Are you kidding me?

quote from Macworld’s “Analysis:  Application blocking diminishes iPhone“”“There is some serious frustration from people that did not unlock the phone but did use third-party applications,” said Tim Bajarin, president of high-tech consulting firm Creative Strategies. “The fact those apps have been altered has caused a big outcry. Apple is taking a significant hit because enough of people found those applications useful.”What outcry?  What significant hit?  Last time I checked Apple stock was at an all time high.  If that is a hit, every company in the world is wishing they would get that hit as well.I believe Mr. Grueber over at DaringFireball, is closer to the reality of the situation.”Me, on the other hand, I didn’t hesitate to upgrade my iPhone. The third-party hacks were fun to play with, but there isn’t a single one that I miss.”
I believe his sentiment is closer to the reality of the situation then the pure crap oozing out of this statement by Christopher Breen in his article “Is Apple on the Wrong Path?” “I’m aware that Apple feels it must do right by AT&T but to offer up an update that it knows will destroy hacked iPhones—and provide no provision for undoing the damage—is a despicable act.”Yeah, not supporting hacks…Geez that is frickin unheard of.

Gore criticizes Bush for ignoring Iraq’s ties to terrorism

Oh how things change! read more | digg story

Drunk students learn lesson from peeved giraffe

Drunk students learn lesson from peeved giraffe -
Animal Peculiarity – MSNBC.com

This amazing, stupid, and hilarious. Definitely check this one out!

A little late but better than never: An explanation of our tax system…yuck!

I stumbled across this analogy set up by a University of Georgia professor that explains the United States Tax System in an easy to understand way. Its pretty crazy so read on…

From the University of Georgia:

Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all
ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,
it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you
are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost
of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so
the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could
they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair
share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the
sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar
owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by
roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each
should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!” “Yeah, that’s right,”
exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair
that he got ten times more than I!” “That’s true!!” shouted the
seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The
wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four
men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits
the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the
bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough
money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is
how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get
the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them
for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact,
they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat
friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

Interesting…very interesting.

News Flash! Dip in global pirate ship attacks

BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Dip in global pirate ship attacks

Alright. I know pirate attacks are serious and all, but I think they need to use a different word instead of “pirate”. The images of Blackbeard and Johnny Depp come to mind much quicker than actual criminals who hurt people. Seriously, it is a good thing that attacks are down, though if researchers were to look at the big picture they would see that pirate attacks since the 1700s are exponentially lower than they are presently.

The article goes on to say that “improved vigilance and security measures had helped reduce [the attacks]“. Really?! So the big ol’ Jolly Roger doesn’t act as a dead giveaway? More vigilance was needed?

What gets me the most however, is that the article lists the “hot-spots” for pirate activity, “Indonesian waters remain the most dangerous for seafarers, with nine attacks. Nigeria comes close behind, with attacks climbing from four to six.” Six attacks?! Six attacks in one year and that automatically earns “hot-spot” status?! Maybe I do not see the severity of the situation or maybe I know they are more lethal lighting strikes (about 100) each year than pirate attacks*. Hm, interesting eh matey?

*Source: http://tinyurl.com/28ydd7