Ever Charge Your iPhone Away From Home?

Trusting iPhones plugged into bogus chargers get a dose of malware
Billy Lau, Yeongjin Jang, and Chengyu Song | arstechnica

"Plugging your phone into a charger should be pretty safe to do. It should fill your phone with electricity, not malware. But researchers from Georgia Institute of Technology have produced fake chargers they've named Mactans that do more than just charge your phone: they install custom, malicious applications onto iPhones."

From what I understand this only applies to using a USB cord for recharging a iPhone.

I also would assume this could also apply to other things like tablets, etc.

ObamaCare- A More Positive View

There sure is a lot of misinformation being put out by those who would like to things to remain just as they are. For one the doctors whose salaries are between $150,000 and $250,000 a year with hourly earnings between $50 to $150 an hour.

There's the big pharmaceutical industries. Then there are the medical insurance companies without 'Obamacare' who would get to cherry pick from those who have no employer based medical coverage.

Another enemy of 'ObamaCare' is congress who's members depend on campaign contributions from these groups. Congressional members who are under constant bombardment from the lobby groups funded by the billions of dollars invested by special interest groups determined to keep the status quo.

Perhaps the biggest reason of all are the Republicans who are determined to win back the White House at all cost. There is no larger nor determined group to see 'ObamaCare' fail then they. Even if they have to shutdown government then blame Obama for it. It's simply unimaginable for them to allow Obama's signature piece of legislation to stand. The logic being once 'ObamaCare' fully kicks in, many Americans will start seeing their yearly medical insurance premiums going down as much as $10,000 a year. That makes for a pretty tough argument for booting Democrats out of the oval office and congress.

Is it any wonder people are turned off after seeing unending deceptive advertisements costing millions of dollars each year in an attempt to derail 'ObamaCare'.

I won't pretend to know whether everything about the 'Affordable Care Act' is hunky dory. I'm sure there are more then a few parts that still need fine tuning. One thing I'm certain of, it's not as bad as we've been told by those benefiting greatly under the current way we are paying for medical coverage. Of that you can be sure!

Check out Tami Luhby's article at CNN Money-- New Yorkers to see 50% drop in health insurance costs in Obamacare exchange

According to this July 17th press release from Governor Cuomo...

"On average, the approved 2014 rates for even the highest tier of plans individual New York consumers could purchase on the exchange (gold and platinum) represent a 53 percent reduction compared to last year’s direct-pay individual rates. The fact that these average individual rates are effectively being cut more than in half is primarily because a greater number of uninsured individuals are expected to obtain coverage in the individual insurance market – lowering overall premiums. (Note: That 53 percent reduction does not include the impact of federal financial assistance for individuals meeting certain income thresholds who are purchasing coverage on the exchange, which would lower costs even further for many consumers.)

Furthermore, despite the fact that health care costs per capita are approximately 18 percent higher in New York than the national average, the average approved rates for the benchmark individual “silver plan” in New York would be in line with (nearly 10 percent lower) the nationwide average

The following companies had health insurance plan rates for the health benefits exchange approved today by DFS. The rates approved today are subject to final certification of the insurers’ participation in the exchange
•Aetna
•Affinity Health Plan, Inc.
•American Progressive Life & Health Insurance Company of New York
•Capital District Physicians Health Plan, Inc.
•Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York
•Empire BlueCross BlueShield
•Excellus
•Fidelis Care
•Freelancers Co-Op
•Healthfirst New York
•HealthNow New York, Inc.
•Independent Health
•MetroPlus Health Plan
•MVP Health Plan, Inc.
•North Shore LIJ
•Oscar Health Insurance Co.
•United Healthcare

Enrollment for the exchange begins on October 1, 2013 for coverage that will be effective January 1, 2014There are certainly a lot more companies to choose from then previously. If this sucked so bad, why are so many stepping forward?

For a breakdown of all the specific rates in New York for 2014 CLICK HERE

Well that's only New York you say. Well in Maryland they are reporting "A 21-year-old nonsmoker will be able to buy health insurance that costs as little as $93 a month on the Maryland Health Connection... The state joins California, New York and elsewhere in achieving monthly premiums below estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and others."

These were the main points I wanted to make. However for those who would prefer a longer read, here are some more goodies....


EXTRA READNew York Magazine- "Obamacare Still Not Collapsing", "The employer mandate that the Obama administration is delaying is not a central part of the law. You could repeal it without any functional changes to the guts of the law"

Forbes, "The Congressional Budget Office, in a 2012 report, argued that employers do not have a large incentive to dump workers’ coverage. And even if employers dropped coverage for an additional 20 million workers relative to the CBO’s projections, the deficit would not increase, says the CBO, because the subsidies paid to low-income workers would be offset by an increase in tax revenue from lower utilization of the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored insurance... If you like Obamacare, and you want it to work, you don’t need the employer mandate.

