rkbabang

I'm not sure where to put this, but it's interesting so I'll put it here. These glasses "cure" red/green color blindness. They were invented to help doctors, surgeons, and phlebotomists, see blood vessels, it was only later that it was discovered that color blind people could distinguish between red and green while wearing them. There is all kinds of other uses for the technology that is under development. Such as light bulbs (for dressing rooms in clothing stores for instance) that make you look younger. As well as light bulbs with the equivalent effect as the glasses I mentioned above without the glasses. How Mark Changizi Conquered Colorblindness With Glasses The web site for the glasses: o2amp.com The research company that created them: http://2ai.org/

I've been using Feedly since I got the notice. If you go into settings and make the index page your start page and change the default view to "condensed" it is quick and minimal like reader was. Also right now they are basically a front end for google reader, but plan on seamlessly transitioning all of their users when reader shuts down: Transitioning from Google Reader to feedly I'm planing on trying some of the other readers as well when I have some time. Feedly is good enough for now though.

My broker (Fidelity) doesn't charge for partial fills if they all happen in the same day. But if part of the order fills today and another part on another day, I would be charged twice. I've built positions in stocks which didn't even trade a single share on many days. I've done this by picking off offers that I've wanted (and paying the commissions) over a number of months and years. And disposed of it the same way. If the stock is sufficiently undervalued then the commissions ($7.95/trade for me) are negligible in the end. If your valuation turns out to be wrong then the commissions will be the least of your problems. Getting out of these stocks can be nearly impossible (without massive losses anyway) if the excrement hits the fan. I'd imagine (but I don't know) that there would be a hefty fee to call a full service broker and have them trade it the way Sanjeev does. Probably equal to quite a few $7.95 trades.

Or it could be that Apple doesn't target price segments that other companies do, so they have a free reign on those segments. that's true. but then they lose market share and become a product for the 1%. :) I think Apple does target upper income consumers, but it isn't just the 1%, it is more like the 25%.

Excellent footage of it from a distance in this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QIMKQihoYRI

I think to be successful and make a positive difference in the world you need to believe and have a tremendous amount of faith.... in yourself. "But you're a profoundly religious man, Mr. Roark—in your own way."

TO SELL IS HUMAN, by Daniel H. Pink giofranchi Another book added to my ever growing to-read list. I seem to add 3 books to the list for every one I am able to read and take off the list. Thank you for posting this, though, if the rest of the book is nearly as good as that snippet it should prove a fascinating read.

I'd estimate if you took my entire TV watching over the last year it would average about 2-3 hours per week. I like Boardwalk Empire, that is the only series I watched in the last year. I used to like The Sopranos back when it was on and I like Dexter, but I don't have Showtime so I wait until I can get the season DVDs from Netflix. When Boardwalk Empire was on I probably averaged 3 hours per week, when it wasn't probably about 2 hours or less. The only TV I watch regularly is a DVD per week from Netflix on a Friday or Saturday night. I've never been into sports very much. There have been years I'd watch the Red Sox, but I don't think I've seen a game in the last 2 years. I probably haven't watched a football or basketball game since I was a teenager (20+ years ago), I don't even watch the superbowl. And I don't think I've ever watched a complete hockey or soccer game on TV. I read probably 8-10 hours per week though.

Thanks for the link. I don't follow Olympus (or any other Japanese company), so I never read that thread before today. Interesting. Japan is a culture I have a very hard time understanding. Not only the business culture, but all of it. Probably for this reason alone, I've never been very interested in Japanese stocks.

I couldn't find anything searching for Olympic Camera. Do you mean Olympus Camera? They seem to still be around. What happened to them?

There is also a large cultural component to violence. Many people like to point to homicide statistics between the US and the UK and make a correlation between the current gun laws and the current homicide rates forgetting that correlation doesn't equal causation. What you find if you look at the statistics over time is that 1) the UK always had a much much lower homicide rate than the US even back when neither country had any gun laws to speak of. And 2) the UK's rate is much higher today than earlier in the last century when it had no gun laws to speak of. You could take that data and conclude that all else being equal gun laws increase violence. Statistics can be used to prove just about anything as the IE vs homicide rate chart shows. Again correlation doesn't imply causation. http://i.imgur.com/47D7zGq.png

The original gun control laws in the US were passed as a direct result of the fact that whites didn't want blacks to own guns. In Massachusetts where I lived up to about 14 months ago you still have to ask your police chief to issue you a license and he gets to use his "discretion" to decide if you are an "appropriate person" (read: white). I find it disgusting that even in a liberal state such as Massachusetts these old clearly racist laws are still on the books and supported whole heatedly by the so-called progressive liberals (the white ones anyway). Oh wait a minute... or are you suggesting that we discriminate against the blind?

