Interesting. I guess that means Radar from M*A*S*H* was their IT guy. Never thought of it that way before.

I'm generally bipartisan, and I don't take any issue with the point you're trying to make here (very clearly the President relied on others to "get" Bin Laden; he didn't infiltrate the hideout himself....).

However, the article you pasted is chock full of weasel words, sarcasm, "quotes", and general contempt. It's difficult - very difficult - to take articles like this seriously; at least for those of us who are what "moderate" used to be. Why don't people ever seem to understand that the facts speak for themselves, and pointing them out without snark is an elegant weapon for a civilized age?

Here's the utter, unequivocal, honest truth:

I don't care, or at least don't spend a moment worrying, other than looking into interesting science behind what's happening. So far as I know, there is literally nothing I can do about it that I don't already do. I recycle, I drive a car that gets pretty good gas mileage, am intelligent enough to know that ditching that car for a hybrid will be a net loss in efficiency, I vote responsibly (if I can), I don't waste much, and what I do waste I try to mitigate. I pick up litter. I smoosh my beer cans. I shower instead of bathe. It's about all I can do, and I'm good with that, and refuse to feel guilty about the rest of the world. What it comes down to is be personally responsible, but at the end of the day, don't worry, be happy, and if the reaper cometh, greet him with open arms, for that is reality.

I had a friend who used to preach about the conditions in El Salvador. According to her hands-on stories, it was and is a very rough place, and she's probably right about that. I always thought that sucked, and if true, the stories of what the CIA et. al. did in the 80s are disturbing. But I have 2 kids to feed right here in my very own house. I can't care about El Salvador because it's too far outside my monkeysphere. Sorry. As always, when something affects me locally, I'm gonna ride things out and look out for my family, and I guess I just assume other people will too. Sure I'll donate to the Red Cross, but that's why I donate to them; they're equipped to deal with not only the problems, but also the sympathy of it all. And I'm not gonna feel guilty about that for 1 second. If I did, where does it end? Am I the whole world's martyr? Fuck that.

Some smarty-pants out there comes up with a "here do this everybody!" with resounding science, or barring that, something that won't take food off my table or put too many pains in my ass, I'm on board, but I'm not sacrificing my ability to provide for my wee ones to go all activist. Just not gonna.

They actually do a chemical castration in some cases. Pretty interesting stuff, actually. I think CA was the first to do so.

http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=12443091

Actually, I'm going to correct myself. The best deterrent is education. Folks who can get what they want by following the rules more easily than breaking the rules won't break the rules. Generally speaking, anyway.

There are those nutjobs that like being bad for the sake of being bad, but nothing's gonna deter those jerks.

Any type of crime deterrent has two factors in play. First, of course, is just how punishing the punishment is. Second, though, and it always seems to get overlooked, is how likely you are to get caught.

As an example, take piracy. We just saw a few stories where some dude has to pay about 4 krillion billion dollars for 2 and 1/3 songs. People still download all the time, because the likelihood of being "caught" is very low.

If you knew that you ran the risk of death for shoplifting, but there was a lottery's chance in hell of you getting caught, the significance of the punishment goes way, way down.

Then, you also have human nature that mucks further with this. Most criminal masterminds are only genius in their own heads, so they commit the perfect crime, with officer not-so-friendly knocking on their door 20 minutes later. Human nature STILL mis-represents the risk, further diluting the deterrent value of a punishment.

The best deterrent is decreasing the chance you'll get away with it, which is pretty obvious when you think about it.

I wonder if there's some mastermind that triggered a crime to occur after his death brings your number to 99.999% instead.

I would say that if your 3 year old prefers the iPad, he's probably getting that tendency from you, making it a moot point. Otherwise, I take no issue with what you said; it's all true. It also contributes to why the iPad is "nicer", "cooler"... or just plain "better".

Those are all good reasons to make a purchase, certainly. It doesn't take away the fact that if it was an ugly brick that smelled like burned plastic, nobody would buy it, and that is my point. There are devices out there that generally do what the iPad does for cheaper, but it's just plain a better looking device.

