If only it were possible for humans to speak more than one language, then they could keep their original language and also communicate in one or more global languages! Alas, it is, sadly, impossible. /sarcasm

Like it or not, language helps maintain a lot more than just "lousy, empty, vapid" culture. It also helps maintain useful culture, history, unique philosophical concepts, unique observations about the world around us, and I am sure countless other important characteristics, discoveries, and contributions of a particular set of people. With something as complex and impactful as language, having only one choice is never good, just like it's not good in software, programming languages, food, or anything for that matter.

Reading your follow-up reply, I would also add that having a variety of languages is infinitely more important than resolving something that could much more easily be resolved with better engineering solutions, like the localization examples you mention.

With interactive graphs, rankings, etc.

http://language.media.mit.edu/

It seems like Joann Killeen fails at Public Relations, the subject that she teaches, if she agreed to admit on the record to the AP that she actually drives 2 hours to go 4 miles.

Just a quick correction: Southern California, including Los Angeles, actually had "the largest electric railway system in the world in the 1920s." which disappeared due to bad decision-making by the government and self-serving actions by companies like General Motors. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... - read it and weep.

Thank you, that's a good question. Companies used to pay for their own, dedicated network connections between various offices - think T1s, T3s, ISDN, etc. Yes, they were much more expensive, which is why they mostly went away. The bean-counters probably saw dollar signs flash in front of their eyes when internet connections became cheap and VPN and other tunneling solutions were worked out that made it possible to replace the old dedicated connections, and that was that.

Another possibility, however, is that the internet made the business need to be interconnected so great (i.e. email, web, saas, etc) that it just became too difficult to justify having duplicate machines on everyone's desks. Remember that IT is a cost center for businesses, so eternally being squeezed to be more efficient and cost-effective.

Let's hope that Harvard teaches their engineers more restraint, balance, common-sense, concern for the common good, and other things that are positive for society and the world than they teach their MBAs.

I'm not positive about the technical aspects of the chip, but just thinking about it, I don't believe that chip cards protect you from certain fraudulent transactions, like online purchases. I'm giving the website my card number, expiration date, card verification number, name, and billing address.

Someone who gains access to all that information stored by the retailer would certainly have all they need to initiate another online transaction elsewhere. The only way the bank has of preventing that would be to issue a new card number.

If they want to keep making money and not get trounced by the competition, they will eventually stop their bluff/tantrum and come back to play ball. Remember that their only current, likely avenues for growth are broadband and mobile, and mobile is probably very slow, if not at a stand-still. They can only pull this off if they no longer want to grow at a significant rate.

You can say that their competitors could do the same thing if they become Title II, but someone will choose to take the growth even under the regulation while the competition stands still.

Your guess for the cost to produce a regular credit/debit card is exactly right, but chip cards apparently cost a lot more. Bank of America sent me a new "chip-and-signature" card (yuck, why not chip-and-pin, so frustrating) after the Home Depot breach. According to this article:

The last link on TFS says that just community banks and credit unions are already on the hook for $160 million. That's not even counting the banking giants. We're talking LOTS of money lost and wasted by a lot of people because of Target, Home Depot, et al being lax with their security.

Do note that this new requirement will only affect non-degree programs at public and non-profit schools, as well as all programs at for-profit schools. I don't think that's a bad idea. It prevents "Joe Bob's school of Hi-Tek" from offering a "certificate" that is completely worthless for $50k, while it doesn't touch any legitimate liberal arts degrees.

Yes, and here's a video reference of exactly this happening: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/...

Don't forget the clogging and drying up if you don't use the printer for a while, requiring buying new ink cartridges, or a whole new printer.

Yep, it's insane. Reagan and Nixon are considered "left-wing" nowadays, or at least their policies are.

I'll grant you that this specific article was way too simplistic, but:

You're way off with that one. Source: http://www.poynter.org/latest-...

Thanks for your insightful post. It makes sense and I agree, except that I understand from first hand accounts that sometimes protests and demonstrations attract people that are there expressly to get into fights with the police, so it's not always only AFTER the melee starts that they act. Sometimes these elements actively incite the conflicts. However, that doesn't take away from your point that the police showing up in riot gear is starting with an escalation.

NPR had an article a few weeks back about exactly the kind of alternative style of policing that you describe. It's a worthy read (or listen) if you or others reading this are interested: http://www.npr.org/2014/09/25/...