Yeah, go back in time and pre-order one of those shapeokos before they close the pre-ordering.

Maybe yours don't.

Grammar fascists unite!

Don't assume regulation involves a loss. Some regulations exist solely to make a profit. (speed traps, war on some drugs, probably others). Golly Gee comcast, that'll be $1M for blocking voicepulse.com's VOIP service, head on down to city hall and get in line with the property tax payers at the cashiers office...

The big problem with getting the locals to do the net neutrality thing, is in the USA, corporations and govt have merged at all levels. At the local level, why would some dumpy local bookstore want people to be able to access amazon.com? Why would any of the dumpy local antique shops want people to be able to access ebay.com? Why would the local fishwrap (newspaper) want people to be able to access news.google.com? I'm struggling to think of a local business that would benefit from allowing the unwashed masses to access their competitors over the internet...

You're correct in that too many people on the left seem to think the purpose of stimulus is just to "save/create jobs." But too many people on the right use that to blind themselves and sit comfortable in the idea that the invisible hand will magically solve everything without that pesky gubmint stealin' their tax monies.

The primary benefit of stimulus should be infrastructure. Putting people to work and keynsian multipliers are all just gravy. Unfortunately infrastructure has become is all the more important in the modern era where fear of dinging a companies quarterly earnings report has choked of most private investment in the future. Keynes didn't get that either. You don't build something just to build it, you need to have an eye toward future value.

The railroads, telegraph, telephone, interstate, and internet were all funded, at least in part, with public money and those investments have paid for themselves many times over. As per your example, the Panama Canal was a publicly funded project that probably paid for itself (hard to quantify the cost of all those malaria deaths). Similar investments in domestic energy, and wireless communications should have started 20 years ago. There's nothing wrong, and a lot right, about the government building something and then selling or leasing it to private companies with an agreement to serve the public good.

Stimulus certainly can be a good idea. Now as for the way the current administration has been spending that money... Umm... Not so good.

I noticed the same on my mac. With a set of eight CPU graph meters in the menu bar, they're almost always evenly pitched anywhere from idle to 100%, with a few notable exceptions like second life, some photoshop filters, and firefox of all things.

When booted into Win, more often than not I have two cores pegged high, and the others idle. Getting even use out of all cores is the exception, not the rule.

Have you perhaps encountered a Windows license limit? Most Windows licenses have a two cpu limit.

--
Welcome to the world of "computer says no".

Personal electronics ban is trying to regulate stupidity. Won't help, it will only hurt those of us who don't fly large aircraft which have working toys. I think Congress needs to do a bit of flying during the summer in singles or light twins while dodging thunderstorms with no onboard wx RADAR and see if that smartphone (or netbook) is worth it's weight in gold for near live RADAR updates.

I just hope they keep practicing their regular navigation/IFR from time to time, or they might get completely lost or at least partially blind.

I only hope that you are correct. I don't trust anything in this bill, and my fear is that it will simply add an extra layer of bureaucracy on top of an already onerous level of red tape and management of the whole system.

The problem with insurance companies is that the patients aren't the customers, they are merely the product. In order to clean up the insurance companies, it is the patients that need to become customers again. This bill did nothing to solve that problem at all.

Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, since I practically no medical schooling, but there have been suggestions by certain medical professionals (names elude me at the moment) that cancer cells could be the body's final (and potentially fatal) attempt to correct other, seemingly unrelated health issues. This would also explain why cancer can return after it has gone into remission.

If so, while this technique would stop the cancer cells from spreading, it may not address the cause of the cancer. I suppose we'll find out if/once the treatment becomes mainstream.

Aside from oversaturating target cells with specific drugs, you would probably use a combination approach - use different surface markers to guide the nanoparticles and use different targets for the siRNAs, so that even with the high mutation rate of cancer cells, the population as whole can't escape.

in a democracy, the majority rules, and the rest have to live with it.

in open source, if a group makes a decision and you don't like it, you can take all of their work, fork it, and do what you want. even make your own democracy.

And to respond to some of the comments here, no you would not need to be a programmer. You could for example start a blog, and recruit programmers who feel like you to do the work.

however, just because you disagree with the direction of one open source project don't expect sympathy from me if you don't get your way and start casting dispersions on the model. it is the best one going...

Universal health care would be socialist.
Government directed health insurance (which this bill is) is fascist
Actually health care was a major part of the discussions. One or two of the founders was a doctor, set up hospitals where they lived. Look it up yourself, you seem to need to read a few facts anyways.

there is no need for a technical solution..assuming this is for a business, fire anyone who decides to infect a company-owned PC with malware. (make sure your AUP/HR Policies *clearly* state this).

Great! So all someone needs to do to get his boss fired is to get his machine infected? What about the CFO? CEO? How long would that policy be in place with a little targeted mischief?

What about the case of the user that gets infected because he visited a legitimate website that was serving up malware because they got hacked by a SQL injection attack last night? What if visiting the (now malicious) website was part of her job (reviewing press releases, whatever).

Not sure if your "Just set the AUP right in the first place" suggestion was a joke or a legitimate suggestion.

Thinking about what you said there, I think it would be pretty cool if, instead of hooking an HTPC up to my television, I could, using the latest RDP tech where 3D acceleration and HD video can be played back on the client, remote into a virtual machine instead or into a second login session on my desktop or laptop, eliminating the need for the HTPC altogether.

Something to think about I suppose.