While Chiropractic might have some positive effects, too often Chiropractors sell their services as a cure-all. My parent's childhood chiropractor wanted to be our primary care physician, claiming that Chiropractic could cure colds and other diseases. Chiropractic's founder, D. D. Palmer, claimed his technique cured deafness, even though there are no nerves related to hearing that pass through any part of the spinal column. So even if Chiropractic has some benefits, its practitioners certainly do claim that it can do far more than it actually does, a habit which damages any credibility it might otherwise gain.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicin...

Not so fast. The IRS does tax barter transactions.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/t...

If you've ever written software that is ported to multiple platforms, you know that the performance of the ported version can only match the original, if serious performance tuning is done. Performance of ported software is not a measure of the hardware, but of the effort put into making it work better.

Microsoft has always tried to position their phones and tablets as "premium" devices, selling for more than comparable competitors. That's really hard to do when you are the disruptor, trying to break into an established marketplace. Google played the game right, coming into a smartphone marketplace that was dominated by iPhone, as a lower cost option that was "just as good." Over time, Android earned the respect of the marketplace, and eventually they gained dominance.

Microsoft devices were, from the beginning, more expensive than comparable phones and tablets from other vendors. But they had no killer app, and a lot less apps to offer. So why should we all pay more for less?

If Microsoft is serious about making inroads into the mobile market, they are going to have to push bargain-basement devices, until they, like Google, can gain enough market share to get a foothold with pricier models.

Where I work, we call that "job security." :-)

Dark matter is like the UFOs of astronomy. It's only called "dark" because they don't know what it is yet! UFOs are only "unidentified" until they identify the flying object. There's no reason to think that "dark matter" is something mysterious or alien, astronomers just can't see it...because it doesn't glow!

Exactly. In suburban Houston, every subdivision has a contract with the sheriff's department in which the subdivision pays a monthly fee, and in exchange the sheriff's department guarantees that officers will spend a specified number of hours per week in that subdivision, patrolling. Without the contract in place, sheriffs would have no legal right to patrol the subdivisions, which are technically private property.

College campuses, very large businesses, stadiums, they all pay for on-duty police protection. The police department gets funded, and people are protected. How is that a bad thing?

The fact that they even claim it's unbreakable makes it obvious that the claim is just commercial hype.

Every new encryption technology is unbreakable at first. But with time, somebody always comes up with a way to defeat the system. Always.

Real researchers are always careful to qualify their claims. For example, they might say that "it is unbreakable by today's processors using known technologies."

Most students won't be scientists, but science is required, in part to help students understand the basics of how science works.
Most students won't be artists, nor can many of them succeed at being good artists, but many schools require at least some art or music, in part to help students have a basic understanding of this important part of our lives.
Most students won't become programmers, but they should at least understand the basics of how you tell computers to do things. This understanding will help them solve real-life problems in life, since we are already awash in a sea of computers.

Yes, some computer language instruction should be required, but there is no need for much more than a taste, except for students who choose to pursue a career related to programming or engineering.

Amazing, they must have finally done some actual usability testing!

How hard are CEOs to replace? Consider this:

How well is Tim Cook doing replacing Steve Jobs?
How well did Steve Ballmer do replacing Bill Gates?
How did Léo Apotheker do replacing HP's Mark Hurd?

Yes, a great CEO is extremely hard to replace. I've seen this on a smaller scale as well, smaller companies whose founders retired and turned over the reins to investors...the result is usually not pretty.

It's not about how much money someone needs. It's about how much money someone is worth to a company.

CEOs are much harder to replace than tellers. And the loss of a CEO is much more detrimental to a bank than the loss of a teller. This is what makes CEOs worth more than tellers (to a bank) and why it makes sense for banks to pay CEOs much more.

Are some CEO's overpaid? Yes, of course. But should CEOs make less money just because tellers make less money? No.

There are security concerns in every company, without exception. Obviously, even the NSA itself had inadequate security!

Yes, many times security concerns are brought up, and brushed off. But this is not necessarily an indication of a problem. Every security risk must be weighed based on the likelihood of occurrence, and the severity of the impact, should it occur. Many of these calculations are inexact, and must be based on incomplete information.

Should Target have protected themselves better? Probably. But hindsight is 20/20. The difficult part is to anticipate the problems that might occur, without crippling your organization through impossibly tight security.

After watching the healthcare.gov debacle, it would seem that surpassing nation-state-created software is a very low hurdle!

Which is it, dollars or bitcoin???

Seems the concept is so new that the language hasn't caught up yet.