If you're right, it would be interesting that the Republicans thought that the federal bailout was a bad idea, but that the local bailout via earmarks was just fine and dandy.

Don't flatter yourself too much, as I mostly remember you from a few epic facepalm moments, generally in the AGW and small government threads. That said.... two things: the funding angle leads you nowhere, as it applies to every single person with any sort of expertise in any area. The only people completely unaffected by the funding angle are people who have never been exposed to it in any fashion - i.e. the totally clueless ones. And secondly, you ought to read Asimov's letter on wrongness. You are the prime example of what equating wholly different levels of wrongness does to your position.

Finally, do you know what would truly and completely provide eternal glory and funding to a scientist? Disproving AGW. Yes, those who have no shot at glory will pursue the safe avenues for funding. The hotshots will go for glory.

iOS's security is also left to the manufacturer. It's just that the manufacturer is the same company which also provides iOS.

It is, however, a good paraphrase of how he characterized climate scientists, and specifically Hansen, in the past. A bit of hyperbole, sure, but close enough.

I find it kinda funny that you think James Hansen (who do you think the J Hansen is, there?) is an authority to be believed when he finds negative forcings, but a total eugenic crackpot who is paid off by the EcoMafia when he finds positive forcings.

All models are wrong. Some are more useful than others. Which ones are useful, and why? Show your work.

> it makes the implication that the mother should have a choice and anyone else (government, priests, etc) can go bugger off.

Which means you accept the exact premise I mentioned as inherent in the phrase, that it isn't an important choice. I.e. that it is 'living' but isn't 'life'. You are willing to be just tolerant enough to allow some poor deluded Christer to imagine it is a baby and not kill it if that is their choice but you know better. You wouldn't be arguing for the mother's right to off the lil crotch fruit the day after birth, right? That would be MURDER, where the day before it is just a PROCEDURE.

But as for me, I'm more of the opinion that on one side you have people who hear Monty Python's _Every Sperm Is Sacred_ and fail to realize it is a joke at their expense while the other side, pushing for abortion right up to the instant of natural delivery is across the line to infanticide. So stupid or evil, are those my only choices? Seriously, it is a question that logic and reason can't decide in the limited knowledge and philosophy available to us so lets just pick something reasonable in the middle, call it "The Line; For now" and move on. No more killing things that could just about as easily be delivered alive and no more of this life begins at conception either. Admit we can't decide for now and agree to revisit it when science advances.

The same mechanism that prevents access to multiplayer can also be used to prevent access to anything in the game. Why do you think EA forces you through their Origin servers when you play on the Xbox?

Oh hey, look! Edge cases that appeal to emotion. Two can play that game. To wit:
- I was raped, I can just have a child (or twins, or triplets) I don't have the money for or am ready to care for. Oh, and they'll go make some fine criminals.
- I was fired from my job when the bankers decided it was more lucrative to just liquidate the company, my kids can now go play in the sewer
- I'm an addict from medication received for an operation gone wrong, I can just go cold turkey and lose my job during the down period
- I had some bad breaks in life, I should be thankful that I can squat underneath a bridge with 30 other losers
- I have a 50k a year job and signed for a 100k year mortgage, but the bank that signed the loan is going under, so I'm going to lose everything
- I'm a banker who made catastrophic investments, and I should be able to take down the entire economy while I retire on my bonuses

You're willfully ignoring the lessons of history just to fuel your little libertarian flame of faith.

As they would say in Firefly: " Go suck it".

Only if you've divided up your roles... But so many companies have people "wearing many hats" that, in practice, it will be the same person doing the virtualization AND the "desktop" support of the virtual-desktops... Which means he'll need far MORE training than current helpdesk people. In fact, what it really does is makes IT hiring that much harder for most organizations because now you can't just hire somebody who knows Windows desktops for the helpdesk/workstation VM admin role--you would need to hire somebody who knows VDI or Xen Desktop (or something else.)

Here! Here!

At least when discussing a story about effects of listening you should get "hear, hear!" right.