If you're good.

Most who think they are, aren't.

That's not always true. A lot of the new buildings in NYC are ultra-luxury condos, which are really only going to ultra-rich people who don't need to rent it out, many of whom are non-local and may only use it a few times a year as a travel home. I suspect average actual occupancy of some of these new ultra-lux buildings will be in the teens.

Indeed. Relevant text from TFA:

They're trying to point out exactly what everyone here is trying to say they're missing. Not really sure it warrants a research paper, but yeah, common sense if you've ever studied computer science at all.

The way to do this is to enable spoofing of your verification.

In addition to giving people a private key to verify their own vote, also provide an artificial verification key generator that allows anyone to generate a fake key (indistinguishable from a real one) that indicates they voted in whatever way desired. I don't know if you could make this work with a public blockchain, but you could certainly do it with some online systems.

Make this easy enough and you can have guaranteed anonymity and verification at the same time.

This is a play by Netflix to demonstrate to the FCC just how dangerous the Comcast/TWC merger would be. Here's hoping they listen.

No, just everything you say or do within range of its microphones or cameras. Nothing significant.

Great idea. Not one I'd heard before.

* even convex ones

Definitely need redistricting reform, but "no concave borders" is probably unworkable given the inherent chaos of population distributions. It also doesn't solve one of the major problems currently, which is that cities are so strongly democratic that it's easy to form districts (even concave ones) that are 90+% democratic, while distributing suburban & rural votes more evenly, essentially "wasting" a large portion of city votes.

I think the solution (and certainly the technology-oriented approach) is to algorithmically dictate districts according to certain apolitical rules.
E.g.
- All districts must have population = district_size +/- acceptable_variation
- Minimize sum of all districts' perimeter/area ratio
- All else equal, maximize overlap with former districts
- etc...

This would still potentially have the city packing problem, but at least it would be more neutral in the application of it. Take the human out of it and it's far more likely to be fair.

This + a campaign finance overhaul would really do wonders for the US.

Egh. Sorry for the lack of spacing. I forgot I was on slashdot...

Agreed. I recently got an X1 Carbon to replace my old X61s. While there's still something nice about the x61s's form factor (oh 4:3 screens, how I miss thee), the thinner, lighter x1c is incredible to me. It's sleek, light, and comfortable. It's also far more feature-full: the hard mute button with an indicator light is a lifesaver for me when turning the computer on when I don't know if it's muted or not (and need it to be); the fingerprint reader that's always-on so you can swipe your finger from full-off and it turns on and logs in automatically is a great time-saver (don't have to wait for it to turn on, then swipe, then wait for windows to login); backlit & chiclet keyboard, quick-charge, better battery management, etc. etc. Not to mention all the general laptop improvements (RAM/CPU/SSD/etc.). Overall, I think it's a huge improvement over old thinkpads. Only thing I really don't like is how wide it is. I'd much much rather a 4:3 13" than a 16:9 14". I guess the integrated battery is a bit of a negative, but for my use, it's a good tradeoff for the thinner/lighter build. Ultimately though, it's all about the trackpoint (aka nub) for me. I simply cannot STAND touchpads for most control (though I like having the option now), so as long as thinkpad keeps making reasonably attractive thinkpads with trackpoint mice, I'll keep buying. Though, I will say, the T431s's lack of trackpoint buttons would seriously irk me.

Find me a company with a PE of ~11.5 that does have negative earnings.

Hint: RIMM and Nokia have negative earnings, what are their P/E ratios?

But yeah, pull up any company that has limited growth prospects, Dell, Xerox, Diebold, etc. etc. etc. Or, you know, do your own search: http://www.google.com/finance#stockscreener

It doesn't imply negative earnings... it implies negative earnings growth, which is exactly what analysts are predicting in the short term (this quarter's avg. EPS estimate is 13.35 vs last year's 13.87 actual EPS). Clearly, Apple can (and will) continue to make tons of money for years to come; the question is whether or not they'll ever again make AS MUCH money as they did last year. If they don't, an 11 (or less) P/E ratio is very fair, depending how far they fall back. Eg. if you expect them to fall back to 2009 earnings levels, you might value them at around 4.5 P/E right now.

Add portable and safe to this. Highly portable, cheaper energy (abundant is redundant w/r/t cheap) that's safe to use could herald a number of advances.