So I would argue the current system is broken. For all the energy, time, and money our government puts into accountability you'd think we would not be reading headlines about how the GAO (Government Accountability Office) itself miss used all sorts of funds to throw wild parties. I am sure that the accountability processes and procedures and auditing do in fact prevent lots of fraud and abuse. The trouble is I am not sure they are cost effective.

You don't install a million dollar security system to protect a couple hundred thousand in other assets do you?

Perhaps accountability should be results focused. Did your your office/department/bureau accomplish its assigned objectives using the funds allotted? If bSuccess goto :quit; Else DisciplineTheResponsibleParty(Audit());

  In the end there may be a little moral victory in seeing the money not go out the door to fraud and abuse, but if it costs as much to prevent that as the fraud an abuse costs does it matter to the tax payer in the end? As I see it either way my pockets been picked, and the money is been spent. I only care at that point society got the benefit was supposed to get from that.

That is a really terrible SOP as well. I can promise this, if you enter my home legally or illegally and do deliberate harm to my pet you will have removed any possibility the of the situation being resolved without additional violence. I don't care what uniform you have on, my response will be to defend my home and family inclusive of pets with any force that can be mustered.

I don't normally support regulation and I am not sure I'd vote for this idea if asked to myself but I want to put it out there anyway.

What if we ban, that is right ban, the use ipv4 on publicly accessible networks after say 2018. Make it illegal to route ip4v addressed packet for a third party. This would force the move to ipv6. Which I think is good for freedom and the little guy. Yes that is right a forced migration is good for the little guy.

Its big business that has interests in keeping everyone on IPv4 and its actually big business who have the bigger investment in ipv4 only gear. The little guy can afford migrate.

What this is really about is ipv4 implies NAT. NAT implies third party brokers, which imply track ability, and opportunities to create digital toll booths. You can't just send files directly to each other; oh no they have be posted to some file sharing site so they can show you adds and the NSA has a good opportunity to data mine.

What he deserves is not at issue. What is legal and correct procedure is; as if the current legal frame works is even justifiable. Tax evasion aside, copyright infringement should be an entirely civil matter. It should be incumbent upon content owner to detect an sue violators.

Its not the job the FBI/CIA/State Department to track copyright violators. My tax dollars are being wrongfully converted in my opinion to support someone else's business. In fact actions like this are not helpful where the perception of America in the world is concerned; which might mean these types of actions run directly contrary to the government's Constitutional mission to promote the GENERAL welfare.

Additional actions like these where a "conspiracy" is invented justify state actions against individuals normally not permitted for the real issues at hand is bad for everyone. Its happening everywhere, look at the finanical crisis and what was done to the Chrysler bond holders. The "exceptions" to No Child Left behind are yet another example, even if you agree its a good idea the law does not provide for exceptions the president is not entitled to grand them. If changes to the law need to be made we have a process for that, we should not just ignore it. The current people running our government have reduced the rule of law to a fiction. They have so many laws the simply ignore and so many vague laws that can be used to do anything we might as well live in China.

The rule of law is supposed to be one the things that make our nation unique, special, and great. As a society if we don't start taking it seriously again and looking very critically upon those who bend and pervert it; even for reasons we might find noble we as a society will vanish.

I think a more valid question is why should MegaUpload be expected to prevent you from doing anything illegal? We don't require manufactures of other products to do that.

How come GM is not required to have cars verify all passengers are willing in some way to prevent kidnapping and human trafficking? How come nobody is prosecuting the guys who painted John Edward's house for not verify they were not being paid with illegally converted campaign contributions?

I think setting the precedent that service providers or manufactures are responsible for the actions of their users is wrong.

Yes they would get theirs and no Romney won't do it, neither will Obama. We need a real outsider. Had we not done the bailouts and let AIG go down, they would have most likely taken Goldman, and second tier investment banks wit them. JPM would most likely have survived but it would have been pushed out of the F50 for certain.

We would all be better off in the long run. The great thing about capitalism is its supposed to off mobility; for that to happen the wealthy must be allowed to fail. What we have today is not capitalism its closer to feudalism.

Its not going to save any bytes in your code and depending on the implementation may or may not save bytes where data at rest is concerned. Its going to save bytes in your live data which in most cases is bigger than your code larger than the corresponding number of records at rest.

Think about a the basic linked list. At a minimum ( for a single linked list ) you have a pointer on every record, that pointer could either be four or eight bytes. Even something like an office document or a web page of moderate complexity might have millions of elements the rendering software needs to track. That could be 4MB of working storage saved right there.

Yes 16GB of RAM for your desktop is cheap. It will cost more for ECC server memory though. Lots of server apps need to handle thousands of clients. That memory savings might mean a great deal there.

The trouble with the pass phrase concept is that the whole words just become tokens. Most people's vocabulary is not that large. You could use a common spelling dictionary and toss in the like substitutions 0 for o excetra and you don't really have a key space much larger than normal 7 character or so passwords offer

Depends on your product. I would expect Facebook to be a strong market for hipster style affordable bling. Guys and Gals who really want to be seen with their mePhone, StarSmucks Coffee cup, and Abercrumy T-Shirt.

