Gold or paper the value of either is nothing unless someone will trade it for something you can use such as food. Whether you like it or not investors view US treasury bonds as more secure than gold. You can stamp your feet and insist that gold is better but it won't change a damned thing, political capital and military superiority simply trumps all other forms of financial security, period. Gold, paper, clay stamps, sea shells, they are just tokens that represent goods, trust is how money works and it is how it has worked for "4,000yrs", ( actually it's 11000 since cows were first used as a standard denomination of wealth ).

NASA has probes zipping all over the solar system, they shot Cassini through gaps in the rings of Saturn, twice, then dropped another probe on Titan and returned pictures from near total darkness in temperatures cold enough to freeze methane. NASA also recently landed a fucking truck on Mars, in one piece and talking to a NASA satellite orbiting above. While I'm a fan of SpaceX and admire Musk for putting his money where his mouth is, the fact remains they have a very, very, long way to go before they can fill NASA boots.

And you're a typical rube for believing that...

Your engineering faculty couldn't spec out a computer?

Would you mind telling us what they've built recently so we can stay away from it?

They buy things and can't talk back. What's not to like?

Server rooms will continue to use the old clunky laptops abandoned by the rest of the company. Bonus points if they are old enough to have serial ports.

I'm not an American but I'm pretty sure LIFE comes first, as in "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Also just because the plane does not come crashing to the ground when you switch on your phone does not mean there is no interference. As for proof, radio interference HAS caused problems with planes in the past which is why the rules were created in the first place, they may be overly cautious about it but that's the wise thing to do (as opposed to the smart thing to do). Besides airlines are required by law to carry out very rigorous maintenance if they want to fly in US/EU airspace, strict regulations have made that airspace the busiest and safest in the world, why should you (with zero industry knowledge and experience) be allowed to operate YOUR equipment in the same plane and not have the equipment subject to the same maintenance regime?

We all laugh at the rules for the first cars that required someone to walk in-front of it with a flag in certain situations. However to this day the 1920's have the worst statistics for number of deaths per car, IIRC it was something like 1 death per 280 cars on the road. The FFC rule may have outlived it's usefulness, but it's certainly not "tyranny" by any common definition of the word.

The "problem" in the US is all the homeland security bullshit, "(air) travel without papers" is the liberty you have lost (if you ever had it?). The FCC is there to make sure the planes are as safe as possible and it has a pretty good track record compared to other countries. The FCC was established to responsibly ensure the safety of the public and it has done that with minimum inconvenience to the punter. Homeland security was put there by the same sub-culture that wants to arm kindergarten teachers, it has greatly inconvenienced the punter, discouraged paying tourists such as myself, and made no discernible difference to public safety.

Internet years.

Or dog years. I wonder about Timothy sometimes.

And I'd like a Pony.

10 hours of battery life with the "Timothy Tablet' would need several Nobel Prize winning breakthroughs in battery technology and thermal management.

Because the opposite attitude is what is known as an arrogant dick.

I think you got that backwards.

The FAA does not have to prove that mobile devices endanger aircraft electronics. Those whose manufacture or those who want to use those devices on a plane need to prove that it doesn't.

Yes, I know that some people get a heart attack if they can't check their e-mail, FB and Twitter for 20 seconds, but last time I checked, we all agree that "default deny" is the proper firewall policy. So with all security systems. If you don't know something is harmless, you need to treat it as a potential danger, until it is proven to be safe.

And when a mistake can kill a few hundred people, you err on the side of caution. Always.

I think the Coyote put it succinctly:
"A libertarian is just an anarchist who wants the police to control his slaves."

Ah, the plight of the poor, confused AC. Lurk more, post less. Look up just a bit. And come on submitters and "editors" - just link to the primary sites when available not the commercial crapfest.

So no, not worth a Goodwin.

No, sadly there was no Mr Gorsky.