...because (according to what I was told when I contacted Nintendo HQ regarding a research project that greatly benefited from using Wiimotes) they were not the ones who invented Wiimotes but rather licensed them from another manufacturer (as was the case with apparently a number of other controllers). I expect them to simply forward this inquiry to the company they licensed Wiimotes from and by doing so wash their hands clean in no time.

Likewise, you fail to combine preexisting loans that have to be paid out for past wars/military missions. I hope you'll agree diverting from the main point quickly becomes a statistical crapshoot. How much is unemployment worth to you, or outsourcing for that matter, both of which are arguably directly related to education? I agree with you that statistics can be easily massaged to fit anyone's needs. Like like Benjamin Disraeli/Mark Twain said, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics :-)

Yet, the truth is while state schools do get sponsored through state budget, that support is quickly dwindling which in turn has resulted in prohibitively expensive higher education, which then in turn has limited a number of people who can get a decent education. It's a vicious circle in which everyone is getting frustrated. You are right in that state universities for instance get a good chunk of money. Yet, whereas they may have been funded 60-80% in the 90s, now a good chunk of them are below 30%, and it keeps getting worse. Look for instance at Virginia Tech (VA). It has had over $60 million in cuts from state funding just in last 3 years alone all the while cost of living/infrastructure maintenance kept going up...

This is not a flaw of the education but rather a direct result of politicians meddling with things they know nothing about for the purpose of personal gain. Everyone knows education is the big ticket item that is close to the hearts of a largest contingent of voters (parents). We have idiots who want to use education as their "publicity stunt." Basically, they push a poorly designed law because they have the power to do so and then use that to gloat at then next election how they've done something profound for "the nation." What they fail to do, however, is support such a law with adequate funding. It is simple folks, if you want a person do more things, eventually they'll have so much on their plate that everything they do will have to end-up being half-baked. This is not because they are poor teachers but rather because they are overstretched by the growing pile of new laws while their funding is being continually cut (thus making hiring of new staff who could help in the process of coping with this virtually impossible). So, what actually happens as a result of this kind of behavior is that there is a growing pile of poorly designed rules/regulations/laws that educators then have to deal with, that they do not have time to do anything other than stupidly designed tests, including recognizing advanced children and giving them a chance to truly shine.

So, if you think this is a problem (I certainly do), I would say go to your local congressman and/or representative and tell them to put their dollars where their mouths are and to back off from education agenda with stupid laws without consulting those who are actually supposed to enact those laws. Did you know that in US annual education budget is one twentieth of the military budget and one third of government operations, making it basically the smallest piece of the pie? (see following chart -- yes, it's that little tiny, barely visible chunk). Now ask yourself how many kids are enrolled in education every year vs. how many soldiers/personnel we have in military...

What you mistakenly call "your right" is in actuality government-endorsed (or in this case for most intents and purposes ignored) corporate privilege to supply you with ridiculously cheap and utterly unhealthy, yet easy-to-get-hooked-on sugary water at the expense of the underdeveloped World where they employ terrorist-like tactics in order to obtain super-cheap water source and pollute the environment without having to ever be held accountable. How do you think otherwise that these companies make any money by selling you 2 liters of soda drink that costs *less* than 2 liters of pure water? And don't forget, that pollution even if it is made on the other end of the Globe will eventually reach you one way or the other. This World or its resources are finite and as such it is only a matter of time...

Non-caloric sweeteners often have questionable side-effects on human body in part because our bodies were never exposed to them before and therefore have no reliable way of dealing with them nor do we have any historical data on what their long-term exposure may do to us (e.g. corn syrup is one of the top reasons for obesity as human body has no way of dealing with this by-product of processing corn that does not exist in nature otherwise, so the body simply deposits it into body fat and wreaks havoc on our metabolism). On the other hand, you mention fruit sugars (e.g. fructose). These have nowhere near the same side-effects like refined sugars because they metabolize slower and do not give us that sugar spike that is so dangerous to our bodies, particularly through prolonged exposure. Hence, fruit sugars are entirely different ballgame than the refined sugar and I would go as far as stating that their prolonged exposure (unlike refined sugars) bears practically no side-effects beyond potentially rotting your teeth (and that is arguably more of a matter of personal hygiene).

How about "how much is your health worth to you?" or "how would you like the Soda Inc. company buying a little piece of land near your house, drilling deep, and running your well dry leaving you without drinkable source of water? (obviously assuming you have well water)" or "how would you like Soda Inc. company hiring local thugs to chase you away from your local natural resources so that they can gobble it up, destroy the ecosystem, poison you and your family and then leave you in this impossible mess to die?" Health care in US is already ridiculously expensive. Couple that with ridiculous nutrition and between insurance companies and corporations selling you corn-syrup-infested water that makes you obese, diabetic, rots your teeth, etc. your hard-earned dollars are already spoken for an endless stream of health bills and life-long health conditions (so much so that US is the only "developed" country in which one of top reasons for bankrupcy is not money mismanagement or poor financial decisions, but rather costly health bills). So, indeed, where do you draw the line?

While a definite latecomer to this post, here's some info that may be of use to this topic: linuxaudio.org and its subdomains are all hosted by DISIS/Music Dept. at Virginia Tech (http://disis.music.vt.edu). Likewise, at DISIS we support Linux, Mac, and Windows through curriculum as well as infrastructure. Finally, for the Linux enthusiasts, this spring we've started a new program titled L2Ork, or Linux Laptop Orchestra. For more info please visit http://l2ork.music.vt.edu./ Cheers!

I think the very fact Apple responds to these kinds of seemingly silly kinds of claims and does so with minimal delay is very much telling of how thin of a line Apple treads with their business model.

Any number 3 plastic has phthalates that tend to bleed out of plastic when they come in contact with saliva. Often these are rubber toys (for the puberty-stricken Slashdot crowd, get a cold shower, I am not talking about condoms) for kids who commonly put them in their mouths. I've even seen some sipping cups and one-time use products (e.g. energy drinks) that use 3 or the other two problematic plastics 6 and 7. Basically, it is a known fact that phthalates are problematic. Couple that with the fact that they are pretty much everywhere and we got a real problem. As a result, autism is on tremendous rise, particularly in US...