We use OnSIP, http://www.onsip.com/ I HIGHLY recommend them. Call quality is great, support is competent, and the pricing structure is usage based, not a flat rate. I don't work for them, and I am not an affiliate, but I have been a customer for 3-4 years.

This looks interesting. Do you need any pbx or if i got 5 IP phones, set them up, they would just work?

Need to crunch some numbers on per minute vs flat rate. One of the businesses is phone intensive, probably use 120-240 minutes per day.

If you view the page with Javascript disabled, you get

"For security reasons Javascript is required for this website to work.

Why?

Because Javascript runs on your computer.

Which means no information is transferred over the internet when you type in your password.

Which means that no one can intercept it."

Am I the only one bugged by the incorrect use of "year 2010 Anno Domini"? Anno Domini means Year of Our Lord, so the proper usage is 'AD 2010', as in "The Year of Our Lord 2010".

Is this unusual for DNS failover? We are looking at doing the same thing for our DR system. Does anyone have any experience with DNS failover?

Record caching is intrinsic to DNS. Negative cache times being ignored is not usual in my experience; but then when you're at Wikipedia's scale minority cases are large enough that they are worth compensating for.

I think the author misses the point at the end - it's not a choice between Adobe messing up and users not updating. The question is "why are so many users running outdated versions?" I believe one of biggest reasons is because Adobe makes it such a pain in the neck to update their products.

Perhaps this is an indication that a single, all encompassing program is impossible to fit to every student. Perhaps a range of programs could be offered, and students and their parents could chose the education program that fits their needs best. A choice in education, if you will.

Didn't the Pierson's Puppeteers breed for luck? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson%27s_Puppeteers#Foreign_...

"This fear arises, at least in part, because people don’t know their neighbors as well as they did in times past. People tend to lead private lives, largely indoors, and adults center their social lives more around their work companions than around their neighbors." Seems like a solution will require addressing more than just the kids.

I think this misses the point of the original article. While the overall point of ignoring progress may be valid, Mankiw is aware of the ability of markets to reduce costs. He is asking about how to allocate scarce resources. If there is a method for immortality which costs more than the average production of the population, there is no way to give it to everyone. Who gets it? It is a thought experiment, not a prediction for advanced cultures.

I think he was annoyed because this excuse is often used against developed longevity science ("but only the rich will get access to it!").

Maybe that's not what the original article meant (I don't know), but the point still stands in general.

We already have a method to allocate scarce resources - charge more for them. What the thought experiment hasn't suggested is why that isn't good enough.

We currently let rich people have better medical care, why would this be different?

It sounds like you don't know many academics.

I do but they're all from engineering disciplines. Maybe that's the problem.