I wasn't quoting. I was paraphrasing. So, you seem to be espousing Evolution here, amIright? I'm still trying to work out the shift from inorganic to organic chemistry. In particular: why does it take less faith to subscribe to Evolution than any other of the alternatives (without bothering to espouse any one of them).

Wow, I think you've reached damn_registrars levels of making stuff up out of whole cloth. Everything I say underscores disregard for truth? You've moved past strawmen to a comprehensive sort of Dyson sphere of tautology surrounding me now. Let me give you a golf clap. [clap]. Does the sound penetrate this bubble in which you've encapsulated me?
Can I ask where this bubble is going, since you're doing all the driving?

Yahoo's directories were like gopherhole directories for html. Web searches didn't start to mean much until infoseek came around.

I picked up an insightful and a troll on the same comment at some point today. One of the insightful mods was undone (note that it doesn't tell me if it was this one or a different one) which moves the score down to (+2, insightful).

Thank you for finding this and offering your insight.

I hadn't noticed that change, thank you for pointing it out. I find it interesting that the editor who posted the story didn't notice it before letting it loose on the front page.

I respectfully disagree with that, based on two things in particular:

• The stories that make the front page, which frequently favor the American conservative viewpoint or frequently trash any other viewpoint (and the general absence of the opposite).
• The high frequency of conservative advertisements on here (even when I view the site without being logged in, or not logged in and from a computer / device that is not mine)

I have also noticed that when I post something here that is does not favor the conservative viewpoint, it is often moderated "overrated" - which everyone knows is immune to meta-moderation and hence a permanent negative mark on a comment.

So, other than strawmanning and boorish browbeating in the face of reasoned responses, and projection, do you have anything? Anything at all?

What I actually want is to constrain the Federal government to its original enumerated powers. But the truth doesn't seem to amount to much with you anymore.

I don't recall now what your internet connection situation is like at home, but hosting your own site is becoming much more viable for a lot of people now thanks to high(er) speed connections being so very cheap. I have a basic cable modem and do my domain through dyn.org (I know, a lot of people hate them but I'm happy with them for $10 per year). Then I can host as much of whatever as I want. Granted, your site probably gets a lot more traffic than mine, so that might not be as great, but you could always try it as a mirror initially and see how it goes (or even do some clever cross-site-scripting to pull files from your home host while the main page is still hosted at your current provider).

Oh, and I think you meant to say "no scripting whatsoever" in referring to your page, rather than "no scripting whatever". :)

It looks like the firing order for an 8 cylinder engine. I thought maybe the engineer tasked with that pin out was moonlighting in a garage somewhere.

What I actually think, not that it amounts to a fart in your thunderstorm of stereotype, is captured nicely here:

Let's stipulate that this is an 80/20 ratio in favor of delegation, and that when we say "delegation", we mean, "what the large-frogskin donors want".
But shag all that. Let's focus on what matters: your strawman collection.

Although not every Linux distro installs bash as a shell by default. AFAIK OS X always installs bash unless the user goes back an uninstalls it.

In other words I would say the two are roughly equally vulnerable. You can't compromise bash if it isn't installed (on various other *nixes) nor can you compromise bash if you can't get to it because no public services are installed that can call upon it (OS X).

The number of replies to my more recent comments suggests that others can read my posts reasonably well. A particular example of which of my comments you find not "readable" would be useful.

... really aren't Apple systems likely the *nix boxes that are least likely to be exploited by shellshock? I have a lot of Apple boxes at work (and know of lots of people who use them in other places as well) but I know of only a very short list of Apple boxes that have any public facing services. While a fair chunk of other *nix boxes are running web servers and other services that can provide avenues for exploiting shellshock, it doesn't seem particularly pressing for the Apple systems that are not.

Carmen Segarra was either the chick with the fruit on her head, or the one in the Senator's car that was really a submarine. What do I win, coach?

This seems highly improbable.

I think the big question here is how many people will have the ability to make that choice. People in high density housing (apartments, condos, townhomes, duplexes, etc) generally only get a choice of one supplier for electricity and they don't have the right to get new lines installed. As more of the world's population ends up living in dense cities, the percentage of people with the ability to select alternative energy sources declines.

From my recollection of Economics 1001 a reduction in supply with static or increasing demand leads to an increase in price.