Poor controls mean that antibiotics are leaking out and getting into drinking water. They are in the fish and cattle that we eat, and global travel and exports mean bacteria are traveling.

In both of these announcements, a significant amount of the costs to develop the drugs were opportunity, or time, costs. They are the returns that might be expected, but that investors went without, while a drug was in development. When a drug company invests in research and development, it is tying up money that could otherwise be invested elsewhere. In this announcement, the Tufts Center says that $1.2 billion of the $2.6 billion is time costs.

In 2010, a systematic review of studies that looked at the cost of drug development was published in Health Policy. The review found 13 articles, with estimates ranging from $161 million to $1.8 billion (in 2009 dollars). Obviously, methodology matters.

Movie isn't out yet. If 200 security experts said that it's fairly accurate, can you at least *wait* to judge it?

And yes, it makes sense there would be physical fighting.Virtual altercations often become physical.

It appeared that it was not "diversity" (having equal numbers of men and women) that mattered for a team's intelligence, but simply having more women. This last effect, however, was partly explained by the fact that women, on average, were better at "mindreading" than men.

Almost every time they started to speak, they were interrupted or shot down before finishing their pitch. When one had a good idea, a male writer would jump in and run with it before she could complete her thought.

Sadly, their experience is not unusual.

Suspecting that powerful women stayed quiet because they feared a backlash, Professor Brescoll looked deeper. She asked professional men and women to evaluate the competence of chief executives who voiced their opinions more or less frequently. Male executives who spoke more often than their peers were rewarded with 10 percent higher ratings of competence. When female executives spoke more than their peers, both men and women punished them with 14 percent lower ratings. As this and other research shows, women who worry that talking “too much” will cause them to be disliked are not paranoid; they are often right.

So if they had instead asked, 'Will Microsoft get it wrong this time?' the answer would still be no?

Only three commissioners may be members of the same political party. None of them may have a current financial interest in any FCC-related business.

A bill can also become law if the president does nothing and leave it sit for ten days or longer if congress is in session. It will automatically become law then. If congress is not in session, then it sort of disappears and does not become law.

There are often very good reasons to not be nice. The adage "Nice guys finish last" proves itself much more often than not.

Being civil = far less results.

Indiscriminate niceness is overrated.

"Unlike others, this is a film about a real person, not a stereotype—a real guy with real problems thrust into a real situation," says Mark Abene. "The technology—and the disasters—in the film were real, or at least plausible.

Director Michael Mann worked closely with Kevin Poulsen in researching, writing, and shooting the film. Like Hemsworth's character, Poulsen spent time in prison for his hacking exploits, and Mann says his input was invaluable.

there is actually *no* prohibition [of blasphemy] in the Quran... the Quran decrees no earthly punishment for blasphemy — or for apostasy (abandonment or renunciation of the faith), a related concept.

Koran (4:89) - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."

Is there some problem with the translation? Seems fairly clear to me.

... this verse also only commands Muslims to fight those who practice oppression or persecution, or attack the Muslims.

... These verses were revealed by God to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), at the time when Muslims were attacked by the non-Muslims of Makkah on a regular basis.

The only source in Islamic law that all Muslims accept indisputably is the Quran. And, conspicuously, the Quran decrees no earthly punishment for blasphemy — or for apostasy (abandonment or renunciation of the faith), a related concept. Nor, for that matter, does the Quran command stoning, female circumcision or a ban on fine arts.

Tellingly, severe punishments for blasphemy and apostasy appeared when increasingly despotic Muslim empires needed to find a religious justification to eliminate political opponents.

The Quran praises other prophets — such as Abraham, Moses and Jesus — and even tells Muslims to “make no distinction” between these messengers of God. Yet for some reason, Islamist extremists seem to obsess only about the Prophet Muhammad.

Even more curiously, mockery of God — what one would expect to see as the most outrageous blasphemy — seems to have escaped their attention as well.

Before all that politically motivated expansion and toughening of Shariah, though, the Quran told early Muslims, who routinely faced the mockery of their faith by pagans: “God has told you in the Book that when you hear God’s revelations disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them.”

Just “do not sit with them” — that is the response the Quran suggests for mockery. Not violence. Not even censorship.

LV: Why do you think some distributions managed to adopt Systemd without any major fights, and then others like Debian had very intense debates and resignations? Is it just because it’s a distro with more political processes?

LP: Arch Linux probably did it the quickest way. You know, distributions attract different kinds of people, of course. If you looked at Arch Linux, it attracted very progressive kinds of people – like power users. They’re progressive and want to make the best out of their computers. So it was easy for them to adopt.

Then if you look at Gentoo, for example, they still haven’t done Systemd as default. They used to be like Arch Linux is now – they used to be the young people who adopted things quickly. But the Gentoo people aged, and they became more conservative.

And Debian is probably an even more conservative bunch. Debian is a really old project, and many people from back in the old days are still active on it. So they have longer release cycles. And Fedora always defined itself as being on the bleeding edge, of course, so it was easier. Well, not that easy – some people don’t realize that inside of Fedora and inside of Red Hat, there were lots of fights. So it’s to do with the culture around the various distributions. And Slackware are the ultra conservatives!

If five years from now, as you suggest, Systemd is an integral part of every mainstream distribution, and you wont use any mainstream distribution because of that, then I would suggest the common point of failure is obvious...