...which are completely freaking worthless if they're turned off by default. 99.9% of users will never visit and study every available config option, and the other .1% will be wondering why it's not the default setting if it's so great.

Your post is like those who insist that MySQL has safe data settings for those who know how to enable them, while ignoring the fact that almost everyone uses the configuration as shipped. Unsafe by default is an insane and undefensible way to distribute software. In fact, I can't think of a good justification for ever allowing the unsafe values to be set.

"Good luck getting one of those for yourself unless its an antique."

Not a problem at all In fact they are rather easy to get.

Step 1 join army.
Step 2 Pass basic
Step 3 Get M60 issued to you.
Step 4 PROFIT!

Honestly, people have the right to be drooling morons and have a degree.

Expecting people to have an IQ or education is not normal today. Let them be dumb, and accept it. They have a god given right to be dumb.

And when told that you can't fail those students and kick them out of your class, you do what anyone clever would do, and bring some light to the problem by failing the entire class. Bravo! Goddamned brilliant, if you have integrity and are willing to deal with the consequences that is.

And many do. Cake for example started as a bar band, and never really changed their lifestyle much.

No bathing in pools full of CrySTAL or snorting coke of the backs of $2000 a night hookers.

They even already have a documentary about it out.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt03...

You even might be able to find Congress' popularity down there....

I use a RO filter, you insensitive clod! I don't even care what's in my water, unless it's so severe I can't bathe in it. And I use a spin-down filter, a spun filter, and a carbon filter before that happens anyway.

It's sad that you need to filter your municipal drinking water before you can drink it, though, especially when that's in part because they added nasty crap to it.

Logical fallacy, appeal to authority.

You can look up his claims and either agree with them or not, but you didn't do that at all.

Aside from the fact that we're talking about used EV batteries, it might interest you to know that high-end vehicles are now replacing their flooded lead-acid starter batteries with Li-Ion packs. Even a really dinky one is capable of starting the vehicle, but the truth is that there's embarrassingly more electrical accessories in the modern car, and they need a battery with more capacity so that you can use them all at once even in a vehicle with a stop-start system. As the price on electrically-operated accessories (like power steering, heat pumps, and so on) comes down due to economies of scale, you can expect this trend to proliferate down to cheaper cars. It's pretty hilarious to look even into older vehicles, say a saturn, and compare the size of the battery to the size of the engine. Which block is bigger, the battery box or the cylinder block? A Li-Ion battery would be half the size, and let you design a foot off the length of the vehicle — or put it someplace else, where it would do you more good.

Anyway, these Li-Ion packs can be broken down and their individual cells tested, matched, and re-used, so the car starter battery of the future will also be useful for these systems... just not the batteries of today. Those are already aggressively recycled, however, like most car parts.

CustomerP are generally too cash poor to be good customers. They are going to nickel and dime you for any project that you do for them because they are either too cheap to invest in newer technology or too poor to do so.

Latest statistics indicate that Internet Explorer has less then 15-20% of market share, with versions older then IE 10 being just 2.5% of the market. Looks like IE 6 is under 1% now.

It was similar arguments that massively hampered the adoption of Linux, Netscape/Firefox, .... Too few users, too cheap, expecting too much frree stuff. No money to spend.

It's one of the reasons general adoption took - and is still taking - so long.

It's also one of the reasons that companies that DID support them ended up with an edge on their competition, becoming some of the big-name companies in their markets.

Becoming market-dominant and ubiquitus includes not dropping substantial chunks of customers because you perceive them as "marginal". If you support 90+ percent of the market and your competition supports 70%, you keep getting little extra advantages. The outcome of competition is driven by tiny margins.

I've also used a slightly amount of hyperbole, they won't cost $0. Packs will at minimum have to be tested and recertified, and in many cases will need cells replaced — and individual cells will need to be tested and matched into groups of cells with similar characteristics for maximum output. That all costs some money. However, it costs nowhere near as much as putting the packs together in the first place; it costs some charge and discharge cycles, but there's no reason why these cycles can't be performed as part of an actual operating load-smoothing plant. After all, you'll have many modules in parallel, and any which cause you problems will simply be removed from the system. On the other hand, some packs might well be usable without any cell replacement, and they really would cost only the transportation costs and testing logistics and overhead, less the profit from their participation in load balancing during testing.

I don't think you understand what I said. If you've only got one uid, then both your web user and your shell user are the same user. This is typical of low-cost hosting services. Unless you're colocating, you've typically only got one uid. This ain't the law, some providers will let you crank them out, especially if you're chroot'd.

I haven't messed with Joomla much so I can't speak as to which is better, but I'm pretty clear that Drupal is at least slightly better and less of a headache than is Wordpress.

There was a study posted on Slashdot about this myth a few years ago. They concluded that Americans care more about their teeth because good dental care is expensive and so is a status symbol. Having few teeth is one of the stereotypes of poor/stupid people in the US. Middle class and aspiring middle class people in the US spend money on their teeth (cosmetically, at least) because if they don't then they look poor. For people in the UK, anyone can afford good dental care (for a while, it was easier for very poor people to because a lot of dentists weren't taking new NHS customers except under duress and people on certain forms of income support had guaranteed treatment), so going to the dentist is just seen as a chore and often slipped down priorities.