They may not be the target demographic for say Tiffany or $40K+ automobiles. GM needs to sell less expensive cars as well but that market is not discerning. Getting someone to choose a Sonic over a Civic is a matter of getting them into your dealership first in most cases. The giant inflatable gorilla may well be a more effective startegy that Facebook for that market.

I have no doubt that there will a period of adjustment, where college enrollment rate falls. My hope would be that Universities, especially public ones, realize their mission is educating as many students as possible; its not winning NCAA tournaments, not building dormitories fit for royalty, not trying to get the most foreign students, not having the most publications, not even research. They could then restructure their costs accordingly.

There is no reason, college needs to cost 8k a year a public university to live at home. The only reason it costs that much is because they can get it, and they use it fund all manor of secondary objectives. They only way it stop costing that much is if they can't get it.

Depends...

Suppose you have a router has link A connected at 10Mbs, link B at 10Mbs, and link C at 300Kbps. You have a host on the far end of A sending packets to something on the far end of C. The traffic is highly bursty. TCP does reliability end to end, so if the host on the end of C misses packets because the router discarded them that is all traffic that has to run across link A again, which cuts down the available bandwidth for A to B. If the router had a large buffer the burst of traffic from A for C might have been stored, preventing the retransmit on A. This works for bursty traffic, obviously the buffer will never flush if the A to C flow is continuous.

Buffering is still important. Its just not as simple now that the internet is less bursty. More transfers are large files, streaming media, etc, less push that e-mail message, or 5K webpage and done.

You can't use "investment" and "spending" they way you are. You are mixing meanings and that is exactly what the corrupt politicians want you to do, confuse yourself.

There are revenues, assets, liabilities, and expenses. Spending just means surrendering some assets for something else. You "spend" one asset even if you are investing in another. Investing in Education IS SPENDING, what it may not be is investing.

Well you have to prove that education is asset to society. Can show that we are generating more nominal output with less input as result of our society being more educated ( % of population with a degree is a valid measure of that ) then ever?

You have no control so good luck.

I am sorry but you wrong on this point as are both parties at least in the context of the way they are going about it right now. The problem with going to college for most students is not obtaining credit, nor is it the interest rate on the credit even if rates were go up to a whopping 4.5% OMG. The problem is COST.

The cost of college has risen in great excess compared to the general rate of inflation. The cause is to much credit to available and to cheap due to government loan grantee and or direct lending programs. This is exactly the same issue which resulted in the housing bubble. It is a bubble the cost is objectively to high today, outside STEM fields, many, many students will never recoup the time value adjusted cost of getting that education, in better salary or career opportunities. The only way tuition will ever go down is if students stop enrolling because they can't pay.

If you want to fix the problem, you STOP offering loan grantees today. You have Sallie Mai start cutting the number of loans and the amounts it offers each year over a 5-7 year period so students can adjust and find other lenders. You eliminate the special bankruptcy protections student loans enjoy so families who borrow to much have a remedy. This will mean students will have to find cosigners or otherwise collateralize the debt. This will make them cost conscience again. It will no longer be a race between schools to see who can offer the fanciest athletic facility and the best food in the dining hall but who can offer the strongest academic credential at the lowest price, as it should be.

House is right but its not the "rule".

I suspect if your recorded all of your personal interactions for a week, and verified the truthfulness of each statement made by those where were strangers to you when the statement was made; you'd see most people are honest. The number would probably even be more favorable toward honesty if you include statements made by people you know.

At least here in American *most* of what people tell me is either true or correct to the best of their understanding. I am not naive, I know *much* of what I hear does contain lies and omissions. Still most of us are able to safely navigate day to day life using the "unless I have some reason to think otherwise, or the risk is high, default trust" algorithm.

When someone tells you the road is closed three miles ahead, I'd like to be able to take them at their word rather than do a 6 mile round trip to confirm for myself.

It matters because it encourages uttering specifically and dishonesty in general. It sends the message that you to could be one of the 1% if just lie often enough.

I think its harmful to let such blatant false claims go unpunished. Everyone exaggerates from time to time or stretches the truth. There is a bright line somewhere where you move from matters of interpretation to contradiction of fact. He might of said "I studied computer science while at college" which would be okay. Most of us would assume that means he was in CS program. If we don't ask any followup questions and its later revealed what that means is he leafed thru his roommate's text books once; that is our problem. If he says "I have a degree in Computer Science" when he does not that is a strait up lie.

Do you really want to live in a society where the rule is you cannot trust the veracity of specific statements made by people? Do you want to have to get every document notarized? Do you want to have to carry your diploma to every job interview? Force merchants to photo copy your ID every time you write a check?

Its better to enforce punitive action like immediate termination on people who do these things so the rest of us can afford each other some minimal level of trust, knowing that unless someone has a reason to be deceitful, they are most likely being more or less honest as there could be negative consequences if the lie is discovered which they would seek to avoid through honesty.