How do you know what the growth rate in the 50s and 60s would have been had the tax rates in the US been lower?

I only deal in empirical evidence. The warnings about higher taxes killing GDP growth are demonstrably false by comparing observed results over the past 70 years.

What's that about being ignorant?

Imagining things that might have been does not count as presenting evidence.

It is stupid if you are paying credit card rates. The US government pays insanely low interest rates and a few times, they've been negative! If someone pays you to borrow money, you'd be stupid not to take it.

The problem is that those interest rates change; our debt is revolving. When the interest rates go up, we're going to have to have to pay down the debt while our interest nut is climbing. So either we'll be showing a higher risk of default or we'll devalue the dollar; either way, the interest will climb even more. This has been repeated dozens of times in history. Every time a country has tried it, with the possible exception of Japan right now, it has ended badly. And most economists think that in Japan is about to hit the wall -- they're going to be our canary in the coalmine.

Really? Doesn't seem that that far out of line.

Really? You're not very good at math. Average from 1950 - 1969: 17%. Average over the past five years: 15.22%. (17 - 15.22) / 15.22 = 11.69%. Twelve percent higher seems like a lot to me.

Now taxation per capita, adjusted for inflation, is way up.

So is income, which is why I, and the chart you linked to, and anyone who understands economics, uses percentage of GDP.

And spending is even growing faster...

By all means, cut spending. I'm all for it. Until we get there, though, we can't just not pay our bills.

instead of trying to preserve the high tax state?

Historically low total tax as a percentage of GDP in a very long time. Lower than most of the first world. What high tax state are you talking about? 'Cuz it's clearly not the US.

And, we are running a gigantic deficit. We have to pay our bills, because paying the interest on credit cards is stupid, period. So, cut spending, then we can bring taxes back down to the current level.

And may I repeat: Historically low total tax as a percentage of GDP. Far lower than during the 50's and 60's, when we experienced the fastest sustained GDP growth rate of any first world country *ever*. So any Laffer Curve argument you want to make would just make you sound ignorant.

Tim Cook Says Apple Can't Read Users' Emails,

No he didn't.

Apple previously said that even it can't access iMessage and FaceTime communications, stating that such messages and calls are not held in an "identifiable form." [Cook] claimed if the government "laid a subpoena," then Apple "can't provide it." He said, bluntly: "We don't have a key... the door is closed." He reiterated previous comments, whereby Apple has said it is not in the business of collecting people's data. He said: "When we design a new service, we try not to collect data. We're not reading your email."

He said they cannot read iMessage and FaceTime, and they are not reading your email. That is a very important distinction. It might be one he was hoping you would miss, and you did miss it, but he did not say they can't access your email.

And I'm not blowing sunshine up his skirt. I came here intending to kick him in the balls (metaphorically, of course) for lying, but he didn't.

Pro-tip: If any system includes a password recovery mechanism that allows you to get back messages, then the administrator of the password recovery system can read your back messages.

If you think like a cell in a Corporate Person, it's a critical distinction.

It's why you can't sentence a corporation to death, as much as it might be deserved.

So, yes. It's a distinction that makes no difference to the user, but every difference to the corporation.

And, at the end of the day, we all know whose interests the corporation is looking out for.

A lot of AM stations are automated these days also, syndicating popular national talk-radio programs. Any idea how to find out which ones aren't?

"an open group of companies who run open source programs" who are seeking to "committed to working together in order to overcome" the challenges of using FOSS

If the megacorps want to get involved in the advancement of FOSS, they have an incredibly clear path to do so: Paid Development. They can fund it themselves, if they want to decide what gets built next. Or, to get a little creative, how about this: Put together some training materials for corporate legal departments explaining that companies can legally, safely, contribute code developed on company time back to FOSS projects. Put together a promotional campaign to convince corporate bean counters that contributing code back to FOSS is a worthwhile investement of company resources.

In short; help channel money into FOSS, either directly or by clearing the red tape that keeps us from creating and kicking back enhancements built for the benefit of our companies. Hey, maybe lobby congress for a tax write-off for code contributions to 501c3s.

Developers contribute to FOSS by giving of their greatest strength, development. If megacorps want to help, they should give of their greatest strengths; money and bureaucracy.

(and yes, I know, they think telling people what to do is their greatest strength, but they've got another think coming when it comes to telling FOSS developers what to do)

"Hell is other people."

My current game addiction is WoW. It's explicitly multiplayer, although you can pretend ("the illusion of single-player") that you're playing by yourself for a lot of the play. Until someone ganks you, or starts spamming inane bullshit in the yell channel, or you have to go into a pick-up raid to accomplish something (damn legendary cloak quests).

In that latter case, you run into the worst of people, all in a little 10-player or 25-player microcosm. Narcissistic douchbags, trolls (some of whom are actually trolls), lazy asses who expect you to carry them, clueless weiners who don't understand the fight and can't be troubled to learn...

Too bad for me I actually enjoy the game, except for the parts where the "multiplayer" part ruins the rest.

The point being that Apple didn't adopt Objective-C just to be weird. Next used Objective-C to build NextStep and there's certain things in Objective-C that made NextStep moderately cool.

I actually worked at Apple, on the operating systems team, around that time. Apple was in no position to be arrogant in 1997 and wasn't actively looking for ways to be incompatible. Today, that's a very different story.

Those would be called "antivirals"

Editorial responsibility one step above basic spelling, grammar, and sense* would have eliminated any submission citing IBTimes as source material. It's right up there with "Nothing submitted by Bennett Haselton" or "Nothing posted by Samzenpus**" or "Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line."

*Which is to say, two steps above what we have now

**Except that I notice that Samzenpus seems to be the only editor on duty lately. What an odd coincidence.

The laws of war generally oppose weapons intentionally intended to maim rather than kill. Mostly dates to popular revulsion around the WW1 era over weapons designed to inflict nonlethal but gruesome casualties to hobble the other side by flooding their hospitals and supply chains. As a result, countries agreed to a ban on various chemical weapons, expanding bullets, weapons designed to blind people, etc.

FWIW, some people weren't really ready for the arrogance of Apple deciding you really really really wanted this album. Those are people who clearly haven't been paying attention. As long as Apple is calling the shots, they know better than you, and they can prove it.

As to the "auto download not the default" setting, sure, the user had to switch it. If they were trusting enough to assume that THEY would be the ones who decided what music is in their own collection, that's a legitimate convenience decision. The mistake was in naively they controlled their music selection. I imagine they won't make that mistake again.

I, for one, welcome this event. Apple's customers need to be reminded of who's in charge. That way they can take the appropriate defensive measure when welcoming our fruit-themed entertainment overlords.

Did you know that the bodies of every criminal, unindicted, indicted, convicted, ALL OF THEM, are riddled with dihydrogen monoxide? ALL OF THEM. Their bodies are so heavily contaminated with the stuff that around 50% of their weight is this insidious substance!

We must BAN this potion of malefaction, this great insanity drug, this terrible criminal enabler!

If you're not a criminal, you have no need to pollute your body with this stuff. If your body is already polluted, purify yourself before it's too late!