So explain to me how a goverment bank, lending money to a goverment entitiy, is saving money.

Sure the goverment overall might make large savings in low interest repayments. But at the same time, the goverment bank with its billion dollars is getting a terrible rate of return on its investment.

So lower expenses with lower income, or normal expenses with normal income.
Out the left pocket and into the right, it makes little differance.

Or is there something i'm missing, like the bank can print its own money?

"Once you emit any electromagnetic radiation outside the bounds of your property, you have no expectation of privacy whatsoever."

What a load of shite.
I believe the US Supreme court decided in a 4-3 decision that there are expectations of privacy, and just because you can observe/listen in a public place doesn't give you a right to do so. (I can't find the case, i believe it was over cops using powerful heat cameras to find and raid weed growing operation houses).

And damned right!.
As it is there are technologies that allow a laser be pointed at a window and you can hear the audio with clarity on the other side.
There are cameras that have limited vision through solid walls. And even your own body leaves behind elements in public places that can be anazlised for private infomation. And that was from what i remember from nearly a decade ago.

Just wait for the portable back scatter machines to be developed, then people will be able to take nude snaps of you if you leave your house...

Privacy isn't a way of life, its a human and legal right. Its even in the Constitution of America, the 4th on the list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Definition_of_.22search.22

Now although this might be a breach of privacy, the fault is on the "victims" because they were transmitting infomation, there was no attempt to keep it private, (the hardware goign out of its way to make it public) so i don't believe google are at fault.

I guess one could say that this case had

*puts on shades*
a Boring outcome

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEH

sounds like their turbo boost feature.
Where you get blazing fast unlimited speed. But when you read the small print, its only for the first 50mb on an http connection, after that you get throttled.

Yeah, US isp's are a joke.

I would say its in part the vested interest in other platforms, but mostly because its Apple.

A decade ago i disliked macs, mostly because they were irrating to use, and their Hockey puck mouse.

Macs died out and that was all good.
They made the ipod. Its great hardware, and was innovative at the time and for a few years after.

Then there was a decided shift to what i consider evil apple. Before where i disliked it over preferances, i now hate it for its ideals.

The iphone came out, you couldn't purchase the hardware except by taking a 2 year contract.

The istore was shown to be the only way to get apps onto the iphone, and apple controled every aspect of that. Control over the apps you installed on your phone was removed.
Lets not forget that the developers using the istore, have to deal with the most retarded systems, my favourite being if a user returns your application you have to provide them a full refund, however the 30% gross sales tax that apple took, they still keep. How is that fair?

Then theres how they prevented any open standards for devices using their itunes. Doesn't matter if it was 100% compatable with itunes, if it wasn't made by apple, it was compatiable. Apple even released an update to itunes just to screw over the compeditors. You can say its in apples rights to do so, and i'd agree, but your not winning any hearts for doing so.

Then theres the rewriting of the iphone/ipod developer EULA, that pulled the rug under adobe, and gives even less freedom to how apps are developed on those products.

Google has been denied any use of analitics for its advertising, meaning its not going to be able to target adds very effectivly at all, making them less cost effective. Apple of course doesn't have that problem, and they have started up their own advertising business for the phone. Of course when google does analitics on ads, its evil. But when apple does it, its not a problem...

Finally as announced last week, apple are dropping support for java, in a move i expect is only the start of what they are doing to adobe.They also are creating OS features for apps that are sold their their istore.

All this to me, shows an orginization that is activtly undermining the freedom of current machines, in an attempt to control it all. If apple had their way, you won't be able to buy a dvd machine without it being made by apple. Otherwise it won't plug into other apple hardware you have (they'll forbid it), you'll only be able to download dvds from the apple store itunes, and browsing the web will be "optimized" for safari only.

Put shortly apple is working to put their fingers in every pie, and shaft any potental compertition.
Now you can claim that its all astroturfing, but go back a decade, and Microsoft was hated for excatly the same reasons. I think MS have since "mellowed" out a lot since then, and a lot of the hate regarding MS has disapated.

I disliked macs because i thought the machine was annoying to use and a toy. That was my preferance.
I HATE apple. I dislike the mac os, but i hate apple. What they are doing will destroy a lot of what i most enjoy with windows machines. Even the ability to build my own machine and uprade as i see fit will be taken away from me if apple have their way.

Apple has a lot to answer for, but i suspect the only answers apple is looking to give are to its shareholders over its quarterly earnings reports over how much money it made from people who don't give a damn and just want something shiny to play with.

Finally thing i'm going to restate.
There are macs, and then there is Apple.
I still dislike macs, and i'll dislike them even more in the future judging by apple's intentions. But i HATE Apple, and what its openly trying to do. You'd have to be blind not to see its trying to control every digital aspect you use.

Since they are adding foreign organic materal into the host, doesn't that mean the host would have to have immune suppressants to stop his body from destroying the cells.

Sounds like its far from a perfect. You might be able to restore functionality to disabled limbs, but at the cost your your immune system.

Here in NZ most of the providers will advertise plans as "downloads as fast as your connection can handle", then an upload cap of 256Kb/s.

