if you would please keep your attention on what you're doing.

Well, that ignores the question.

Following some links. A fan of this Peter Schiff guy? You realize he a) appears to have a background in accounting, not economics, b) seems to have his own self interest (selling gold??), c) seems to cling to a lot of ideas that most economists consider long ago discredited. Anyone else you follow for analysis of the economy?

Some sources I'd recommend: The Economist, blogs by Krugman (or pick your favorite actual economist). Agree or disagree, some understanding of a wider variety of viewpoints is helpful.

Right, but the opportunity cost in this case is:

      (income from investing) - (income from stuffing cash under your mattress)

The second number is deflation.

And you're claiming that increasing deflation *increases* the opportunity cost.

At the very least, that's a claim that needs some convincing evidence!

If there is deflation, then I can get a few percent a year just by stuffing my cash under a mattress. Why would that increase the incentive to invest my money?

And I always thought that was the absolute rule too, so when I researched my most recent printer purchase I was surprised how much price-per-page varied within the two categories--some inkjet printers are reported as quite cheap to run, and some lasers quite expensive--and the printer I ended up with was an inkjet for which consumer reports claimed around $.02/page for black-and-white text (if I remember correctly--I tried to check that just now on their website and found they'd switched to using a monthly cost based on average home use).

Look over to the right of the download page. Note where it says "To install Fedora using a USB stick, follow these instructions."

(Also note the command line version of the instructions amount to just dd'ing your choice of iso images onto a usb stick.)

Would it? We talk as if China held most of the US's debt, but of course they don't (about 10% if http://www.businessinsider.com/who-does-the-us-owe-its-debt-to-2011-4 is right), so the market for the securities is huge, and why wouldn't more buyers suddenly take interest if the price dropped a little?

Well, of course it's a bit of a ridiculous scenario to start off with anyway.

Oh, good grief, you're talking about this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/17/us/politics/17budget.html?hpw

No, that's petty political brinkmanship, it's nothing to do with economic fundamentals. The federal government is perfectly capable of paying its obligations, but parties in congress love to play these games with the debt limit to put pressure on the other side.

No, debt service is under 10% of the federal budget, if I remember right (less than 2% of gdp?).

You're almost certainly thinking of the *debt* to gdp ratio, which is very close to 100%--but that's not a critical milestone (according to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html, Japan's debt-to-gdp ratio was 225% in 2010, and people are still willing to lend to the Japanese government.).