Seriously? Can you provide any substantive evidence of your claim? I can't provide any proof of that, but it certainly appears that way from the things they say and support. I tend to agree more with republicans than democrats when it comes to taxes and social programs, but the racism, homophobia, hatred of foreigners/immigrants, war mongering (although Obama seems to be trying to outdo them in this regard), religious intolerance (for any religion other than extreme Jesus worship), really gets to me. I have nothing to go on except what I hear Republicans I know saying and their presidential candidates, etc. Democrats are a bunch of utopian socialists with an unrealistic view of what problems government is capable of solving, but in general they are decent people not likely to look at you funny or treat you differently because you're white and your adopted son is black, or you're a gay male who is walking hand in hand down the street with the love of your life, or you're a Muslim, or you don't speak English. Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc,........ You can't provide any proof so you go on to state your opinion as fact. Amazing how labeling those who don't agree with you as intolerant just highlights your intolerance. Maybe they look at you funny and treat you differently not because your white and your adopted son is black, but because your an "____", (keeping it family friendly), and you would still be one even if your adopted son was white. Easier to blame things on appearances than your own character. I admit that it is my opionion based on what I see and people I've talked with. I'm not sure I wrote anything that wasn't "family friendly", sort of adds to my observational data.

I have run into all of those things personally in various people I know. Although obviously not all republicans are racists and hate gays, or are super religious, it's just that of the large minority of Americans who fit this description most are republicans. But when it comes to the extreme flag-worshiping and war mongering, I'm not sure I've ever met a republican who doesn't fit that mold of extreme nationalistic pride, which I find almost equally appalling. I've been accused of "hating America" or "Blaming America first" more times than I can count when discussing the wars. That's from republicans, the democrats are of course completely silent about the slaughter because it is now their guy ordering it.

Seriously? Can you provide any substantive evidence of your claim? I can't provide any proof of that, but it certainly appears that way from the things they say and support. I tend to agree more with republicans than democrats when it comes to taxes and social programs, but the racism, homophobia, hatred of foreigners/immigrants, war mongering (although Obama seems to be trying to outdo them in this regard), religious intolerance (for any religion other than extreme Jesus worship), really gets to me. I have nothing to go on except what I hear Republicans I know saying and their presidential candidates, etc. Democrats are a bunch of utopian socialists with an unrealistic view of what problems government is capable of solving, but in general they are decent people not likely to look at you funny or treat you differently because you're white and your adopted son is black, or you're a gay male who is walking hand in hand down the street with the love of your life, or you're a Muslim, or you don't speak English. Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc,........

But no reporting or journalism ever is. There is always a million different ways to say the same thing. A million different ways to frame any event. A choice of which photos to display, etc. The way one chooses to do so is always colored by their prejudices even when they are making a conscience effort to be neutral. Every human being is biased in ways they don't even realize consciously. So this is a problem that is impossible to solve, yet the cable news networks have problems above and beyond this sub-conciseness bias. They are all consciously and intentionally biased in either the left or the right direction as a corporate policy. None of them even make an attempt to be neutral. And none of them have a libertarian/anti-government/pro-individual bias, either intentionally or otherwise.

I don't see why people get so worked up about guns. No one wants to talk about it, but we all know who is really behind violence in the US. Bill Gates. http://i.imgur.com/47D7zGq.png

Not that catastrophic. Mythbusters did an episode on this. They pressurized a plane and shot a hole in the fuselage. Nothing. They blew out an entire window. A lot of wind, but nothing catastrophic. Then they blew a big hole with some explosives and it was quite impressive...very catastrophic. A few bullet holes or even an entire window isn't a big deal, if this were not the case there is no way anyone (pilots, air marshals, or anyone else) would ever be allowed to bring a firearm onto a plane. If you were really worried about that though, you could load up with frangible ammo. --Eric

