A couple points:

1) You do not need a data connection to use GPS navigation. You do need to obtain offline maps and an app that can use them. I typically use OSMAnd with OpenStreetMaps when I'm traveling internationally to avoid data roaming charges.

2) I'm old enough to have grown up with Thomas Guides, and then printing out directions from MapQuest after that, and trying to figure out your next turn with them is far more distracting than using a GPS nav app. Looking at a paper map while driving should be considered at least as dangerous, if not more so.

That's also illegal, at least on the freeways. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vct...

In California stopping on the shoulder to talk on the phone will also result in a ticket. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's legal to refuse to do business with any individual. It's illegal to refuse to do business with an entire class of people, simply because they're a member of that class.

In Arizona being gay is not a class. So this law is attempting to solve a "problem" that doesn't actually exist.

In terms of religion, there's a big difference between beliefs and practices. Any and all beliefs are legal in the USA. Practices must exist within the law.

Well, your last sentence was correct. Some Christians (I'm looking at you, Southern Baptists) used to preach that being black was the Mark of Cain and used it to justify first slavery and then racism. To purposefully legalize this behavior is stupidity of the first order. As the law is written, a business in Arizona could use the Mark of Cain argument to refuse to do business with blacks.

I imagine a gay CEO isn't too enthused about doing business with a state that thinks it's ok to refuse to do business with someone because they're gay. It's a two-way street, Arizona.

True, but from a practical perspective the exchanges are a mandatory part of the system.

Tell you what, you go get one of those 1800's electric cars and drive it at highway speeds for a couple hundred miles without any electronics. Then come back here and tell me how full of shit I am.

I think his point is that the decision to lock consumers into IE was made almost two decades ago, so people born since then should be looking for other reasons to dislike Microsoft. I will concede that Microsoft has lost their leadership position in anti-consumer practices and pretty much everyone has caught up to them now.

The electronics are very deeply embedded. Not sure how you're gonna dump them when there's no physical cable connecting your throttle to your engine. Impossible in the case of EVs or hybrids.

Also although the article does a decent job of showing that a stack overflow is possible and might result in unexpected behavior, what's needed is a simulated failure scenario to see if that's what actually happens.

If I had points I'd mod you up, simply because you actually offered a potential solution rather than just rushed to judge the OP based on the use case.

As the saying goes, wish in one hand and shit in the other, then see which one fills up first. I wish you good luck with your strategy.

I'm really trying to give a shit about Beta, but I can't seem to do it. This sort of reaction happened the last time they redesigned, too. Everyone got over it. /shrug

The network, I'm sure, is ok with people being angry as long as they're getting angry by watching.

And then, failing to really understand the lesson, they took their new mobile interface and tried to cram it into a PC. Apple tried to do the same thing with Launchpad, which also failed. Consumers want to use their mobile devices differently than their PC devices.

The real lesson is this: if you want someone to perform a task in a completely different way than they've already learned, there needs to be a big reward behind it.