Y2HH

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 08:17 AM) lol. This is your retirement, not your casino money. I don't see where the gamble is, and you've yet to show anyone.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 08:16 AM) I don't think any of the 401(k) options I've had through four different plans now offered bonds or just simply cash. Had to pick some sort of (fee-generating) security. There is usually a bond fund, but like I said, bonds are a dead investment at this point and will be for the foreseeable future. They're returning less than inflation right now, and it will only get worse when interest rates rise. They are "safe", but you shouldn't be worried about safe until you're within a decade of retirement.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 07:44 AM) No cash, no bonds. Not really recommended for retirement money. The rule of thumb is one percent in "safe" investments for every year old you are. AKA, a terrible rule of thumb unless you're well over 50.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 07:42 AM) That is incredibly aggressive. It's not that agressive at all. It's investing in the top 500 stocks in the American market, in a cheap index fund. The time to do what you're talking about is when you begin nearing retirement, (maybe within a decade of retirement), not while we're still young. And bonds are dead. They're a dead investment at this point and their returns are below inflation, and it's only getting worse, and cash isn't an investment, whatsoever. What your talking about here is what you do when you're 55+, not when you're in your 30's. If you had a 401k 100% invested in the S&P500 in 2001, when the market crashed, a few years later you would have had all the losses back and then some. Same goes for 2008. A mere two years later and you would have have it all back plus a bunch more. Aggressive my ass. More like safe.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 07:42 AM) I think that is a general limitation of wireless technology for now. Everyone complains about that. Have to do your "checkin" at a sporting event early, if you want to Instagram a picture you take, forget it. I don't have this issue with Verizon. It's the primary driver of why I switched. My friend had Verizon and I had AT&T for years, and every time we were at a sporting event, his phone worked fine throughout the game, regardless of how crowded it was...and mine did exactly what you described, early checkin or nothing. Needless to say, I no longer have that problem. My phone works fine. AT&T simply has piss poor back loading, or whatever technical term they describe it with. Though, they're much better in areas where they have LTE.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 05:58 PM) The discussion of how many different fees were buried into various mutual funds and the discussion of how little information you actually have about what is being purchased and sold by the mutual fund options made available in the plans I have available discussed in that frontline ep. are pretty much exactly what I was talking about when we had our last retirement-related discussion. If nothing else, that made a pretty compelling case for moving everything into index funds. That's my exact advice to people, especially with retirement money. Use index funds. That's all I use when it comes to my 401k. As a matter of fact, if an S&P500 index fund exists in your fund choices, use that to simplify things. You don't really need anything else. That single fund IS diversified so you don't need to buy other funds along with it. Though it will never over-perform the market, it will also never underperform the market. Mutual funds not only carry large fees, but given enough time, they NEVER outperform S&P500 Index funds. They usually show little blips where they do, but given a timespan of 20+ years, they always come up short. My S&P500 Index fund total cost basis is 0.10%. I recommend people do the following: 80% of your 401k goes into an S&P500 Index fund, 20% of your 401k goes into an International Index fund, if available. Bases covered, well diversified, and it will never -- ever -- underperform the market. You aren't gambling with this money, you're investing it, so don't look to out-perform, especially when it's not necessary.

QUOTE (Knuckles @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 07:54 PM) I've never had issues with ATT other than Sox opening day, not sure what it is data overload or something? Other than that it works fine. For the most part I've found AT&T works fine, just has its problem areas, dropped calls, etc. I've never been able to get a very good connection with AT&T at sporting events with big crowds...that always annoyed me. I had that same problem at Hawks, Sox and Cubs games. I have none of those problems with Verizon...so far anyway. Verizon being CDMA has issues of it's own, as their "3G" sucks really bad.