The only thing I find insane and retarded is that Byrne isn't allowed to carry his Glock onto a plane. When I ride in a car, take a bus, ride the subway, etc. I can carry my Glock. When I get on a plane I'm disarmed by my own government and at the mercy of 3 guys with razor blades. That is insane. That said, I am not a CEO of a public company and even I realize that not intending to hurt anyone is no protection from a government hurting you if you don't follow their insane laws. I wouldn't carry my Glock in a gym bag and try to get on a plane. Which is the reason why I don't like to fly. That and I'm not a big fan of body cavity searches. Where guns are outlawed, terrorists need only boxcutters. http://web.archive.org/web/20020803090525im_/http://rkbabang.com/images/rkbabanner3.gif :)

Not just this board, but the internet as a whole. As Cory Doctorow wrote in "Eastern Standard Tribe" you can be part of a community based on any number of things which you have in common with other people, not just where you happen to be physically located. In fact you can easily find others throughout the world with whom you have significantly more in common with than your neighbors in any number of different ways. You can be part of many different communities for different reasons with people who are all physically located all over the world. The whole current theory of the nation-state (marking off areas of land and calling the people a 'nation') is falling further and further into obsolescence every year in proportion to the ease of communication and the network effect linking us all together. (and good riddance to it).

Giofranchi, I agree. I don't know what I'd do without my audiobooks. I started listening to audiobooks in my car maybe 12 years ago or more. I used to get them on tape (then CD) from the library even way back before I had an mp3 player. Up until about a year ago I spent an average of 3 hrs per day in my car, now I spend about 1hr/day in my car. Plus I listen when I do yard work, or workout, etc... I can't tell you how many books I've listened to over the years, too many to count. I enjoy them so much that I've never thought of my commute as wasted time. I always have 3 books in progress at all times, one audiobook, one on my nook, and one dead tree version. I probably only watch on average about 2 hours of TV per week and that is a Netflix movie not anything showing on TV itself. If it weren't for the wife and kids I wouldn't be subscribing to cable at all.

Trading again!

No because of Roe versus Wade, http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf And/or the decrease in lead exposure during childhood. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--MITcvOw0QQ/UO0GUwa1UGI/AAAAAAAAguY/VFpNow1JNfs/s400/Lead_Crime.gif from: Strong case that childhood lead leads to a lot more youthful adult violent crime, teen pregnancies and IQ loss

The big oil, gas, and energy companies are always on my watch list. For instance I bought XOM in 2010 for $59 and sold in 2012 for $88. I've made money in the past on CHK as well and I might be buying now if I didn't have better ideas. The need for energy isn't going anywhere and will only be increasing as the developing world develops. When these companies go on sale they are worth picking up.

I'm not actually convinced that any facts about the crime rate make much of an impact on consumers' decisions about installing an alarm (or taking any other sort of defensive measure such as not allowing your kid to walk to school or buying a hand gun). The decisions get made based on the perception of risk rather than any objective measure of risk. In many cases, it's truly an irrational, emotional decision. Many of my friends and colleagues have monitored alarm systems that cost anywhere from $300-$500 annually. Unless your community has a demonstrably high break-and-enter rate, that's basically wasted money. Canada's national break-and-enter rate is about 700 per 100,000 annually, implying that on average there's a very small probability of your house being hit. If your house does get hit, most people have basically nothing of interest to the crack-head perpetrators (ie, maybe a small amount of cash, some booze, or a couple bits of electronics), so your losses to theft are likely going to be small in any case. And if your losses do actually amount to something significant due to accompanying vandalism, then you just make an insurance claim. So, in essence, every year my friends and colleagues are incurring a 100% probability of losing $300-500 to mitigate a 1% probability of losing a couple thousand bucks. Crime rate be damned! This is true unless the crime rate was very high and on the increase, people would perceive the danger, constantly hearing about friends, neighbors, or family members being burglarized, and would be much more likely to buy an alarm system. The point you made about insurance is exactly what my wife told ADT when they kept calling us after we bought our house (they previous owners had the alarm monitored). The guy was very pushy asking her what if your home alone and someone breaks in? She told him "I own guns I'll be fine". He paused and said "but what if your not home", my wife just responded "that's what insurance is for". He finally hung up. In general I don't like to do business with companies who employ pushy salesmen with appeal to fear tactics even if I was inclined to purchase a service. I