" Once users are banned from installing applications, or modifying the system security, usability, and more are improved, the Googlers claim."

For years I have fought IT staff who held the position that the computers should never actually be used by putting applications on them. They used the exact same logic shown here.

Google does not trust apps. The reason I got into open source was because I did not trust OS and library vendors.

The reason I have never used Apple products was their attitude of "It you want to do what we don't allow you to do, you are obviously wrong in wanting to do it".

I don't see this as progress.
 

I would recommend not thinking you can "revive" you skills and produce useful apps for a school district (or anyone for that matter). You will probably just produce a lot of non-maintainable code naively written. Based upon the background you described, your software experience is basically that of a CS undergrad (full respect for your 18 years as a hardware designer). Minimum knowledge for useful apps today: client/server, databases, web, AJAX, networking, threading or multi-tasking, efficient GUI, OS, etc, all which take years of knowledge building to master, before even thinking about SDK's and development environments or methodologies. Your idea is like a software developer with 18 years experience saying "I would like to start designing with integrated circuits and build useful devices (I took an electronics course once, long ago) and want to know which electronic CAD packages are best. Sorry, I just don't see this is a productive plan.

I can't judge much at all from the videos, be it "wing twist" or whether this machines performs any better than an ordinary glider. Considering this is graduate student project at a major university, I was expecting real data and analysis not just videos. The U of T PR machine seems to be working quite well however.

Put me in an ordinary glider, give me the same initial altitude and initial velocity, and I think I will go as far as this machine.

Can you really tell from the video you can determine how long and far he could have flown without the "flapping wings". I would like to see a comparison of this machine with an ordinary glider launched with the same altitude and speed.

I believe health care falls under the implied intent of the US Constitution as stated in the preamble: "promote the general welfare". Trying to frame this discussion as one of "rights" misses the bigger picture. Congress creates social programs, health care is one of them. The 14th amendment guarantees we all have the right of access to these programs.

LOGIC, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding. The basic of logic is the syllogism, consisting of a major and a minor premise and a conclusion — thus: Major Premise: Sixty men can do a piece of work sixty times as quickly as one man. Minor Premise: One man can dig a posthole in sixty seconds; therefore — Conclusion: Sixty men can dig a posthole in one second. This may be called the syllogism arithmetical, in which, by combining logic and mathematics, we obtain a double certainty and are twice blessed. From Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

Go to work for Planned Parenthood or some other family planning organization that performs legal abortions. Spend you day dealing with death wish hate mail and bomb threats. Factor in the fact that these are not always empty threats -- your colleagues have in fact been murdered and bombed. Look around at the security fortress you must work in. Check out internet sites, once public (now private) that track where you work and live. Realize that you are personally demonized every Sunday by you local Christian religious leaders, in propanganda-speech proven to very effective in motivating those who are, shall we say, less than "connected" to reality. Put up with this every week for years. Then come back and explain your claim that Christian groups do not threaten others with anything more dangerous than a boycott.

Your personal experience is fascinating, but not very helpful. The real standard is what teachers make on average, including the value of benefits (and the time off for summer and holidays), given their level of education and experience, in comparison to others in there geographic area. I do not personally believe that English teachers are worth a lot of salary (although I would reward a really good one). I do however believe math and science teachers are. I find it ridiculous that qualified math and science teachers must work for the same salary as an English teacher, which is what is demanded by the teaching profession itself. If teaching salaries are low, it is because they are paid to the standard of the lowest common denominator.

The universe is not "so damn mathematical". Humans are, so all descriptions of the universe are. It's like saying "the universe is so damn big". It is not, you are just small. I don't know how to get around the fact that all descriptions of the universe are relative to us, but I don't jump to the God conclusion because of it.

Atheist have no excuse for not living life to the fullest. We also don't find ourselves on our deathbeds thinking "wow, I wasted my whole life worshiping an imaginary sky fairy!" No wonder theists suddenly want more life.

"Very few have ever thought seriously about the question" Maybe because it is not really a question, but a false dilemma fallacy, and they find your jumping to the God conclusion a good example of someone not thinking things through very well.

"I say hammer the juror whose misbehavior requires a mistrial--with very steep civil and criminal penalties." Ok, this will require a trial. With more jurors. Who will misbehave. Requiring more trials....

"How do you deal with jurors that decide to do their own investigating at home? " The same way you deal with jurors made up their mind before the trial, and refuse to weight the evidence.

"There are no restrictions on you contacting him after the trial is finished right? Couldn't you send him a letter and tell him to appeal." Using the money he saved by having an public defender the first time, and the rent and health insurance saved by being in state prison, I suppose. You can only appeal an error in the trial. You cannot appeal because you did not or could not put on an adequate defense.