ObamaCare Facts.com- About The Employer Mandate

No all the investors in hospitals are against the new healthcare law. 'The Raw Story' reports Hospital investors ‘sold’ on Obamacare despite bumps. "They expect company earnings to strengthen as more Americans gain insurance coverage and hospitals lose less money treating the uninsured... The biggest benefit from health reform is expected to be an influx of patients whose treatment will be paid for either through expanded Medicaid programs or with private insurance obtained from state-based exchanges that will take effect on January 1. That should help drive down the percentage of revenue now being written off as bad debt for treating the uninsured, which can be up to 20 percent or greater for some hospital chains.


SOME FINAL WORDS
This legislation is extremely complex. Some of it is good. Some of it not so good. There is big money riding on this thing. There sure are bunch of loud mouths shouting too. At the end of the day both are trying to appeal to peoples' raw emotions and preconceived beliefs. When this happens, the facts are largely overshadowed and buried. One needs to dig and sort things out for themselves.

I'd be willing to bet 90% of my readers never got this far into reading my post. I've been told numerous times to keep it to one paragraph. For the vast majority of people reading anything more then 10 sentences would be like waterboarding. This holds true when I read my stats. Be that as it may, it can't be said I didn't take thrice the time it would take for even a lazy person to read.

U.S. Congress Hard(ly) At Work

In a few days the U.S. Congress will be going into recess. Except for two sessions in the 'House of Representatives' on Thursday, August 1st and Friday, August 2nd both the senate and house are taking off the entire month of August. When they return on September 9th they will be facing a grueling 9 day schedule for the entire month of September.

When congress returns it will be facing the deadline for funding the United States. Failure to pass legislation will result in shutting down the government. Congress also has to enact legislation that would raise the budget caps both due by October 1st. This leaves them only 12 sessions between today Monday, July 29th and October 1st to figure things out.

Getting this work done isn't looking to too promising. According to an article Sarah Jones wrote for 'Politicus USA' on July 2nd congress only managed to pass 15 actual bills up until that time. It's no wonder. This bunch only scheduled themselves to get together only 4 months this year for a total of 126 sessions.

It isn't like congress was lazy as some accuse. They managed to vote 40 times against 'National Healthcare" despite knowing it was DOA in the Senate. Even if they could get it past the Senate there's no way in Hell the President would sign it. According to 'Govtrack', "Around 10,000 bills and resolutions are considered by the U.S. Congress in each two-year session, but of those only about 4% will become law." You know important things like..S.Res. 201: A resolution designating the first Wednesday in September 2013 as “National Polycystic Kidney Disease Awareness Day”.

S.Res. 35: A resolution congratulating the Baltimore Ravens for winning Super Bowl XLVII.

S.Res. 183: A resolution commemorating the relaunching of the 172-year-old Charles W. Morgan by Mystic Seaport: The Museum of America and the Sea

H.Res. 107: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 890) to prohibit waivers relating to compliance with the work requirements for the program of block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy families, and for other purposes

H.Res. 4: Authorizing the Clerk to inform the President of the election of the Speaker and the Clerk

H.R. 1411: California Coastal National Monument Expansion Act of 2013

* SOURCEPoint is, I have no problem with congress not passing another bunch of laws that most likely would only mucky things up anyway. What I do have a problem with is their callous disregard with the things that need to be done. Things like screwing around with the U.S. budget till the last minute before there's a government shutdown. Playing politics (with Obama) by forcing sequester to continue into 2014 . A move that according to the CBO could cost us up to 1.6 million jobs.

I have rather a simple theory. More governments have collapsed throughout history from within then by outside enemies. One of the most effective ways to defeat one's enemy isn't through the use of military force but rather by collapsing its economy. The United States tries to employ this method all the time through the use of embargos on other nations.

It's all fine and dandy to try and defeat the other political party in this manner, but when does it cross the line and we end up jeopardizing our nation's own well being?


Whoever is President represents not only their political party affiliation but also the American people. When congress ends up hamstringing the President, does it not also take down the American people who elected that person right along with him?

Many may see congress as nothing more the bunch of politicians blowing hot air. Not I. I view this current batch of legislators far more the that. They are playing games that could end up threatening the continued existence of the United States more then those who dare war against us.

The Daily Show - A$$holes Wanted for Congress 07/25/13

Something I Noticed About Electric Consumption

Rep[ost

Over the hot spell I noticed that my electrical voltage dropped back to around 115 volts in the day. At night it returned to around 120 volts. Now it may seem like 4.17%. isn't a big deal, but consider this. The average 10,000 air conditioner uses from 8 to 10 amperes. The wattage (that which you pay for in your electric bill) used is between 960 watts and 1,200 watts to power this size air conditioner when voltage is at 120 volts. However at 115 volts the power consumed then becomes between 920 watts and 1,150 watts. (Power=Voltage x Current).

When the utility company reduces power the wattage that you are billed is reduced accordingly. This on the surface seems fair since I am getting less I am therefore paying less. However here's the rub. At 115 volts you are getting only 9,583 BTU's worth of cooling out of the 10,000 BTU's the air conditioner was designed to deliver. OK, so you say what's the problem with that, the AC will run 4.17% longer to get to where it needs to go. NOT SO!

