And the facial expressions were subtle but fully in line with her character and how she should be reacting. If "bad skin" really was a bother, there are remedies for that. All in all, she performed excellently, fit the part, seemed authentic, and I liked the performance. I wonder if the original poster thinks that District 9 was a complete failure because of the lead actor not being 'traditional attractive'? Or what about Rachel Dratch? Does she ruin SNL because she's not a model? Ugh,. I think Hollywood needs more 'average' people on film who are better actors.

Watch it again. She starts mumbling the numbers on the wall to herself, her eyes slightly light up with understanding (excellent acting skills!) and she then confidently tries out her theory by pulling the bed over. My guess is if you inspected the numbers, you'd find that they create a pattern in which the user was checking the walls and she realizes this and sees where the pattern stops, leaving the next spot in the pattern as the location of something important to the previous occupant. It made perfect sense to me, and felt like excellent writing performed extremely well.

Even if I agree with their statement that there was never a time where there was an initial pair of the first human beings (if they didn't ever exist, where did all of humanity come from? At some point, there existed a mother and father with a child that would be considered by most as "human" of some sort), the lack of an initial pair and the lack of the Genesis story being absolute fact (many theologians have argued that it's allegory... this is not new) would not necessitate removing the description of man as having been deceived into thinking we are better than God and choosing knowledge and self reliance over wisdom and faith in the God who brought us into being.

The story of Cain and Able can be seen as the birth of the concept of War, the story of Adam and Eve the first step from a life of freedom within boundaries to a choice to leave that safe harbor and venture out into the world, believing ourselves better capable of taking care of our own needs than the one who created us. Even without a literal apple (more likely a fruit similar to a fig based on the region of the world where Eden is thought to have existed), the idea of choosing the serpent's ideals (deception, betrayal, insecurity) over God's (honesty, truth, protection) still holds true as an allegory and still shows a fall from the state of innocence to a state of separation from God by willful rebellion against God's very minor and very reasonable rule - don't tough that one thing... everything else is yours.

Wow. Ignorant much? The Mosaic laws forbidding close relations were not in effect at the time of Adam and Eve (allegorical or not). No one in their right mind would think that laws put into effect hundreds if not thousands of years after an act would then retroactively condemn someone for breaking a law that did not exist at the time they performed the action.

My personal belief (supported by many scholars, but I'll leave it up to you to take the time to look if you care to do so) is that the Mosaic laws were put into place due to the apparent slow degradation of the species. Adam was said to have lived 900+ years, but by Moses' time, the average lifetime was said to be nearer 175 years of age. Marrying of close relations was no longer a safe option. Marrying a sister or cousin could introduce more and more defects into the human gene pool, so it had to be outlawed. Not that they necessarily understood the intricate details of the genetic code (obviously not), but they understood breeding processes and knew that it caused defects in the animal kingdom, so it's not at all unlikely they understood the consequences of close relations marrying.

So the objection to incest for any rational modern Christian due to the social, genetic, and mental issues it can cause does not preclude the belief that there must have been one initial pairing of humans, and that that pair had children who intermarried to have more children. Both make logical sense.

It is likely we all came from one initial set of 'parents' and that intra-familial marriage had to occur at the beginning. This does not mean that it is fine and dandy for brother and sister to marry each other now, especially when we know better genetically and socially speaking.

No, Hitch Hiker's Guide To the Galaxy... the "B ship" if I recall correctly, filled with the "useless" part of the population (phone sanitizers, politicians, economists) ... idiots declared leaves as currency, but then realized there was massive inflation due to the abundance of leaves, so their solution was to deforest the planet in order to keep the value of the leaf currency stable.

Google's spam filters are that specific... they apply both globally and individually. Google knows that email from ebay is spam to me in my one account, but is vital information and "important" in my other account.

Why do I suddenly have images of Minority Report in my mind... little spiders built with this technology in it, remotely controlled, identifying everyone in a building quickly... completely disregarding the rights of the people to be secure from unreasonable search...

Restricted websites = pay for access (paywall) websites, such as porn, technical forums, some newspaper websites, etc.

On top of paperless billing is "automatic payments" for your "convenience" (it's really for their convenience). So, mystery charges are added to a bill, you get an email with your itemized bill telling you "thank you for your payment" and good luck trying to get the company to refund that money.

It has always been the burden of the individual to pay the proper use taxes in their own state on purchases made in other states. If I drive up to NY and buy a Plasma TV, I am expected to both recoup my taxes paid in NY on my way out of the state and additionally remit my Use taxes to my home state. This is how the law works. This same law applies to me ordering mail order products (Sears had a whole legal case that decided in favor of this setup), and Internet sales are no different than Catalog sales or sales across state lines. That no one really follows this process appropriately with physically purchased items from other states (though many follow this process for items purchased in other countries) is not enough reason to suddenly put the burden on the small store trying to run it's business according to the law.

Because Ohio, for example, is unable to enforce their local tax laws on their own residents, I, being a business in an entirely separate independent state am somehow required to collect that tax on behalf of the inept state government of Ohio? That does not make sense and is in violation of the independence of the individual State, and violates the Constitution. "No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state." It's pretty simple. The constitution says that the federal government and the states agree not to levy a tax against my products should I export them from my state to another state. The state may levy a tax on their residents for purchasing a product from another state (and they do through the Sales and Use tax), and my state may levy a tax on me for any sale to someone within my home state, but the other 49 states simply cannot levy a tax against my exports to other states.

Invite on it's way to you.

Wish I had mod points. This sums it up nicely!

Sent you an invite so you can check it out.

I wanted to just say "Invite sent." because it was short and to the point, but Slashdot won't let me... it says "This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original...". So... be more original, eh?

An invitation to the services for communications between various social circles mimicking the interactions of real life social circles created by the company named after 10 to the 100th power, only misspelled, has been electronically dispatched to your virtual equivalent of a postal mailbox and awaits your attention and action.

Hopefully that's original enough for Slashdot :-)

Compartmentalization is exactly what Google+ is all about. The Circles feature means you can compartmentalize your work, personal, family, friends, acquaintances, extended family, internet only friends, and any other grouping you can come up with. Each and every post requires that you select just who will have access to these posts, so there is no chance of merging the two if you don't want them to merge. If you have something you want to announce to all of these groups (such as woo hoo! I have a new grandson!) then you can easily do that while still keeping all other communications in their silos. It is leaps and bounds easier to do this in Google+ than it is to do this in Facebook.