I'm in corpse disposal, so yeah, they'll probably be work for me after the end.

I see. I hadn't considered the relative timetable, thanks! Though it still seems to me that keeping the two versions like they have for such a rapid incremental upgrade might be a mistake. Those of us who don't hate the damned OS could have easily waited twice as long for a version 2. They need to go after the potential ipad users who DON'T like the upgrade treadmill - those tend to be the same ones who expect more out of their tablets (USB ports, file compatibility, etc.) My Surface 1 is doing all right for me, I'll have to see if they've made significant performance gains with the Surface 2 Pro. if it can get lose to the battery life of my RT w/out too much sacrifice, maybe it would be worth the upgrade.

Precisely. I'm one of those few Surface RT owners (didn't need a full laptop), and the battery life is excellent, and directly comparable to iOS devices.

I'm only disappointed that Microsoft didn't abandon ARM for a low-power x86 chip, and just put out one version of Surface 2. Win8 is an excellent tablet interface, but I don't want to have to sacrifice so much battery life (and low heat generation) for a comparatively noisy 'full OS' version. If they've solved the noise issues and extended the battery life in a meaningful way, then it might be worth it to me.

But comparing the x86 version to a portable-native OS is disingenuous.

oh! I didn't even notice that. Yeah, I agree - most people I know have an ultra, plus a touchscreen device of some kind, and that's all the computing they need. Ultras can be quite powerful, certainly sufficient for most non-gaming tasks, and gamers just up and build their own most of the time, bypassing the PC manufacturers altogether.
What a load of drivel.

I would agree, with one modifier - I don't think they'll fade, exactly, but I do think the upgrade cycle has lengthened significantly. Most PCs are stable, user-friendly, and quite powerful on hardware made 3 years ago. With good, free AV software out there, and several OSs that are reliable and unchanging in their current state, why would someone feel the need to throw away and buy a new one?
The market can't grow indefinitely - saturation is unavoidable, particularly when you have a quality product that does everything users want them to without a fuss. The industry is just expecting too much out of its customer base.

She didn't miss much - the 'integrated neighborhood' that sims 3 instituted actually reduced the ways you could play significantly and made it harder to design multiple households, and the huge reduction in stuff in the shop - only to have it reappear in the expensive online store - was a naked cash grab. Plus, like you said, all the older play features being re-added as expansions later.
Sims 2 was the better title, by far. I went back to it, and couldn't be happier. Also? No EA sign-in!

Well, yes and no. If 'offline mode' is activated at least once with the current installed catalog, then it can be activated again at a later date without a connection. The trouble is automatic updates - if the system has an update queued, or your list of games has changed since the last offline session, it won't activate without an active connection first. Lastly, and most importantly, you can keep steam configured as 'offline' for as long as you wish - so if you wanted to use it as purchase/update service, you could just go online when you want to make changes, and stay offline the rest of the time. Basically the only time this system really screws you is during an unexpected connection outage - especially in proximity to a client update. Which, admittedly, is exactly when I want to play my video games, too.

I grant you it's convoluted. But as online activation schemes go, it's hardly onerous. I've only had one steam launch negatively impacted by download numbers, and that was ages ago, and it was a question of server download rates, not activation/verification/prove-you-bought-me bullshit. I'm happy EA pulled its new titles from steam - a launch like this would give valve a bad name.

So, because it's a service that others find useful, the company should be responsible for maintaining it, for free, in perpetuity?

Yes, the name is reminiscent of evil videogame megacorps or secretive sci-fi splinter groups. If I saw this name in fiction, I'd shake my head and laugh at how silly it was.

Perhaps, if this measure were enacted, many people who are fearful of such technology will see just how much of our food is modified from its natural state, while causing no harm to said people. As long as the label was neutral (instead of "warning! GMO detected! Has caused cancer *when ingested in extreme amounts by laboratory mice*), it could actually serve to inform the public, instead of scare them.

There will always be those who reject technological advancement. Let them have their information.

I think he wanted experienced, hobbyist advice. Or even a bit of professional advice, considering the large number of electricians around here.
Your reply suggests that the only thing preventing him knowing how to perfectly secure his electrical possessions is that he can't spell "surge", or doesn't know of this google thing.
Buzz off. Anyone can google for a product. The question wasn't "are there surge protectors designed to protect a home", but "what are my options? what works well? can I trust a single device to do all I need it to?"
You gave us a comparative shopping list. Brilliant.

Who is muddying these waters?

The schools have been paid, have they not? That's the whole point of a loan - lender pays now, and you pay the lender.

And, as others have said, it's a little short-sighted to stand in the way of those in debt, since the best way for them to pay off those loans is to be successful. Again, that's the whole point.

Any institution engaging in this sort of behavior is way out of line. In fact, it's rather rare to see such a clear-cut case of wrongdoing when it comes to financial/political entanglements.

Back off, universities. You are not moral guardians, gatekeepers, or creditors. You are educational institutions, and your obligation is to the students, not to whatever twisted group of people suggested you monitor you alumni for credit score violations.
A declining credit score is already one hell of a millstone - like weight gain, it's much easier to damage your score than improve it. The last thing we need is universities undercutting those students who need their credentials the most - those who essentially gambled a portion of future success on the hopes of a beneficial education. Do they want us to pay our loans off or not?

Even hospital personnel with only occasional, incidental proximity to x-ray devices wear film badges. I'm honestly surprised that people operating technology that emits ionizing radiation aren't wearing exposure devices already!

There are 8 sonography machines with embedded keyboards in my lab.

Mainly because he's giving people peptides, and ingesting someone else's half-metabolized enzymes does fuck-all, so he hasn't been convicted of anything more serious than fraud. Ironically, if his 'drugs' were more potent/toxic, he'd have been responsible for a few injuries, and arrested for them. That said, he's already been sued for not meeting FDA approval, and there's a complaint lodged in 2010 by the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners against him which, once it works its way through the courts, will surely mean the suspending of his license to practice.
This show's almost over, folks. Just takes a while - at this point he is 'treating' very few, and these suits from him will probably be the last we hear of him doing much more harm. I hope.