dustinst22

Are you really using antecdotal hands to justify a convention. I think many methods can get you to slam here, but that's not the point -- cherry picking hands to "illustrate" why a convention is useful is about the worst way imaginable.

sorry I missed, will be there this Sunday

Sounds like a good trip. Gordon, we gotta do an AK regional one of these months. I need an excuse to take a trip there.

Interesting read. Reminded me of this: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/04/my-students-dont-know-how-to-have-a-conversation/360993/ *****'s getting real in the streets -- new generation of kids will be haves and have nots -- not based on material stuff, but those in charge to lead and those who are sheep. They will be too stimulated and 'trained' dumb to do anything but comply. It's really scary and imo will represent massive inequality far beyond anything we see now.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=pn|dustinst22,~~M38967,~~M38965,~~M38966|st||md|3S5AH37JKD367AC89A%2CS3689H8AD49TJC45Q%2CS27KH49TD2QC2367T%2C|rh||ah|Board%205|sv|n|mb|p|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20!D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|1N|an|One%20notrump%20overcall%20--%202-5%20!C%3B%202-5%20!D%3B%20|mb|2D|an|5%2B%20!D%3B%206-10%20total%20points%20|mb|2S|an|4%2B%20!S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%208-12%20total%20points%20|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|H2|pc|H3|pc|HA|pc|H4|pc|DJ|pc|DQ|pc|DK|pc|DA|pc|D7|pc|DT|pc|D2|pc|D8|pc|S3|pc|SK|pc|SQ|pc|S5|pc|HT|pc|H5|pc|H7|pc|H8|pc|H9|pc|H6|pc|HJ|pc|S6|pc|S9|pc|S2|pc|S4|pc|SA|pc|D3|pc|D4|pc|S7|pc|D5|pc|C2|pc|CJ|pc|CA|pc|C4|pc|HK|pc|S8|pc|C3|pc|HQ|pc|D9|pc|C6|pc|ST|pc|D6|pc|SJ|pc|C8|pc|C5|pc|C7|pc|CK|pc|C9|pc|CQ|pc|CT|]499|350[/hv] One of the stranger bids I've seen. I've seen GIB make this bid in a similar auction quite often with only a 4c major, which is strange enough, but 3 is really from another planet.

You'd be surprised what Google allows to run across its display network -- malicious downloads don't suprise me in the least. It's surprising because Google is a very trusted brand in the ad space. The only reason I know of what they allow is because I spend considerable amounts of $ and time on their platform. On Google owned properties (i.e. google search ads), they are much more stringent about what they allow to run. But on their display network (which is google adsense utilizing doubleclick) they are very loose, figuring it's not their own brand to protect.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57614544-93/kentucky-police-chief-to-be-paid-in-bitcoin/

Well, apparently it's possible. How many people are doing this I have no idea, but I imagine there are some. http://www.coindesk.com/get-paid-bitcoin-bitpays-payroll-api/

Thanks for the sarcasm, I was just curious what Pam was referring to. Anyway, it appears the Newsweek story has been debunked already and Satoshi is not Dorian Nakamoto: We are getting trolled by Satoshi Nakamoto This story keeps getting more and more interesting. Original Forum Post http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/06/satoshi-dorian/

From what I could gather, it doesn't appear that his family knows. Or maybe there is something I missed?

The poll questions are actually delivered via what's known as "content locking". The questions are served across the DoubleClick display network (which google acquired many yrs ago) and a user can't access the content of various news/content sources until they answer the question. In my opinion, for certain types of surveys you will have much greater bias than other types (depending on the type of question being asked). Additionally, since the nature of the content sites tend to be news-related for the most part, the demographic is likely a more educated demo. An example: http://www.hitchedmag.com/article.php?id=1803 Another issue is, how accurate are responses to a survey when the user simply wants to answer something quickly to receive their "carrot"?

The major problem with a survey like this is that I think you will get a higher response rate amongst those who actually play. I imagine when you ask a random survey question to a random Internet user who isn't forced to answer, those who know the subject will be more willing to answer the poll. Especially if it's a niche subject (in this case Bridge) it will attract more attention to those who know the subject. I think the only way to get an accurate representation for something like this is to somehow "force" every person asked to answer. On the other hand a poll asking an opinion on who will win a presidential election is likely going to get a fair representation, thus making the Google consumer survey very accurate for those types of polls.

The Face Behind Bitcoin

States do determine minimum wage, the federal minimum wage is just a baseline. Every state that falls in the higher cost of living category has a higher minimum wage than the federal wage.

