If this is possible, then why was petrol such an issue in (the rather disappointing) Beyond Thunderdome?

The good: A. This reduces the key man risk of getting rejected by a single biased reviewer. That is really, really annoying. B. Studies that show no statistically signficant effect are often left out of the literature. Having a more comprehensive database could improve meta-analyses (studies of lots of studies). The bad: A. You probably cannot publish to a good journal with copyright and also to this system. B. Cheating, but let's assume cheating can be minimised. C. I cannot envision how this would look on my academic cv. "So, everybody can publish on this?" "Erm, but I ranked highly..." Is that really going to fly? The ugly: Democratising science? Never gonna work.

but linux is still comparatively hard to use, full stop. Many computer users have never even installed an operating system, never mind trying to get their home scanner folder shared across their house using samba. Also, Ubuntu is ugly, a minger, a dog, beaten down. That has to change too. As to the specific post, linux is better with competition methinks. The lack of competition is precisely why Microsoft get away with being so trousers at everything.

There are a couple of comments on the new scientist site about his skin probably blistering off due to being submerged in a wetsuit for that long. Ouch.

Powered by Glaswegian headbutts, and horrendous hangovers.