Wrong. Your post: '...in that the Google spreadsheet provided was tracking incidents, not fatalities...'

Article: 'The Los Angeles Times recently did a story detailing all of the NHTSA reports of Toyota "sudden acceleration" fatalities...' And yes, the spreadsheet data is from the LAT story.

And no, to poke holes in the author's idiot argument, I don't have to figure anything out about the "percentage of Prius drivers, blah blah blah." I would have to do that if I wanted to find the real numbers. Instead, I just demolished the author's prima facie case. Once that goes down there is no reason to invest more time on it. He can make the case again with better data if he feels like it. I'm not about to throw any more mental effort after an idiot's idea.

Oh...did your feelings get hurt? That makes me feel so rotten about myself! I was inconsiderate. Maybe I brought up unpleasant memories of your childhood? You can talk about it. Nobody here will make fun.

Hey, you sure got me. Really stuck it to me..oh shit, no you didn't, you just can't read. From the article: 'The Los Angeles Times recently did a story detailing all of the NHTSA reports of Toyota "sudden acceleration" fatalities, and, though the Times did not mention it, the ages of the drivers involved were striking.'

If you read the above article and thought, "gee, what convincing evidence," then you're a moron.

It's not a surprise that traffic fatalities were skewed towards the elderly. In any given accident, an elderly person is much more likely to die than a young person. They're not as sturdy.

Now that you're a little bit less of a moron, please go on with your day.

I don't know. I'm not Catholic, but I read Fr. Z's blog at wdtprs.com fairly frequently. It's not spam by any stretch. It's interesting to peep into another world.

According the original article, DEP (enabled by default in IE8) and sandbox mode (Windows 7, Vista) all stop this zero day.

If that is the case, doesn't that in IE's favor, nor against? All browsers have vulnerabilities. All of them have zero-days. However, it seems that IE has some pretty good built-in protections that Firefox lacks.

Yeah, at least the first one was succinct.

Murakami is aces at making you feel good about your literary hoity-toityness. But I, for one, have better things to think about than the opium dreams of some oversexed wit-lit writer. There are no real ideas or insights there. It's fluff.

Now, Dostoevsky or Tolstoy...

Really, why not try proving that a particular digit should be uniformly distributed? I'll give you a minute.

Not done yet? I'll give you a hint: Benford's Law shows why it doesn't have to have a uniform distribution. The original critique is likely fallacious.

I looked up the story. It's sort of bizarre. Unless he had no supervisor and reported directly to the mayor, he didn't have much justification for not turning over the passwords at the get-go.

That's the one thing that confuses me. He still hasn't turned over any passwords, right? Why not?

Moron. A correct statement, maybe, would be that "corporate censorship is not prohibited by the first amendment of the American constitution under current SCOTUS interpretation."

Saying that corporate censorship has no relation to free speech is wrong and stupid. It's a very important consideration when looking at speech issues.

It's magnetic. Self-clean mode on your oven would probably do the job.

I believe that "Critical" updates usually need to be remote.