Eric Rodwell answered why he prefers serious 3NT here: http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/in-the-well-eric-rodwell/ I'm going to make the assumption that if Rodwell thinks it's better than non-serious, that non-serious probably isn't a "way better agreement" as you put it. That said, Justin made an interesting point I think regarding MP versus IMPs. Maybe we aren't concerned in IMPs about giving away information with a cue bid when looking for slam, but in MP's where every trick is critical it becomes more damaging.

From another planet overbid.

I'm not sure if food has been genetically modified for thousands of years. Can you explain what you mean by that? But to answer your question, yes that's what GMO refers to.

I think Pam is referring to genetically modified organism in the sense that the genetic code is manipulated via biotechnology (i.e. using cloned or synthesized DNA and then inserting that into the genome). Clearly this is much different than what has happened for thousands of years. But she is correct, we still don't know the long term implications of GMO produced food. However, isn't this true for almost anything involving science, and hasn't this been the case for centuries as we have progressed technologically? We should be careful of what we read and see in the media, especially with a subject like this one which is an easy target for the media to play off people's fears that we are acting as "God". In my opinion it's much more important to read what the scientific communities have to say on the matter.

Yes and for some reason very few intermediate level players have this agreement, but almost all adv+ players do. Very useful agreement to have. Keep in mind only the high low signal is a strong signal, as with 2 you will just play up the line. With 3, obv the middle is used for no pref.

Was just throwing out one example. There are many countries with high gun ownership (i.e. Germany, Norway, Finland, France, Denmark) with relatively low murder rates. Then there are countries with an outright ban on firearms (Soviet Union) where the murder rate remains astronomical (people just find other weapons to use, or find illegal methods of obtaining firearms). There doesn't appear to be a definitive correlation between the rate of gun ownership and the murder rate.

Except that you're making a logical fallacy here. There could be (likely are) many reasons (other than the current gun laws) the homicide rate is lower. There are many instances and examples of areas that have liberal gun laws with a low homicide rate (and vice versa). Switzerland comes to mind. I very much doubt tighter gun control in the states would have a drastic impact on the homicide rate.

The issues/debates/controversies and politics involving Monsanto are another sub-subject altogether. Really I was just interested in the debate about the known risks (by the scientific community) tied to GMO produced food.

Are GMO's safe? What have world’s top independent science organizations concluded about the safety of GMOs? http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/29/are-gmos-safe-global-independent-science-organizations-weigh-in/ Example of the media trying to scare the public about GMO's: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/08/can_gmo_corn_cause_allergies_don_t_believe_elle_s_scary_story.html Or if you care to read more on the sources: EU-Funded GMO research: http://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf Plant Genetics, Sustainable Agriculture and Global Food Security http://www.genetics.org/content/188/1/11.long About mandating labeling of GMO food: http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-board-directors-legally-mandating-gm-food-labels-could-%E2%80%9Cmislead-and-falsely-alarm Interesting quote:

Hi Pam, here is a good article on this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/29/are-gmos-safe-global-independent-science-organizations-weigh-in/ and this http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/08/can_gmo_corn_cause_allergies_don_t_believe_elle_s_scary_story.html Or if you care to read more on the sources: http://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf http://www.genetics.org/content/188/1/11.long http://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-board-directors-legally-mandating-gm-food-labels-could-%E2%80%9Cmislead-and-falsely-alarm "While every major scientific regulatory oversight body in the world, including the National Academies of Science and the Food and Drug Administration in the United States, has concluded that genetically modified foods pose no harm not also found in conventional or organic foods, the public remains deeply suspicious of them. A survey published in the same newspaper the day before Harmon’s piece ran found that 37 percent of those interviewed worried about GMOs, saying they feared that such foods cause cancer or allergies. Those fear-based views are regularly reinforced by popular lifestyle magazines and the echo chamber of the Web." "Since GMOs were introduced into the food supply almost 20 years ago, there has not been one documented case of any health problem in humans—not even so much as a sniffle—linked to GMOs. The American Medical Association, whose physician members would have long ago picked up on a GMO-allergy connection, definitively rejects such speculation. “Bioengineered foods have been consumed for close to 20 years, and during that time, no overt consequences on human health have been reported and/or substantiated in the peer-reviewed literature,” it has stated. That scientific consensus has been endorsed by every major science oversight body in the world." I won't post anymore about this as it's off the topic and really shouldn't even be a consideration as an answer to the OP's question.

Amadeus. Still just as enjoyable after having viewed it at least 10 times. I feel the same away about the Godfather.