I don't know why people are arguing that "look" or, yes, "status" don't factor into the purchase, because it absolutely does. And there's not a thing wrong with that.

When you get to this level of "status" you're not talking about being impressed; you're talking about a minimum qualification to be considered "cool". Young folks are never about "stuff makes me cool" they are about "not having stuff makes me uncool". Quite a difference.

When you get to be a young grownup, some demographics are actually cooler by what they DON'T have (TV, nice jeans, contact lenses, mustache-free fingers, etc). Yeah, I'm lookin right at you, hipsters.

When you approach middle-aged, you're not "successful" unless you have at least the ability to buy nice things, and most people will splurge once in a while to prove they CAN buy those nice things. It's less about impressing friends or keeping up with the Joneses (though it happens) and more about proving to yourself that you have "earned" nice things.

I don't think any of these are bad, so long as you don't make dumb financial decisions getting there. In fact, I've fit all three of these categories at some point in my life. We'll see what I do when I get old, other than forget I own half the things I'm buying now.

I don't think you were "bragging" in a bad sense of the word. But those things you listed had other, cheaper, non-Apple options, too. It's not just Apple, either, high end Droid phones get bandied about quite often, as well, as does anything that hits the advertising airwaves.

I do think that this factor goes into any moderate to large purchasing decision, and the wise man is aware of these tendencies, allowing him to properly evaluate what "status" (also read as "fancy" or "cool") is worth to him. It's just the nature of the human beast.

It's not always about impressing other people. "Status" doesn't necessarily mean you're trying to fit in with the richies, or impress some fool. I don't have nice things because I want the neighbors to be jealous; I have nice things because I like having nice things. It's a "self-status", so to speak, and I think it factors into any major purchase we make. In other words, I buy sleek, shiny, fun things, and while I do like to show them off, I just like lookin at em sometimes, and I also like seeing my friends' toys too. It's still status, even if it's just for personal satisfaction or to see who has the neatest gadgets; without the intention of saying "look how better than you I am now!".

Otherwise, we'd all be living well under our means with the bare minimum we need, and our economy would pretty much shit the bed.

Hell, this even translates to something as simple as the food we eat; we could live just fine on protein shakes and a legume once in a while. But that's not the way our society works: we like nice food, fancy clothes, fast cars, shiny boats, well-kept lawns, etc. All those things are for status (self or acquaintance related) and overall satisfaction, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Anyway, the point is this: nobody *needs* an iPhone, but lots of people like an iPhone, and purchase based on their desire for a neat, sleek, fancy phone that does lots of cool things reliably. Other phones meet some of those needs, or all of them, but they don't have an Apple logo, and I'd say a TON of people allow that logo to tip the scales when making a decision.

Yes.

I'm not knocking the hardware or those that purchase it, but status is absolutely a part of the decision to go with Apple devices. It's much the same as having a nice car versus an old yet reliable Ford Pinto. People want features, reliability, and the "look". Apple offers all 3, and I know it was a factor in *my* purchase. I can be honest with myself, too.

Agreed, if you can. Best advice I have is to not let it get to the point where you have to quit to avoid insanity.

Best to find a job, then quit. Better to quit, and then find a new job. Not so good to burn the place down over a stapler. :)

Your words are very true. The only problem is we really don't have much say in the matter, other than to keep our skills and resumes updated, and be prepared for opportunities as they come.

The days of 50 years, a pocketwatch, and a pension are long over.

Unions can be very powerful, but there aren't the checks and balances that are needed. My experiences with unions have been 100% awful; they don't care about me, as an individual, at all. They just cared about keeping their overtime and career paths in place.

Having had GOOD bosses, at good companies, I can say I'd MUCH rather work with a boss who cares about me than a union rep who doesn't.

This isn't the 50s anymore, and not every industry needs unions. I think unions make MUCH more sense for the blue-collar worker; there are safety and wage issues galore. In a call center? Not so much; tracking a bathroom break isn't something the union will stop. Call a CenturyLink to ask one of their reps if you don't believe me.