Green technology can be profitable, but it needs to be made practical. If I have a budget and see if I buy this expensive solar setup I'll get a return about five years or more from now then that just isn't an attractive option to most people. They want savings now, not later. I see news all the time about breakthroughs in making solar energy cheaper and more efficient but I've yet to actually see prices on solar drop when I'm looking to buy equipment for a remote setup. I don't agree with the government taking more money from people to prop up a business who's business plan obviously didn't measure up or they wouldn't need the help to begin with. If you want people to be green then make it economically practical for them to be so. If people don't have the extra income to go green is it fair to beat them with a stick saying they have too and taking more of their income so the government can give it to whoever is the most politically correct at the time?

I hope none of those guys are working on Windows 8. The story sounds like they have a years supply of whiskey on hand.

We all know not everything you read on the internet is true, shocking I know. Things like this cause issues when some individual reads something on a blog and then cuts and pastes the contents of said blog into a classified report without confirming the information within or finding multiple independent sources. That said report then causes a snowball effect that has people crying wolf and running around and gives the actual skilled analysts problems as they're now fighting an uphill battle with their well researched multisource information supported by classified sources because the first report said differently. Just because it's a classified report doesn't mean the information inside isn't bullshit if the single source is bullshit.