I've been using BSD for servers for 20 years, and as much as I support the kind of things they are talking about here, I don't support making it a hard and fast policy, nor do I agree with mixing social issues with technical and commercial products and services.

I will be migrating all of my servers, probably to one or another flavor of Linux.

"Country with history of lying about foreign affairs accusing another country with a history of lying about foreign affairs of lying about foreign affairs."

This story was a waste of electricity.

...and you can believe as much or as little of that as you like.

Basically, he's going to make it harder to graduate high school.

What an asshole.

I wasn't going to buy one of those pieces of crap, anyway, and now they won't even make the type of car that I would consider buying.

Ironically, I still use AMD graphics cards, but I switched to Intel CPUs a while back.

The Internet caters to the lowest common denominator; someone else will make the equivalent service without the ads, and Facebook will die.

Good riddance.

Benjamin Sovacool has a known anti-nuclear bias, and his topics range from economics to engineering and now to safety, none of which are areas in which he has any education or expertise.

Yes, the cost would be a large chunk of our GDP; why is that a problem? Where else should that much of our GDP go, if not to food and shelter for people?

And how much would our GDP improve if, all of a sudden, we had a strong consumer base, again? I'm not an economist, so I can't run the numbers, but it seems obvious that the economy as a whole would improve massively.

We've been hearing the rhetoric that tax cuts increase tax revenue by stimulating the economy for decades, and that's true, IF, and only if, the tax cuts go to people who will spend more money. The problem is that they keep giving the tax cuts to rich people, who don't spend it, which leads to lower revenue and an even worse economy.

A Universal Basic Income is just the reverse; give money to people who sill spend it on goods and services, and it will drive the economy.

In an era where increased productivity and technology has radically improved the ability of an individual to accomplish work, it is only natural that fewer and fewer jobs will become available, and there is a strong argument that many jobs that exist today are make-work programs; effectively a UBI for certain people. We need to extend it to everyone, or there are going to be a major problem.

As usual, the Ars Technofools have completely and totally missed the point:

The shuttle program should have been canceled. It was a wasteful boondoggle with no purpose other than the one-up the Soviets; unless you want to add it to the Cold War strategy of forcing the USSR to spend money on similar boondoggles, but look how that turned out.

"new legislation would provide the government with the ability to force CSPs to "develop and maintain a technical capability to remove encryption that has been applied to communications or data"."

Next, lawmakers will demand that companies develop telepathy and magic.

Is the interviewer an idiot? Or are the scientists writing the book just out for publicity? I don't really care.

Of course String Theory and the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Physics are controversial; they are unproven, possibly unprovable, hypotheses, and I don't know a single physicist who says otherwise.

Does that make it a "crisis in science?" Were Newtonian mechanics and Special Relativity "crises?" If so, we need more crises, not fewer.

This is terrible news! It means that North Korea might actually become a viable, independent state that we cannot contain with economic sanctions and foreign policy arm-twisting.

That means that we might have to (gasp!) actually talk to them and treat them as a legitimate government with the right to sovereignty over their own land.

Has anyone else noticed that our "non-proliferation" programs have done nothing but increased nuclear weapon proliferation?

Something overlooked is that drug testing technology has advanced; in the wrong direction, but it has advanced.

They have made the tests more accurate, which sounds like a good thing until you realize that they sacrificed precision to do so. Yea, on average, the tests get good results, but at the cost of many "outliers," i.e. false positives and negatives.

Supposedly this is corrected by verification through a GC test at a lab, but more and more labs are getting caught confirming initial results without actually doing the test.

And I caught one last year: Knowing that I hadn't used anything in years, and knowing that I could pass (using home kits, afterwards), I gave a sample that tested positive and the lab confirmed. Ah, but I'm a chemist, so I asked them for the numbers, and they hung up on me.

Lost the job, anyway, but now I know: Clean or not, ALWAYS CHEAT!

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...

They can make formic acid much more efficiently than methanol, and it is actually a better option for fuel cells since it does not cross the polymer membrane.