Death and Taxes Shows Fascinating, Terrible View on Military Tech Spending [...

 

 

Sent to you by Derrick via Google Reader:

 

 

Death and Taxes Shows Fascinating, Terrible View on Military Tech Spending [Military Technology Spending]

via Gizmodo by Jesus Diaz on 10/24/08

Death and Taxes 2009 is a detailed graphical account showing where your tax dollars will go next year in the most detailed and fascinating way: Everything is set to scale according to the amount of money spent on it, showing the amazing weight that military-related spending has in the total Federal budget. It's just mindblowing to see it all with one look. It's easy to get amazed with military technology and, like with Dubai's architecture and its slaves, I keep forgetting how much money really gots into developing hypersonic missiles, airborne lasers, invisible bombers, next generation fighters, body piercing tanks, torpedoes capable of splitting a huge ship in two, ever-vigilant drones, scary helmets, and other deadly gadgets. When you zoom in the interactive map, the numbers are just staggering.

For sure, the military research and manufacturing that Darpa or companies like Boeing and Lockheed Martin do not only push the scientific and industrial envelope—with long term benefits for everyone—and some may argue that it provides with work and fuels the economy—although this is kind of a fallacy and a vicious circle—but seriously, is this the only way to achieve it? What about the rest of the stuff?

Hopefully, this will all change. Someday. [Wall Stats via Dark Roasted Blend]

 

 

Things you can do from here:

• Subscribe to Gizmodo using Google Reader
• Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites

 

 

Vote for the Guy with One House

(CNN) -- Republican presidential candidate John McCain is just holding on like a boxer before he gets knocked out, comedian Chris Rock says.

Comedian Chris Rock told Larry King he's proud of Barack Obama's character.

Rock, an avid supporter of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, spoke with CNN's Larry King on Thursday. He said Obama is more grounded with your average American -- not somebody like McCain with "12 houses."

"The other guy [McCain] can lose five houses," Rock said.

"I'll go with the guy with one house. The guy with one house is scared about losing his house." Watch Chris Rock describe a beaten up McCain »

King began the interview by asking Rock about Thursday's economic bailout talks when Obama and McCain went to the White House for discussions with the nation's top leaders.

KING: Obama and McCain at opposite ends of the table. What do you make of it?

ROCK: What do I make of it? If this was a boxing match, McCain would be holding.

KING: Holding on?

ROCK: Yes. It's like he got hit really hard in the stomach like, 'OK. I can't let him go. He's going to knock me out.' So that's what appears to be going on right now. Just a hold.

KING: Has the financial crisis affected you?

ROCK: Larry, I drove a cab over here tonight. When it's over, I'm going to try to pick up some more fares. I'm losing everything, Larry.

KING: Really downtrodden?

ROCK: Yes, it's real bad.

KING: Have HBO paid you already?

ROCK: They have paid me, but the money is worthless now. Haven't you heard? Your money's worth nothing.

KING: You must be ... proud that at this stage in our history a black man is running for president on a major ticket.

ROCK: Um, you know what? I'm proud Barack Obama's running for president. You know? If it was Flavor Flav, would I be proud? No. I don't support Barack Obama because he's black.

KING: I said just as a proud feeling. That's normal.

ROCK: There's a proud feeling because of the character of the man. You know, I was -- I supported John Kerry and, you know -- and what's my man? Al Gore.

KING: Al Gore.

ROCK: But this guy seems to be a little bit more. He seems to have watched other peoples' mistakes and, you know, seems to have a little bit more going on.

KING: From a comedic stand point, who is funnier, McCain or Obama? Seriously. Is Obama not -- it's hard to be funny about Obama?

ROCK: No, no. It's weird. People ask me that all the time. ... McCain jokes are just easy jokes, like I don't want a president with a bucket list. That's like a McCain joke. Those jokes are easy. It's like you basically, you know, you know, take the dust off your Reagan jokes and tell them again. You know?

But Obama, oh, this is a whole new set of jokes. I got to find a whole new move to the basket here. So I kind of hope he wins.

KING: Didn't you introduce Obama at a rally?

