Overfeeding is exactly right. Just the sheer number of "blockbuster" films coming out now are getting out of hand.

Just for fun, I pulled up the list of number-ones in the US for both 1985 and 2012.

A movie has to make a huge push now-a-days just to last more than a week or two at number one. In '85 Code of Silence was number one for three weeks. Now some of you may think this was the best movie in the 80's, but I don't think it falls onto many people's radar (including mine) of being one of the big 80's movies. That movie, if published today, lasted more than a week at number one I would be surprised.

So basically is a "dual license" license with an automatic "devolve entirely to [X open source licence] after [Y] years" clause.

Makes sense. No one will use it, but it makes sense.

First we got the bomb, and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way.
Who's next?

France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears,
They can't wipe us out for at least five years.
Who's next?

Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white.
Who's next?

Egypt's gonna get one too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense.
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb.
Who's next?

Luxembourg is next to go,
And (who knows?) maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb.
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next?

"Who's Next" by Tom Lehrer (That Was the Year That Was - 1965)

Possibly worse: liposuction!

Although the article looks legit, I'm having a hard time finding actual proof that this works. Still, after an article like this I want to to break out the brain bleach.

How about...
- Have a exponentially increasing fees by the Patent Office as companies apply for / renew / buy patents.

This would:
(1) Give the Patent Office either (a) more money to hire patient reviewers or (b) cut down on the backlog of patents pending.
(2) It would force the patent trolls and big companies to look at their patent portfolio and only keep what they feel is important. If these biggies develop something new that they want to patent, then they either need to pay the extra fees to keep it or jettison / sell a lower producing patent to keep status quo.
(3) The small guy could still get in their small handful of patent(s) for relatively cheap.

Personally, I think him making these comments are a good thing. Bear with me a sec....
A politician putting a comment out like this serves one purpose: He's testing the public to see how much backlash is still out there if the bill (and remember, it's still a bill at this point) was to get brought forth once again. Do people care anymore?
Now, I say making these comments is a good thing because it is keeps the issue hot to the public at large. We are reminded that we need to stand up and say "NO!" everytime they want to pass this type of bill.

Politicans can be bought by the corporation as long as there is apathy from the population at large. SOPA/CISPA backlash hit critical mass and the politicians backed down. I say keep bringing up this bill to kep that critical mass opposition hot.

One thing to note is that the popularity of a language has changed based on the culture of the bulk of the programmers at the time. I'll focus on business needs here, but there is whole other post that can dicuss the academic world as well.
Originally the "popular" languages were forced down programmers' throats from the companies that built the servers they ran on:
Mainframe era (1960s - 1980s): In a time when the mainframe was king, Cobol was the be-all-end-all. you couldn't go wrong learning it.
Midrange era (1980s): As mid-size companies began to afford computing power, midrange servers started filling in. Languages like RPG and such became popular. The midrange era in business didn't last long, though, so most people don't know these languages.
Server era (1990s - present): Now smaller companies could afford computing power. Also, the merger of business and acedemic programming cultures started happening since businesses didn't really have a major player to go through when x86-based programming started.

• C became the defacto language at the beginning since it was not as isoteric as assembler, had mature tools to go with it, and got the job done quickly.

• Visual Basic (sorry to bring this one up, but it *was* a popular language) gained popularity since it was simpler to learn (and had a major player ramming it down business throats)

• C++ became popular since it was laid on top of C, but offered better growth opportunities to business developing software.

• Java then came along looking similar to C++ with great backing and the promise to "write once, run anywhere" which became popular with the non-"locked into Wintel" companies. (And the fact that Microsoft was trrying to "embrace, extend, extinguish" C++ at the time didn't hurt Java's popularity either)

• C#: Microsoft, feeling threated by Java, fired up their .Net initiative, bringing a kicking and screaming VB (and Java clone [C#]) into the OOP world. "Locked into Wintel" companies rejoiced once they got over their "OMG, (non OOP) Visual Basic is going away!" fears.

• PHP, Ruby on Rails, Perl, etc.: As businesses started realizing that "open source" is not a bad word, niche languages started becoming more popular to fill the needs out there. They would not have become as popular, though, without the already established (at the time) community of users (many in academics) out there.

In summary, many languages (in business) over the years suceeded mainly because they had major backing from an established vendor at the time. The main exceptions to this are C/C++ (the biggest supported languages in the academic community at a time when x86-based servers started taking off), and the current crop of languages which are successful in business because they fill the need, have great tools and support from the community at large.