I don't want to get all technical, but the fact of the matter is that electric motors lose efficiency (horsepower) when their voltages are reduced. This isn't in direct proportion to the 4.17% we are discussing. It exceeds that.



Air conditioners lose further efficiency in another way. Again without getting all technical. There is a certain amount of refrigerant allowed to flow between the high side (condensation coil) and the low side (evaporation coil). If this flow is reduced (by less horsepower coming from the compressor motor) there is further reduction in an AC's cooling efficiency in most home units.

As you can see when the power company drops back just 5 volts AC's suffer. The compressor motor not only produces disportionately less horsepower, in turn delivers less refrigerant at lower differential pressures then it does when voltages are at 120 volts (where it was designed to run most efficiently). This results in less cooling even if it runs 4.17% longer.

It may very well be that power companies need to protect their grid with 'brownouts'. But it doesn't hurt their bottom line either if customers are using more electric then they would have otherwise at 120 volts. Summertime also is usually the time they shut down turbines for maintenance. Maybe this helps pay for that, eh?

Interactive Newspapers- The Savior Of Print Media

Something both 'The Morning Call' & 'Express-Times' may want to consider. Here's what 'The Spring River Chronicle' in Arkansas has been doing since June 2011..

The First Fully Interactive Newspaper in the U.S.

Since that time there's been even greater advancements made. By using conductive inks with standardized printing methods a reader can simply push an icon in their newspaper and with the proper software, it will transmit to their iPad or SmartPhone.

Intro to Interactive Newsprint Video Source 'Interactive News Print'

Think about the possibilities. By utilizing SmartPhones and iPad apps newspapers could offer updates to the story, discussion rooms, comments, sharing what a reader read with others, direct feedback (either by texting or speaking) to the reporter. The publisher would have the stats on just how many times an article was read.

Advertisers (for a premium) could have all these things offered to them as well. Perhaps charged for each feature they'd like to have for themselves. This all in one place simply by pressing or scanning an icon printed or embedded in the published article or advertisement.

All of this leads to further opportunities for monetizing. Face it, the next generation is glued to their electronic devices and are no longer content with just glaring at newsprint. They want to socially interact with it.


The question I ask myself is why haven't more newspapers done this? It's not like I'm brilliant. Instead of sitting around spinning their wheels and whining about the good old days, get the cobwebs out of their heads. Gutenberg invented a press which was cutting edge technology in it's day. He used his head and created a break through that enabled newspapers to be printed en masse. Are there no more great minds down at the newspapers that can think beyond doing things as they've always done them? If this is so, then newspapers will continue to 'wither on the vine'.

Schlossberg: The New Allentown

People called me nuts when I said on this blog a year ago that we'd be on the hook for $1 billion!!!

How England's Royals Pick Their Names

Now that England's Kate & William named their baby 'George Alexander Louis' there's been a great deal of interest in how the royal families derive them. In this case he will be known more formally as 'His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge' until/if such time he becomes king. Upon being made king he will then become 'King George VII'.

G.A. Louis now becomes third in line to the throne behind Prince Charles (his grandfather) and Prince William.

Now if all this naming business becomes a bit confusing 'The Official Website of The British Monarch' explains it this way."Members of the Royal Family can be known both by the name of the Royal house, and by a surname, which are not always the same. And often they do not use a surname at all.

Before 1917, members of the British Royal Family had no surname, but only the name of the house or dynasty to which they belonged.

Kings and princes were historically known by the names of the countries over which they and their families ruled. Kings and queens therefore signed themselves by their first names only, a tradition in the United Kingdom which has continued to the present day."In other words. Surnames can come from their various 'dynasties', but can also sometimes change due to their 'line of succession'. That is, if they choose to use them at all. Hey, when your royalty you get to make the rules, right? :-)


How The Game Is Played
The line of succession goes from the first born eldest male heir to the throne (Prince Charles). The next in line would be his first born male child (not his brothers). In this case Prince William. Now that William has had a son, that son becomes 3rd in line (knocking Harry out of 3rd place pushing him back to 4th).

Let's mucky this up a bit more. If Prince Charles never had a son his younger brother (Prince Andrew Duke Of York) was 2nd in line to the thrown. However since he has had two sons, Prince William and Prince Henry Charles Albert David (Prince Harry), that pushed Andrew back to 4th place.

Prince Harry was in 3rd in line but now that William & Kate had their baby that pushes him back to 4th and leaving Prince Andrew now 5th in line for the throne. Prince Andrew's 2 kids along with Prince Charles's other brother (Prince Edward Earl of Wessex) are pretty much out of the running as they are now in 6th thru 9th heirs to the throne. They could be pushed back even further if Prince Harry were to have a son sometime in the future. Clear as mud, eh?

Fret not. If your still confused (and who wouldn't be) check out the royal site for the whole scoop on 'succession' and 'precedence' for the royal events. There's also a listing of the current sixteen royal families. In addition check out the currently occupied royal castles and palaces along with the 23 others which are no longer occupied and a whole bunch of other goodies.

Who was that?