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 06:17 PM) I've never had a problem with AT&T 4G in Chicago. Are you taking about AT&T "4G" or LTE?! In either case, there are areas where AT&T absolutely sucks. Such as at any sporting event. Hell, in the middle of downtown I often had data issues. Also, true 4g is LTE, which is a data only network. Voice calls and text messages go through their older 3G net. I had AT&T for about 6 years, and always seemed to have issues whenever I actually needed coverage. I finally got sick of making excuses for them and jumped to Verizon, same prices, better coverage as far as I'm concerned. They (AT&T) don't have the poor network ratings and dropped call percentages they have for no reason. Though their LTE data coverage is a lot more solid then their fake "4G"/3G network was, I'll give them that.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 03:17 PM) Sprint doesn't have 4G LTE in every major city though. And even then, when they say "Chicago", there are huge areas of Chicago that have no such coverage, dropping to 3G. I've found areas of AT&T that claim to have coverage and had none at all. Those coverage maps are exaggerated a lot of the time.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 12:58 PM) This is what I do - there shouldn't be any inefficiency or signal desynchronization or anything. That's weird. It should be impossible, but it seems it was only happening with one specific show, and it later fixed itself? It had to be some sort of compression issue, maybe the AV processor in his receiver was crashing or something, and eventually "rebooted" and fixed the issue. These things are more like computers every passing year and they're prone to crashes now, just like anything else we use.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 12:42 PM) That is how I have it set up. For whatever reason, and I set it to HDMI Control, which is supposed to sync up all that stuff, and it still wasn't working. The only thing that did work initially was bypassing the receiver and hooking up the ps3 directly to the tv, but I didn't want to not have my sound system for all the blu rays, so that doesn't really work for me. However, now it seems to have corrected itself somehow. Very odd that it just corrected itself.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 12:03 PM) I tried putting in other discs in season 1 and 2, and it seemed to have the same problem. Then I put in a disc from True Blood, and it seemed fine. So I assumed it was something with the way the Mad Men discs were formatted or whatever...however, about 3 episodes into the first disc, the problem seemed to be much less noticeable. Maybe the system is gradually syncing up everything better as it plays or something. I have no idea... The video is probably compressed more than the audio, causing it [the audio stream] to process faster. You can solve this by using your receiver as the A/V hub, which is especially easy with HDMI cables. Connect all of your devices to the receiver, and connect the receiver to the TV, this way all the audio/video streams run through the receiver, and the receiver controls not only audio output, but video output, too.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 11:29 AM) That's discouraging. I went with Verizon specifically because of travel. Sprint and Tmobile (and other small carriers) tend to be fine inside of big cities or major areas...but anywhere outside of that, even in many suburban areas, the coverage is intermittent or shoddy at best. Also, when some of these carriers claim to have coverage, they do...so long as you stand on your car, don't move, and the wind is blowing toward you, then you'll get one bar that will undoubtedly drop out the second you actually try to use it. I've even experienced this with AT&T, having full coverage in the middle of downtown Chicago and being unable to use the Internet. I finally went to Verizon and love the coverage...it's the same price as AT&T, too. While I think Verizon has the best network, and AT&T a close second, I hate both companies for gouging their customers just because they can. I look forward to the day that Sprint or Tmobile or someone can actually compete with them when it comes to coverage area.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2013 -> 10:19 AM) It was terrible in Chicago before I left and it's terrible in Seattle. I'm counting down the days until my contract ends. This is what I've found. Especially if you travel anywhere. AT&T and Verizon are the most expensive, but their networks have the most coverage, and I think Verizon is even a bit better than AT&T in this regard. The savings outside of AT&T/Verizon are nice, but the coverage just isn't there, making it not worth it to me. I take frequent road trips, especially in the summer, and it's nice having coverage regardless of where I happen to go, Sprint and Tmobile just can't do this for me.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:56 PM) You cant compare a rumor about professional athletes being traded. That would almost never be considered slander/defamation in any circumstance. They are public figures and therefore the law is extremely different. In comparison the people in the pictures on Reddit, were just ordinary people, and therefore the requirements are much lower. This is being caused by the over proliferation of social media, and peoples inability to handle it. The fact that the world largely doesn't understand social media, or the need to slow the f*** down and stop believing everything it reads simply because some unknown idiot posted it on Reddit, 4Chan, Twitter, Facebook, or thousands of other such forms of social media.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) Okay you are comparing apples and oranges. A joke on Reddit would have the exact same liability as a joke on tv, a joke on Soxtalk or a joke on the radio. Now lets compare starting a witch hunt based on pictures and theories. It should have the same liability if I did it on tv, if I did it on the radio, if I did it in a newspaper or if I did it on Soxtalk. Reddit should fall under the same laws that we all do. if I as an individual do not have that right, then I dont magically get it because Im posting anonymously on the internet. If its defamation/slander it doesnt matter if its on Reddit, it doesnt matter if its something I said in my house to 2 other people. The publisher of defamation/slander can be held liable, Reddit is the publisher, re-publisher or disseminator, this is not ground breaking. http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_docume...Defamation1.asp Now you could argue that this was all just "opinion" and therefore outside of defamation/slander. You dont have to be a "fact based news source" to slander/defame. You can be a single person. Same would have to be said of Twitter, and the rest of them, too...they were all doing it, let's not single out Reddit since the media decided to be careless with it's power.