...you will never struggle with turning anything at freeway speed.

Unless of course the hydraulic assist from the power steering pump is lost due to a pump failure or broken belt -essentially the same thing. Then the steering becomes very difficult as you have to supply the 'power' necessary to force the hydraulic fluid through the steering gear and the failed pump. This is also made more difficult as most power assisted steering has a higher ratio -fewer number of turns lock-to-lock- than a manual (non-power assisted) steering gear.

Going 'through' any large city in SoCal is possible using public transit. Getting around 'inside' one is nearly impossible.

Please. No one needs tubes. All one needs is a little spice to fold space --and possibly some 'Juice of Saphoo' for the trip.

What the OP and others seem to fail to realize is that when you buy an Apple Macintosh computer -along with the copy of OS X installed- you own the hardware and only have a license to use the software -and that is restricted by the terms of the license to only Apple hardware. Nothing prevents you from running another OS on the hardware that you own. When you purchase a retail version of OS X, you are bound by the license terms to run OS X only on Apple hardware. To run it on any other hardware is in violation of the terms of that license. How is that in any way anti-competitive?

That's what the cost-savings per computer would be, $0.50 a week, $26.00 per year, per computer.
More opinion here.

What they need is the Infosphere!

Mr. 'Smart Science Guy' has his mind changed for him on 'Clean Coal' after being appointed to a political position. Who would think that such a thing was possible?

You are standing in a dark cave.
The Wizard, Obama, is to your left.
To his left are five gnomes.
He taps one with his staff and it turns into a lawyer.
You are eaten by a grue.

to navigate their jungle habitat, are the waypoints bananas?

'apt-get'?

When it's free -as in beer: 'Advanced bash Scripting Guide - Mendel Cooper'.

Light pollution is just one of the by-products of industrialization. Fifteen-hundred years ago the air was a lot cleaner, hence more transparent which means more starlight/moonlight reaches the surface at night, than it is today -less soot, smoke, dirt, suspended aerosols, smog- so much so it is estimated, that the light from the stars alone would have enough to read a newspaper by -had newspapers existed then. If we want to see the sky as Galileo saw it, we're going to need more than just turning off the lights to do so.

The article states that LCD TVs use more electricity then 'conventional' tube TVs. That's absolute crap. A few years back my old Sony 27" XBR went tits-up. Its power consumption was approx. 550 watts depending on screen brightness. Knowing that LCD and plasma sets where the 'wave of the future' -yet not wanting to be an early adopter- I decided to buy a cheap 27" Phillips CRT-based TV which has a power consumption of 275 watts at full screen brightness -since I don't run it that high it's actually averages about 225 watts. New LCD TVs have power ratings in the 215 to 275 watt range depending on the screen size -the CCFL is the big power user I guess. Plasma sets are considerably higher, closer to the range of the XBR. So what kind of savings in energy do these laws hope to legislate? Ten percent? Twenty Percent? There has to be some minimum power usage for LCD TVs even if they were to go to OLED by the time frame stated -which probably won't happen- so given the dollar savings figure cited, they seem to think that they can get a fifty-percent savings -or more- through legislation. I just don't see that happening.

you backup and archive the site on a daily (hourly) basis and continue to post articles. Why shutdown the whole thing? This makes no sense. Maybe they're taking some cues from \.-sister site, Linux.com.

Never really was a "major technical programmers' magazine". It was simply a rag filled with useless advertisements and a forum for John C. Dvorak to spout his nonsense. I stopped reading it ten years ago when it became irrelevant.