Man, me too. I always read through them and I don't know what the hell they're talking about most of the time. What is it with that? Maybe I find it fascinating that these arguments happen at all. I mean, you would think that, aside from emerging technologies, the best practices for everything has already been worked out. I guess it's silly to think that but maybe I just thought there would be less to argue about. It seems as if every point a person makes is contradicted. Is there a zen superhacker who knows all and we can just ask him? Maybe Hugh Jackman?

So Google invented a print server. Brilliant!!! Those guys are AMAZING. What will they do next. :P

Ok. WTF. Is the South Asian Post the eastern equivalent to the Onion? There is no way that's a real story. What a riot. I love this line FTFA:

He lives among 80 eunuchs — castrated men — at the temple. But some have their doubts that he is equipped to be a goddess. A eunuch called Sudha said: “He is a fake. I checked and he still has a penis."

There's another line further down in which a woman says she's going to see Steve because her sister did and immediately got pregnant. Looks like goddess Steve has been using his penis to do the blessings :)

No. It was the dog.

I see that point. Yeah, I was trying to be funny but to some extent I was busting on them for making people sober up faster.

I would rather see a way to sober up on command. A pill or drink I could consume that would sober me up immediately (or within 15 mins) if needed. Invent THAT and you'll be basically printing money.

There are 2 other comments here that have practically the same message as you. Either you guys all have unlimited income or you own a bar.

No hangover - Good
Faster sober - Bad

You're not done mister, get back to the lab.

Or, Option C - Another competitor enters the market undercutting the rest.

This, in my opinion, is when government needs to step in, not before.

In some industries this would be considered a monopoly, which you discouraged earlier in your post. You do realize that this "agreement" was for their benefit, not yours. It allows them to charge you whatever they want due to the lack of competition.

Digital cable also costs more here in the United States. It might cost more to deliver digital but that's not really the point. The market wants digital. If they didn't someone would start a company selling analog cable service and make a killing, driving the digital only guys out of business or forcing them to lower their prices to compete.

I would imagine a horse and buggy is much cheaper than a car. You don't see people running out to start a horse and buggy company. Horse and buggy's are slow, don't have a stereo, and you get to spend all day smelling horse farts and watching it crap. It's a lot like analog cable. Market doesn't want it.

Thank god for competition. You have a choice. You can choose Telus' competitor since you are unhappy with them. Imagine if it were government regulated and you didn't have a choice. Telus or nothing, that would suck.

So, what would work for you, is that the government controls the prices. Instead of cost+ or supply/demand the carriers would be forced to charge the price the government sets. So when the cost of delivering those services is higher than what the government allows them to charge they should just go out of business? Oh, maybe the government could subsidize them. Yeah. Then everyone in canada could help you pay for your cable TV. Even the people who don't own TV's. That'd be cool. Maybe subsidies wouldn't work and the Government would have to take them over, or buy a controlling stake to keep them in business. Then the Government would own the media you consume. I'm sure they wouldn't abuse that power.

I could go on and on. What's the point. I'm a capitalist, you're a socialist. Let's leave it at that. Maybe we could have a beer sometime if you have to come down for a surgery or something.

You make good points about anti competitive practices being bad for capitalism but you're not taking into account the context. Event tickets are not a necessity, they're a luxury, so you can't compare this to selling flour or other necessities. Government should be involved in breaking up monopolies, or exposing and breaking up price fixing schemes, but only when it's something that people HAVE to buy to survive. If these guys buy up all the tickets and price them too high no one will buy them and they'll lose their ass or reduce their prices. Or Walmart and Ross will come along and buy up their surplus inventory at pennies on the dollar and sell the tickets for even less than they were originally sold for.

Government needs to step in if some peckerhead buys up all the water in a town that is destroyed by a hurricane and tries to sell it for $20 per bottle. Government needs to interact if all the gas companies get together and decide to artificially inflate gas prices to make more money. Government doesn't need to step in so my kid can go see OMG MILEY!!!

Sounds like capitalism to me. He's taking a risk by buying up all the flour. If he prices it over what people are willing to pay they won't buy it and he'll lose money. Some other smart business man will call his contact in the town over, buy up a bunch of flour there and sell it in this town for a 200% markup. He'll make a profit, undercut the 400% profit guy and put him out of business if he doesn't lower his prices. Some other smart business man will see the demand for flour booming and will buy up some high quality flour and sell it at an even higher price to folks who can afford, and desire, higher quality.

The original 2 guys make money, the 3 new guys make money. 4-5 other guys get jobs hauling flour. The other towns that make flour increase their sales. I like it.

I would start up a tire company, make the tires, and sell them for $400. I would undercut the tire "scalpers" and make the other guy feel stupid for selling something for $25 when it was clearly worth $400-$500.

I know you're just screwing around but the scary thing is there are people out there who believe this could actually work.

Agreed. Plus, this is only going to be a problem for the "pioneers" of the program. Colleges only have an abundance of 18 to 23 year olds because of the way the system is structured. If they were to change to this new system colleges are going to be full of 16 to 23 year olds in no time.

I don't want a laptop with a touchscreen. Well, maybe that would be cool. What I really want is a pad that is useful at work

There was an article recently about how Apple doesn't care about marketing to businesses. Business use is more of a collateral win. I'm sure it'll do quite well because of the folks to buy anything apple and because it's a cool consumer device.

The Leveno pad part of the U1 has some cool user stuff for media but I look at it as a great replacement for my laptop at work. I'm sick of dragging my laptop to meetings and would love to just grab the screen and go. If it can give me the ability to take notes with a stylus or something all the better. If I could connect it to the projectors in our conference rooms I'll do somersaults and it usually takes an act of congress to get me to attempt a somersault.