Invisible Buttons – A Neat Bit of Programming December 8, 2004January 19, 2017 ANOTHER USE FOR THE AMAZON SEARCH Gary: ‘Thanks for pointing this out. I’ve found it’s a great way to look up cryptic Windows errors in the Microsoft tech support manuals. Not that I mind paying $70-plus bucks for these manuals to use maybe once or twice, but it sure is handy.’ TWO MORE CHARITABLE GIFT FUND OPTIONS John Bakke: ‘You mentioned the donor-advised charitable trusts at Fidelity, Schwab and Vanguard. I’ve been thinking of setting one up this year, and would prefer Vanguard (where all my investments are) but their $25,000 minimum is out of my range – even though they let you pay it in over two tax years, a little-noticed option. Having done the research, I believe the best one with a $10,000 minimum is actually T. Rowe Price – half the account maintenance fees of Fidelity, plus they have an all-index-fund investment option with low expenses.’ ☞ Half the price is hard to beat, as are low-expense funds. I’m with Fidelity because they pioneered this product and were the only ones with it at the time. I get good service and am happy; but if I were starting from scratch, I might well have gone elsewhere. Why pay double? A NEAT BIT OF PROGRAMMING, IF IT’S TRUE And the only downside is that it is the end of our democracy. Click here (and then here). Then get ready to demand ‘best practices’ in every state in the union: uniform, user-friendly voting machines; an audit trail; polling machine distribution that makes long lines no more likely in poor precincts than in wealthy ones – and so on. You’ve got to question the motives of anyone who would oppose this. Now go click. Don’t miss the part about pressing invisible buttons to assure a 51% win.