The result is that even if you connect to the exchange at 18Mb/s, you'll find using more then 3Mb/s impossible because of the tiny upload.
Each packet you receive by tcp requires confirmation packet to be sent. Each sent packet uses your upload bandwidth.

So by all practical measures, your download speed is limited by its upload speed. As fast as you can download is false advertising, as its as fast as your upload allows.

I'd love to see companies sued over false advertising, as it is misleading the public into thinking they are downloading as fast as possible, when they are only getting a fraction of their true potential.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Having something that is potentially dangerious unsecured, is the act of stupidity or recklessness.
Theres a reason why all guns have a saftey, just as theres reason why all pools should be gated.

In a world where you had pure freedoms to do what you like, it'd be acceptable. So would killing people outright for any or no reason at all.

Theres a compromise involved. If such a drowning did happen, i'd blame both parties involved. The parents for loosing track of their child, and the pool owner for having a pool so easy to access that a child managed to get in and drown.

There are so many threads attempting to justify copyright infringement that its just sickening.

If you "pirate" a game which you didn't pay for, you've done a bad thing.
Stop trying to justify your actions. You CAN"T

You broke the rights and wishes of the owners of the game, so you could profit.

End of story.

You can talk all about the ideas of DRM, or how you wouldn't of purchased it anyway, or how you advertise by word of mouth. But its all excuses.
You don't have a right to use anyones software without permission.

I have far more respect for people who purchase games, or refuse to buy when a publisher goes too far. ("I won't buy a game i can't install more then 3 times")
People who are at least honest about how they break the law often aren't too bad. ("I shouldn't of, but i couldn't afford it")

But people who think its their right to take what other people make for free are dicks. And people who then promote it as their right to "pirate", are scum. ("I'm only willing to pay $5, but since the publishers have no idea how to price, i'll just steal it $0)

Seems to me, the younger the person, the more likely they are to think anything on the internet is a free.

I think the end result of their DRM might hurt their sales more then help, but i still can't blame nintendo for doing what they feel is best. At least at the end of the day, their cartridges are drm free (at least how i'm concerned)

I'm not sure where that question came out of.
The real debate is how apple changed the developer EULA to effectively deny any possibility of a flash developed app running.

History lesson:
The first developer EULA prevented any apps from interperting code. So no emulators, or on the fly compliers. This meant that everything had to run as a native executable.
This denied flash or java from running on the system, in addition to preventing a potential backdoor to the apple shop. (Otherwise you could download a compiler type app (ie: java), and run any program you wished, instead of having your choices controled/taxed by apple's iStore)

Adobe worked around this EULA limitation, by allowing flash developers to create a native executable for the iphone. It was written using flash, but was an actual native execuitable for the iphone.
Apple still controled the iStore, but flash developers could now develop for the iPhone.

Lo and behold, our saviours of the internet, Apple, got around and changed the developer EULA, to explicitly fix that "loophole". Making it against the EULA to write a program that wasn't in objective C (or whatever language apple now demands, i forget)

The ONLY reason i can comprehend for that change to the EULA was to ban the native flash executables. Theres no other practical reason for it.

Adobe went out of their way to support the iPhone, and in return Apple pulled the rug out from under them and banned any use of their application for development/use on the iphone/ipad.
Thats a dick move by apple, the likes of which i haven't seen since Microsoft in the 90's

And to top it off, now they come out telling us how they are only doing whats best for the ipod/iphone. Well that's bloody obvious. Apple want to force as much vendor lockin as possible, and cross-platform tools are the bane to any company trying to force an OS lock-in. Lock-in is great for apple, the iphone, and ipad.
Its terrible for everyone and everything else, including the actual iphone consumers!

I haven't been given mod points in months...
Karam is excellent, i've got the abilitiy to disable advertising...
Just no mod points..

I'd love to know why

The signal in this case is just semi-random light. If that was enough for her to develop a problem, then she was a time-bomb waiting to go off.
If i was passing by, and i sneezed, and she "developed" her problem then, would I be libable for her problems.

Even if the scanner developed her problem (which i don't believe for even a second), i can't see how shes justified in persueing the store. Either learn to live with it, or seek help/aid via normal disabilitiy channels.

Houses, or at least the land they are built on, do increase in value. its a known fact.

As the population grows, the need for houses also grows.
Supply and demand.

Same supply with increased demands means higher prices.

Now although more houses get built to help keep demand in place. These new houses are normally built and developed in new suburbs with minimal cost/infrastructure/community.
Their desirability isn't as high as in an established zone

Properity, both the land and the house its built on (assuming maintance) increase in value as time goes on.
So much so that most goverments have a special tax in place to tax the increase in value from people who buy and sell property.
Here in New Zealand we don't have such a tax and its a concern, due to the fact that a lot of investment capital goes into property investment.

Going slightly off-topic, ubt its worth mentioniong
The problem with property investment is that investing in land does nothing inherntly useful. No new jobs are created, yet a huge amount of money is "invested" in something that generates nothing. The value such an investment "generates" is caused by the action of others who have invested into businesses that actually generate wealth.

As such most goverments have a tax systems in place to encourage development away from such dead-end investments
Anyway, since an artical this long demands a citation, heres wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_tax

sounds like it'd be a good example to use the Chewbacca defence