To be honest, since mobile applications have become prevalent, I'm surprised we have not seen more languages that support those platforms become more popular. For example, Objective C would be still in relative obscurity if it wasn't for iOS. Mobile is the next platform that is going to be targeted for the "next big thing" (tm) in programming languages.

I understand what you are saying, but I think you are looking to say today's "high data use" becomes tomorrow's "normal data use". However, more than likely the "high data use" users of today becomes the "holy-crap-they're-*really*-downloading-a-crap-load-of-stuff" users tomorrow.

I have to agree with the GP. If you kick off the few people that really suck up the bandwidth now, you have a network that can support more "normal use" users.

The problem becomes, though, at some point they don't have enough bandwidth for "normal use" users and people start leaving in droves. I hope that time is now, but I think people will be more inclined to think... Hmmm, I might go over my cap, so I won't check Facebook every other minute.

Problem is that they are trying to do this within the confines of US borders by going after the man-in-the-middle that has nothing to do with the copyrighted material in the first place.

If bad site A is in Russia, but it has to go through ISP B, that is in the US, to get to you, they want to be able to shut down ISP B in order to "stop piracy". If ISP B has to resort to deep packet inspection to cover their as...butt, now we are one step away from the government say "well, you already have to look at what comes through anyway, so let's see what so-and-so is up to..."

They are not trying to police the world. They are trying to get the ability to shut down US companies that they can get to, privacy be damned.

A good (maybe not great, though) analogy I heard of in regards to in house IT: Designer clothing

An internal team will cost extra, but can create a solution that fits the company perfectly and it looks/works *really* good. The thing is (a) they are the only ones who can build it just to the company's needs and (b) hopefully the size of the company doesn't change dramatically. Otherwise it won't fit right.

On the other hand, a one size fits all may work for the company, but nobody looks good in a muumuu.

In theory, this would be a great idea until people of a state realize that, "Hey, if we re-elect our current people and no one else does, our folks will have seniority and are able to be on all the 'allocation' committees and send federal money to our state."

Lather, rinse, repeat for all 50 states.

What we need are term limits for our congress-critters. I know there are arguments against, but if it's good enough for the president, it should be good enough for Congress.

Just my $0.02

You're a freekin' idiot! You know that?

Naw... just kidding. Unfortunately, though, this is the kind of reply you too often get.

I'm actually in very much the same boat that you are (although I'd probably lean just a bit right to the center instead of left).

One thing that works for me is that, when a political conversation comes up, I ask, "Are you will to listen politics as well as talk politics?" You would be surprised how often that either stops the conversation from happening (which is good, since it would be like talking to a bag of half-bricks if I did) or makes the other person pause sometimes, allowing you to actually have a conversation.

...and that all it will be. An announcement. Just like Germany is doing now.
Does anybody really think that anything announced by politicians "to be done 10 years from now" really means that it will get done?

Really?

While I am not in total disagreement with you - speculation on anything can jack up prices, people seem to miss one other major contributor:
Chinese/Indian wage increases.

Think about it... with Chinese and Indian industries ramping up, there is the beginnings of a middle class in these two countries. Yes, China is still communist and the Indians have social inequalities, but the short of it is, there are more people in those countries that have moved from being a peasant to having some money in their pockets.
What's the first thing people do when they go from being dirt poor to having a bit of money?
They buy better food.

What we are starting to see is more and more (and, in the case of China, even more and more) people who are willing to pay for the wheat and the corn that normally wasn't sent in that direction. I would think that is having a small effect on the price of foodstuffs as well.

Disclaimer: These opinions are my own. Take them for what they are worth.
As a parent of a relatively high functioning autistic 10 year old...

I worried about what I could control (ie. He got the vaccinations. That was something I could control).
Age I noticed the signs: We had a good idea at 3.5 years old. 20-20 hindsight, we could have gone as early as 3. (But how can you tell if it's autism or just slow development?)
Average age of detection: Getting earlier as time has gone on. No actual idea, but between 2 and 3 at the earliest if I were to guess.
Two caucasian parents: For us, yes.

As for the GP comment about "a little savant in all of them". I attribute that to the ability to focus all there attention one one specific thing (in order to try to block out the rest). One example was that my son learned about all the Windows operating systems (back to version 1.01). For some reason he picked that as ran with it for about six months. Now if I could just channel that concentration... :)

Anyway, like I said, he's pretty high functioning, but YMMV depending on severity. Thing is, don't go looking for symptoms. Just have the ability to recognize them if they are there. That's probably the best advice I could give.