UN was suggested, and while they are weak, they are the strongest international organization I know of that is supposed to be impartial. Key phrase time: what on earth gave you the idea that the UN is supposed to be, or is in any way, impartial? I would suggest that all evidence to date would support the opposite conclusion - that the UN is a collection of self-centered nations each trying to get as much as it can from the collective.

You might get more milage out of a nokia n810 than a netbook. Mine has a battery life similar to that of my cell phone. And there's a skype client for it.

The catch is that the process costs more per barrel than just hoovering the stuff up out of the ground. Until it becomes cheaper, it's a non-starter, now matter how many dollars are thrown at the problem.

Tell the world what you've discovered, and if it's real, you'll have 10,000 copycats. Keep it secret and be first to market, and you'll be a billionaire.

Based on that thesis, I declare this article a load of crap.

When are these clowns going to learn that if they make really annoying ads that make the page load slower, nobody is going to want to look at them?

Put another way, why don't they try making the ads be part of the HTML as normal images and text, instead of annoying bloated crap ads served by a 3rd party? It seems like "ad banners" are a 1990's idea that somehow has too much momentum behind it to ditch it. Also, I think many of the big content providers (think newspapers) are really missing the boat by outsourcing their ad service.

Why not treat internet ads a lot like newspaper ads? One page, one ad, for everyone who sees it. Wouldn't that be pretty attractive for an advertiser, and maybe command a better fee? (think repetition and distribution factor).

...and we've been dancing it for decades. Big software corps, particularly ones that make the hardware and the software, have an incentive to make their stuff proprietary and to make it difficult to interoperate with anybody else's stuff. They lock you in, then lock you down. Apple is one of the worst offenders, here.

I'd like to say that when a truly open competitor comes along and offers competition, people will flock to it. But they won't because that's not how it works. Normal people buy the stuff that "just works" and apple's stuff is pretty good at that. The only way around it is for hackers to do what they do so well.

Hats off to you, hackers of the world.

You're right, only the employed ones do.

Someone mod the above troll, here's why:

I have to disagree with the GP. There is a strong similarities of liberal and Nazi's policies. Yes, the nazi's had a mass murder that the liberals could not compare in shear number. BUT, put had policies benefiting their friends in businesses; both spoke of one thing, but did another. both had policies that were destructive to their countries long-term interests, and often with criminal intent. In essense, both pursued a policy that reflected "the ends justified the means" attitudes.

P.S. I recommend following your own signature's admonition.

Oh gosh golly, where will I get my news from if all the newspapers put up a paywall!

cnn.com, foxnews.com, bbc.co.uk.... none of which appear to be in any financial turmoil like these crappy newspapers.

The current generation of newspapers is carrying an infrastructure designed to deal with distribution issues from 100 years ago. We have literally hundreds of newspapers in the U.S., with dozens that are considered "newspapers of record" or major players. In an age when information is instant, and you don't have to wait for dead trees to get delivered to your doorstep to get it, there's just too many news sources.

Does anyone else think it odd that the white house press room is filled with reporters? 3 or 4 reporters could do the same job as the 20 or 30 that pack that news room. I also find it funny that most of the major newspapers carry substantially the same stories. It's all very redundant, because it's designed to be distributed locally in an age when that delivery process took an entire day, and delivering over longer distances was not feasible for a daily paper.

The major newspapers will mostly die or consolidate. Technology has made redundant having a major newspaper with all its attendant printing machinery, reporters, staff, etc. in every major city. Certainly there will be a market for a few major newspapers, but not the sheer number we have today.

I don't think it's the end of the world scenario that people are painting it to be, either. We'll still have multiple sources of info (I suspect the NY Times and Wall Street journal for instance will survive, along with a multitude of local news outlets and other media outlets like cable news networks and bloggers), there just won't be the increadible multiplicity we have today.

How about you RTFA:

"SH: Osiris in the U.S. is our biggest competitor. We are way ahead of most of the Chinese stem cell companies."

Also from reading the article, they don't seem to be doing anything terribly scientific. They are basically injecting stem cells into patients, along with "holistic" treatment like accupuncture. And the head guy seems like more of a business-guy than an actual researcher. So this all smells like a lot of BS to me.

Everyone keeps talking about how the big us auto makers were making SUVs and how that screwed them. It's a crock of shit. Yes, they were making SUVs, but they also made lots of very fuel efficient cars (e.g. focus, malibu, etc). The US Market is what wanted SUVs, right up until the ridiculous oil bubble, when suddenly everyone was selling their SUVs and V8 pickups that used to be cool.

Now the big 3 have fooled us all into thinking OMG, the sky is falling, lets get bailouts! when the real culprit is 3 auto makers who leveraged themselves with so much debt that they couldn't weather a short-term, irrational market swing based on unforeseen events.

The real issue here is a retarded corporate culture of short term thinking that allows managers to leverage so much with no room for uncertainty, as they know they likely won't be around to clean up the mess if/when it occurs.

If only humans fought because of shortages, you might be right. The reality is that the Earth has plenty of resources for all, but greed is a part of human nature.

I'm surprised no one's mentioned this. The concrete benefit of seeding is the entire torrent network. If nobody seeded, you wouldn't have one. I think most people who seed have that in the back of their minds.

And most assholes who don't are selfish, short-term thinkers who probably should consider business school.

Sounds like a long and fairly useless exercise in common sense. People who succeed are those who work hard and are lucky to be in the right place at the right time... wow, real work of genius, somebody submit this piece for the nobel prize.

I do congratulate the guy on being a skilled enough writer to convince large amounts of people that it's worth buying a book that simply restates what 90% of humanity already knows.