https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/prosecute-director-national-intelligence-james-clapper-lying-congress/HNfsgGlm

You speak as though you are positive there is parity in the amount of funding and lack of transparency. I have not seen data to either support or refute that hypothesis so it seems like pure conjecture. I am aware of individual funders such as Al Gore and George Soros but two famous sources doesn't mean there is parity.

One can't prove a negative, someone will always say that you just haven't found it yet. But proving the positive is possible so if someone can, please do.

Note that a major goal of the groups discussed in the article is to generate a sense of false equivalency in public opinion such that nothing is ever done.

https://www.catalogchoice.org/ - I've been using the free part of the service for a while now and I get vastly less junk mail than I used to. Not having the extra volume to deal with is worth the time it takes to use the website.

From the Verge article: "For example, Valve intends to make Steam Box a server, which can serve games on multiple TVs around the home simultaneously. So you could purchase a single Steam Box and use it with multiple controllers for playing games on the different TVs around your home." I'd like this very much please, thank you. If I could share games in a steam account within a household that would be awesome. Currently, when I'm logged in and playing Game X from the account then no one can play Game Y. That's not any different than with consoles but you can buy multiple consoles. Buying multiple consoles solves the problem completely. Having multiple steam accounts with games split across them doesn't. You aren't going to have a separate steam account for each game. And then you still can have the issue of two desired-at-the-moment games being on the same account. And constant account switching. This is not a major issue, but it would be a very-nice-to-have.

On education and "complex skills" http://www.abelard.org/asimov.php

We definitely should. We need to practice the technique. We'll need for ourselves someday. :)

But it is a political problem that with an understanding of humanity (or a realistic/pessimistic opinion), one realizes humanity will never solve. So perhaps a technological, post-scarcity world created by technology is the only solution.

I bought a "Western Digital Caviar Blue WD5000AAKX 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive" on Newegg in March '11 for $40. That was before the floods. I just bought another for $75. Ouch.

I can't say for sure that your place of employment is like mine, but I know that similar perceptions are held by many were I work. These folks tell corporate that it is a waste of time to separate since it all gets combined. Corporate repeatedly tells them that it actually is getting recycled, the company is saving money by not having to pay trash hauling fees, and they give figures to prove it. The argument never gets resolved. But through my own observations I've noticed the following after being bothered by this myself.

1) Deposit bottles/cans - if placed in the more limited number of containers around the company they are picked up by special needs groups. Special needs folks do the pick-up giving them a job and they get the deposit money for the group's programs.
2) Paper recycling - the bins that the cleaning staff wheel around all look the same. I've realized that the staff often have 2 separate bins with them though you only may see one out your door when they stop by.

So while there may be some instances of the waste stream being combined, I'm pretty convinced at this point that the majority of it is properly recycled.

My advice if you think your employer is putting on a big charade just for looks is to ask the question - How much is the company saving on trash hauling by recycling? Ask the person or group in charge of facilities if the cleaners are actually separating. It may be that the cleaners are supposed to separate but don't because they are lazy. Or they do and you just can't tell. Ask questions, make a little noise and you can help get the situation resolved. Not everyone can be convinced, but if the recycling program is a farce you can make sure it becomes a real one.

Is the article author aware of how pervasive astroturfing is in the comments sections? Perhaps if the article is about a subject that no one has a financial or political interest in, comments sections could serve this way. But as soon as someone's got an interest to protect, you can't trust the comments to be anything other than posts made by paid people creating fake personas to do so. Slashdot has had articles about this type of astroturfing before.

Not necessarily. Organic food has gotten the notice of big business. With so many Monsanto lobbyists working in the federal gov't & Obama administration, expect to see attempts to weaken organic standards. http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24575.cfm

Ah ha! So that's why they get such bad mileage!

I was commenting more on what I perceive to be the general intent of the "live life to the fullest" kinds of statements than on your specific phrasing. The reason they irk me is because I hear them most often in marketing - "live every day like its your last, eat out and get that big piece of chocolate cake for dessert!" The constant drone of the marketers has co-opted these statements and made them mean spend beyond your means. I agree that the good things to keep in mind are making sure to spend time with family, etc. As for plans, what I mean is that I would like to know if I'm going to kick the bucket at 55 of a heart attack or cancer. That way I would know I only need to earn enough to support myself until 55. Otherwise I might still be working at 55 thinking I need to support myself until 95. I'd be able to spend even more time with family, etc. that way. Not that I don't spend time with them now, but more is better with no limit.