So what you're saying is that the qaudrupling over the last 2 years WAS from the obama administration's continuation of the policy, but they didn't start the policy?

idk, I'm all for specificity, but that seems a bit nitpicky. Either way, they're cutting the data centers now, which is a great move for cutting waste since they're running at 27% utilization. Sad that it means cutting the jobs associated with those data centers, but at least it's a step in the right direction.

actually, scratch that, I think that's for water usage

hmm...I wonder if there's a way to get the data sent from the little port they installed on the outside of the house. Those scanners the power guys come around with are probably just simple IR, wonder if there's a way to figure out the control signal.

I'm really not sold out either way on this whole debate for two reasons.

1. I can't seem to find original data for all these claims (and if anyone has any please point me to it). I really don't like taking someone's word for it when the trends they're talking about should be simple enough to be observed by an untrained eye.

2. Global scale is a very difficult thing to deal with because proving cause is almost impossible. We genuinely haven't been recording this stuff that long, and we essentially end up with hypothesis of cause and effect rather than any real conclusion. From what I've heard it sounds like this is cause and effect, but again, without the original data, what kind of change are we really talking about here?

Quotes convey things sometimes...

Yah know, if we keep finding variations, we're gonna have to take another look at our "primate ancestors".

air pumps are no-where near as difficult to deal with as oxygen tanks when lugging them around/replacing them. I agree that there is still work to be done, but this is a HUGE step. Obviously the ultimate goal would be an entirely self-sufficient internal apparatus, but I would disagree that this isn't useful.

Really? Here in the U.S. It's 200 with the contract, something like 400-600 without.

I said a large portion, not the average. My whole point was that status symbols are a perception, not based on how many people can afford them.

Seems like you misunderstand what a status symbol is. At $200 starting with 2-year plan, an iphone is still well outside the price range of a large portion of the population. A status symbol is not something that is unusual, merely a cultural symbol of attaining a certain level. You would in no way expect the workers at your local McDonalds to be sporting iphones. Status symbols are perceptions, not percentages. Status Symbol (wiki)

I agree completely. Matter of fact, I own a 360 purely because of the controllers. It feels better/sturdier than the PS controllers and I love having actual triggers.

Not quite. It was polygamist, but only on one side of things. That makes a huge difference when you're examining the evolution of a social norm.

Doesn't seem relevant to anything actually... They developed a custom software interfacing with SQL server and it had bugs. They were worried that a system without a password could be accessed by someone. That article must have been written on a very slow news day. Although props to the reporter for actually getting a response from MS rather than just reporting that there may be bugs with nuclear software.

While I agree with the "google fu" sentiment, office has been a high selling point on just about every internship/entry level position I've held. Especially if you combine it with a bit of programming knowledge and a VBA object reference. I've had quite a few managers impressed with a simple VB script when it took their 100+ csv files and made nice graphs of them for a proposal or report. I've also discovered that if you have a good enough knowledge of the suite, you end up increasing productivity all around. For example, showing someone how to use proper formatting tools rather than the spacebar can save a lot of time for everyone who's working on the document.

The date of their writing is disputed, and you're assuming a historic account is inaccurate merely because it was written after the event? You can't assume they made it up, you can certaintly think that, but you can't assume it.