I went to someones profile and looked for this. If I click "View all", the only information about Circles that shows up is for people that we have in common. In that case, it displays only to which circles I have added those individuals (not the other people's circles). Basically, I can see everyone they choose to display, but I have no idea to which circle they have been added.

But please correct me if I am wrong, I don't want to start getting things wrong from the get-go...

I always understood that Google would show you people you have added to circles, just not to which circles. So you would not be able to tell if they were added to "Friends" or "Acquaintances" (or whatever Circle you drop someone into). All you know is that they are linked somehow.

But thanks to Nemo for pointing that out. If people get the wrong impression then that's definitely something that Google could have clarified. I hadn't clicked there so I checked it out and it's kind of an interesting feature. You can selectively choose which Circles that field will pick individuals from to display.

Well, I'm not worried then. Personally, I'm not connected to the internet. I type all my messages on a computer without an Internet connection, then save it using a thumb-sized flash drive. I then pass the flash drive to a trusted courier, who heads for a distant Internet café.

At that location, the courier plugs the memory drive into a computer, copies the message into Slashdot and sends it. Reversing the process, the courier copies any incoming email to the flash drive and returns, where I read messages offline.

Why I go though this amount of security for slashdot, I don't know.

I'm pretty sure this has been done before. Though I can't remember by who...

To where?

I'm curious because I use t-mobile because they are cheaper than the competition and have what I need. I use the Even More Plus w/500 minutes and signed up before these limits were in place (though I think there was always some fine print... not too sure though). If you currently use them, wouldn't you be grandfathered into your plan and not need to worry about these new rates?

Seriously though, what's a good alternative for a carrier that has a phone I can use in Europe as well (so I'm saying I need GSM phone)?

Yeah, I don't eat at McDonald's here (the US) either, but I've eaten there when I go to France and, though some of the menu has similarities, there are a lot of differences in the overseas McDonalds and McCafes.

Take a look: macarons at mcdonalds and other tastiness.

OK, I lied. I still eat their fries every now and then. Usually if I'm on the way home from a bar.

Closure? I don't think that's necessarily the case.

From psychologist Kevin M. Carlsmith.

True, the term Colosseum-Complex may seem harsh, but I like it better as a term because it implies a show. People didn't go to the colosseum to get closure, they likely went there to be entertained and in the hopes of seeing injury and death.

In this case, and perhaps in the viewing of executions, I think it's people wanting vengeance. They may think it will lead to closure, but according to Carlsmith, it often doesn't.

I haven't heard the Sedaris bit, but in France you can actually ask for "fire" when you want a "light". "Can I get a light?" -> "Tu as du feu?" (I do get your point though.)

But even ignoring that you can ask for "fire" in France, auto-translators have to realize that you can't word-for-word translate, but also understand that written language is often different than spoken language. Some have started to pick up on this, but they all still have a ways to go.

Futurama also said it:

Leela: “Cool your jowls, Nixon. You may not like it that Dr. Zoidberg desecrated a flag. You might even find the image of it festering in his bowels somehow offensive. But the right to freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Earth Constitution. ”

Nixon: “Ahrrrroooo! Maybe so, but I know a place where the Constitution doesn’t mean squat!”

(Cut to the Supreme Court)

I'm a little late to this party, and I can't speak of everyone, but I'm American and I'm totally on board with being annoyed by things. I think Philip Pullman said it best when he said: "No one has the right to spend their life without being offended."

There is a quick video and context here.

Just thought you might like the quote, if you haven't heard it already.

Nolan actually refused to use 3D in Inception because of the fact that it would potentially detract from the story. He was apparently pressured by the studio to do it in 3D, but wouldn't budge. He also argued that some of the scenes would have been too difficult to shoot on the cameras (hand-held style, for example). While I have to admit the some of those scenes would have been total eye candy goodness in 3D, I also have to admit that he was right; 3D would have been distracting.

I'm glad he understood that special effects are cool, but you have to know when and how to use them to enhance a story, not just to use them because you can.