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:39 PM) I hate reddit personally. I think it is an awful website filled with the smuggest of the smug, at least the defaults are. I just find it odd people are going to attack them here as opposed to Twitter, which has 100x volume, 0 moderation and made discussion about the missing kid a very hot topic. And no I'm not going to bash Twitter here either, just found it interesting what people are citing as stories. I agree. I use Reddit, but I'm on specific sub-forums, and I hide annoying ones, like r/Politics, and r/(anything Religious). For the most part, the Reddit community sucks...it's a hivemind of dumb.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:30 PM) Reddit was instantly deleting anything to do with the missing Brown kid (this was amusing to watch in itself. New threads were gone the second you hit refresh)and eventually abolished their entire discussion forum on the Boston case. Not really more they could have there IMO. They do what they can, but some times things are going to slip through...it's just a user forum. Maybe people should stop taking things like user forums so damn seriously. People need to treat these things as what they are, instead of treating them as gospel, etc...it's just people stating opinions. Treat it as such.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:24 PM) It doesnt need to be reprinted. Simply printing nonsense on Reddit should result in potential liability for Reddit if they do not use reasonable means to remove it. You just cant simply argue "Aint nobody got time for that" Well if you dont have time to moderate your business, dont start it. But Reddit has no problem making money off of this, so they should have no problem moderating their content. Again, it's a user forum, not a fact based source hard news website. They should have no more liability than a comedian would have for making a joke about killing someone, or than someone on Soxtalk saying Die, Ozzie, die!@#$!@, either... This is what happens when legit organizations take the word of a person off the street, which is essentially Reddit in this case. I don't see your point, whatsoever, not when it comes to what this is. It's a f***ing huge user forum. What responsibility? The only responsibility here are hard news organizations shouldn't be taking something someone posted on Reddit and re-printing it as fact, without bothering to check.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 02:08 PM) Its up to the owner of Reddit/Facebook to handle their own content. At the end of the day, they are making money from the hits, views, advertisements, they have a responsibility. Just like a newspaper has a responsibility for an op ed. At any point the owners of Reddit could have closed or deleted the thread. They are responsible. Y2hh, That is also true the article wasnt really blaming the owners. But at the same time, there should be some responsibility if you are going to be profiting off of this type of stuff. I understand your point, but when it comes to Reddit, this is the type of medium/forum it is. It's a user based community, what is printed on Reddit should be scrutinized by the reader, not reprinted as fact. This is more the fault of media outlets treating Reddit as fact checked sourced material. The community itself refers to itself as "Reddit", for example: Dear Reddit, loosely translates to "Dear everyone on Reddit," A "Redditor" is a citizen/user of Reddit. An "Orangered" is a super cool Reddit user, while a "Periwinkle" is a f***face loser. This is an inside Reddit joke only a Redditor will get.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 12:27 PM) This is kind of inaccurate, as Reddit was not responsible for the subreddit nor did any Reddit representative start it. That's like blaming Facebook for Facebook Pages' content. When they say Reddit in this context, they mean the Reddit community. They're not blaming the founders/owners of Reddit, as you appear to have misunderstood.

Hopefully everyone that's ever been on "reality tv" is sent to Mars, and they never come back.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 01:29 PM) Anywho, federal charges filed against him today, for using a weapon of mass destruction against persons and property in the U.S. resulting in death. Charges can qualify for the death penalty. Sorry it took so long for me to comment on this, but this charge bothers me a bit... If that qualifies for the definition of "weapon of mass destruction", then by that rational, GW actually did find WMD's in Iraq. Seems like we're being a bit loosey-goosey on the definition of a WMD here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 09:19 AM) So you said "if you have a gun register it" for what reason? That's completely different from what you've said here. All you've said here is that you'll make sentencing laws tougher, which brings a "la de freaking da" from me. Kind of glossed over...I was merely pointing out that all the local laws should be followed just like they should be being followed now, if that includes local registration, then do that. I was merely pointing out actual fixes to what they're talking about, vs the dog and pony show they're giving us. They want a registry, so make one. If that's not feasible, what is feasible is mandating a minimum sentence structure at the federal level so the local courts lose the ability to do what they're doing now...and that's giving people sentences of 3 months, or 0 days for gun convictions.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 09:15 AM) "If you have a gun, register it" Immediate response from the only people who matter: "OH MY GOD THE GOVERNMENT IS COMING FOR MY GUNS THEY CAN'T DO THIS I'M GOING TO HAVE TO START KILLING PEOPLE!!!!!!!" Easy response to that is everything remains the exact same as it is now. The same federal/local laws apply, just as they always have. The only change is that the feds mandate a minimum sentence for those CONVICTED of gun crimes.