ROCK: I introduced Obama at the Apollo Theater not too long ago. I think Obama would be great. I mean, just look the big thing right now is the economy. And people are going broke. And here: The choice isn't Republican or Democrat. The choice is you got a guy that's worth $150 million with 12 houses against a guy who's worth a million dollars with one house.

KING: Well --

ROCK: The guy with one house really cares about losing a house, because he is homeless. The other guy can lose five houses and still got a bunch of houses. Does this make any sense? Am I the only one that sees this?

KING: It's unique way of ...

ROCK: I'm just saying, John McCain could lose half his houses.

KING: You got a point.

ROCK: And sleep well.

KING: You and Bill Clinton were on Letterman on Tuesday. You had some problems with the tone of his endorsement of Barack Obama. ... Do you think Bill is hesitant about Barack Obama?

ROCK: You know what? You know, he did a great speech in Denver. And Hillary's been on the campaign trail. Just at that moment, if you watched what happened on David Letterman, it appeared he was holding back. And when you tell a joke and everybody laughs, it is not because they disagree with what you're saying. So --

KING: They get it?

ROCK: Yes, they get it. The whole audience was in on it. But, you know, hey, the guy's in a weird position there. His wife ran for the thing and she didn't win.

KING: The next night, on "The Daily Show," Jon Stewart asked Clinton about the Letterman appearance and Clinton suggested that Obama supporters who questioned commitment are missing the point.

ROCK: It was great. It was great. And you're right, [Obama] does need to get some of the votes that went to Hillary and all that. I don't understand any Democrat that voted for Hillary that doesn't support Obama. Because their views are pretty similar. You know what I mean? ...

I understand people supporting Mr. McCain. But a Democrat that's going to just be mad is -- there's something kind of really messed up about that.

KING: Have you always done political humor?

ROCK: You know --

KING: When you started, did you do politics?

ROCK: I'm interested in the world. Jon Stewart does political humor. Bill Maher does political humor. I talk about stuff the way guys would talk about it at the barber shop. I don't belong on any panel on this show. You know what I mean? I don't deserve to be near Roland Martin and Anderson Cooper and all these guys. I try to talk about politics in a way a guy that works at UPS would understand.

KING: You did a lot of Brooklyn stuff.

ROCK: I do all sorts of stuff, Larry. All sorts of stuff. You know, I hope Obama wins just because, you know, the country needs it. The country needs a change. We kind of seen what this whole McCain thing is. And I'll go with the guy with one house. The guy with one house is scared about losing his house.

 

KING: I never thought of it that way.

ROCK: It is that simple.

Filesharing case dismissed

Not saying that anyone I know of downloads and circulates any questionable music files, but this is a landmark case and precedent.

---

Judge declares mistrial in RIAA filesharing case, sets aside $222,000 verdict

09-25-2008

We always thought that the RIAA's first-ever filesharing trial victory against Jammie Thomas was a little suspect since the labels weren't required to prove that Thomas even had Kazaa installed on her machine or was the person using the account in question, and it looks like the court agrees -- it's just declared a mistrial and set aside the $222,000 judgment on the grounds that simply making copyrighted works available for download does not constitute copyright infringement. That's a huge decision -- the "making available" theory is the basis for most of the RIAA's legal arguments -- and it means that the RIAA will now have to prove the unauthorized transfer of each song it wants to collect damages on at the new trial. We'll see what effect this has in the broader sense -- we've got a feeling we're in for a slew of appellate decisions on both sides of the "making available" debate -- but for now it looks like the good guys are finally starting to score some points.

[Via ZDNet, thanks JagsLive]

Read - Wired article
Read - Decision [PDF]

Redeem Team: Statement Time

Have you seen this photo? No, it is not an invitation to get your eyes checked, nor a photoshop. This is the Spanish National Team's version of talking smack. Throw all the "yo momma" jokes out the window, this is a slap in the face to the host nation China. The teams response, "What's the big deal?" If they don't see a problem, I guess they never will.

My problem is the perception that the NBA has an image problem. Say what you want about tattoes and saggy shorts, nobody is posing with the New Black Panther Party with "Kill Whitey" shirts on with a black fist. Will the Spanish team get a pass? Of course. Because they are European? Nope. They will get a pass the same way that their other acts have come to pass.

Spanish sports is no stranger to racial controversy.

1. Luis Aragones, the head coach of Spain’s men’s soccer team, was overheard telling his player Jose Antonio Reyes to “tell that black (expletive) you are better than him” at a training session in 2004. Aragones was referring to Thierry Henry, a black player from France who was then a teammate of Reyes at English Premier League club Arsenal.
   
2. At a Formula One motor racing testing session this year, a group of Spanish fans believed to be supporting home driver Fernando Alonso were pictured with their faces covered with black paint. They wore T-shirts with the slogan “Hamilton’s Family,” a reference to Alonso’s world title rival Lewis Hamilton, a black Englishman.
   
3. Moreover, at an exhibition match in Madrid in 2004, several black members of the England men’s soccer team were subjected to monkey chants and whistles whenever they touched the ball.
   
   Spain recently beat China in overtime after overcoming a 19point deficit. All I can say is that the Redeem Team is set to play Spain on Aug 16th at 10:15 am est and should hold no mercy....they could be on the next photo shoot. We don't even want to imagine that one....do we?

Why play a losing game?

Study uncovers why low-income people buy lottery tickets

Although state lotteries, on average, return just 53 cents for every dollar spent on a ticket, people continue to pour money into them — especially low-income people, who spend a larger percentage of their incomes on lottery tickets than do the wealthier segments of society. A new Carnegie Mellon University study sheds light on the reasons why low-income lottery players eagerly invest in a product that provides poor returns.

In the study, published in the July issue of the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, participants who were made to feel subjectively poor bought nearly twice as many lottery tickets as a comparison group that was made to feel subjectively more affluent. The Carnegie Mellon findings point to poverty's central role in people's decisions to buy lottery tickets.

"Some poor people see playing the lottery as their best opportunity for improving their financial situations, albeit wrongly so," said the study's lead author Emily Haisley, a doctoral student in the Department of Organizational Behavior and Theory at Carnegie Mellon's Tepper School of Business. "The hope of getting out of poverty encourages people to continue to buy tickets, even though their chances of stumbling upon a life-changing windfall are nearly impossibly slim and buying lottery tickets in fact exacerbates the very poverty that purchasers are hoping to escape."

The researchers influenced participants' perceptions of their relative wealth — or lack thereof — by having them complete a survey on their opinions of the city of Pittsburgh that included an item on annual income. The group made to feel poor was asked to provide its income on a scale that began at "less than $100,000" and went upward from there in $100,000 increments, ensuring that most respondents would be in the lowest income category. The group made to feel subjectively wealthier was asked to report income on a scale that began with "less than $10,000" and increased in $10,000 increments, leading most respondents to be in a middle or upper tier.

Participants, who were recruited at Pittsburgh's Greyhound Bus terminal, were paid $5 for completing the survey and given the opportunity to buy as many as five scratch-off lottery tickets. The experimental group purchased an average of 1.27 lottery tickets, compared with 0.67 tickets bought by the members of the control group.

A second experiment reported in the paper found that indirectly reminding participants that, while different income groups face unequal outcomes in education, jobs and housing, everyone has equal chances of winning the lottery induced an increase in the number of lottery tickets purchased. The group given this reminder purchased 1.31 tickets, compared with 0.54 for the group not given such a reminder.

In the study, the researchers note that lotteries set off a vicious cycle that not only exploits low-income individuals' desires to escape poverty but also directly prevents them from improving upon their financial situations. They recommend that state lottery administrators explore strategies that balance the economic burdens faced by low-income households with the need to maintain important funding streams for state governments.

"State lotteries are popular revenue sources that are unlikely to go away anytime soon," said George Loewenstein, a study co-author and Herbert A. Simon professor of economics and psychology at Carnegie Mellon. "However, it is possible to implement measures that can actually benefit low-income lottery players and lead to fairer outcomes." Loewenstein noted that one such potential method for addressing income inequality, which has shown promise in other countries, is tying lottery tickets to savings accounts.