Mozilla suite was not credible for the normal users. Don't get me wrong, I used it as my main browser, hell I even used phoenix as my main browser on my laptop, but I just could not recommend it to most people at the time. Firefox was just right.

Wiping the computer and forcing linux if you have to clean their computer more than 3 times?

Calling a person as "Untrusted" simply because they got a virus?

God you are a piece of work, and you call THEM untrustworthy?

IT is their computer, their right to do what they want with it. IF you don't want to support them, you tell them you don't want to, or charge them appropriately. Don't wipe their computer and install a alternative OS, and treat them as if they are untrustworthy

I hope you were joking when you said what you said above. Even so, I hope this is a joke you dont share with normal people.

If I had mod points, I would award you all of them.

Its easy for some "Younglings" today to criticise what happened then. I personally didn't like IE back in 2000(Active X drive by installs, toolbars, and standards compatibility). Hell, life was bad back then (1997 - 2004) when Nutscrape and Exploder each having their own view of "Standards" (I am ignoring the Mozilla Suite and Netscape 6/7 as both never truly gained critical mass, and were not really for the masses anyway).

Until Firefox was released in 2004, there was no credible standards based browser, apart from the rather good Opera, which was pay ware at the time. Even then it was the surge of appalling viruses and drive by installs on IE, that finally got people to notice Firefox with its better security, and seduced by features such as pop up blocking and tabbed browsing.

Thanks to the efforts by Mozilla, which were then cemented later by Apple with Webkit/Safari, Standards Compliance has become a desirable feature for browser developers, rather than a drag.

Even Microsoft has slowly gotten their act together, and improving their own standards support.

Today we are in a better place, but its easy to forget how bad it was. even though Firefox was released in 2004, it still took a while to overtake IE.

In companies, where they are very much into standard installations and frowning upon installing software, it wasn't until Windows 7 came that IE 6 was eventually replaced together with XP. Therefore coding for the crappy standards of IE6 was the only realistic path available.

Its easy for most of us working in Tech companies to say otherwise, but in other companies like banking, and government, its a different environment.

Then... Slashdot woudl have to change its tag line! (News for nerds......)

I am no apple fanboi, but I bought one of the 15inch retina macbook pros for work reasons.
  It has an lg screen.

Now don't get me wrong, I have a lot of frustration with this machine. Its the only machine in the last 2 years I have had to force turn off by holding the power button due to some weird osx issue. However I have never experienced the ghosting issue? Maybe it doesn't affect all?

There are MANY technical reasons why an android devices cant present itself as USB mass storage. The two MAIN ones are:
- USB Mass Storage (USM) is a block level service which would NEED to be formatted in some form of FAT. Since Android is Linux based, the file system internally is ext4 on recent devices. No windows machine out of the box can mount ext4. (see below for implications on Nexus devices)
IT is extremely difficult, and dangerous to "Simulate" FAT where the device is not internally FAT.
- When a storage device is USM mounted, it has to be unmounted from the host, otherwise data corruption is likely to occur (especially with FAT) meaning that apps which write to that storage will find the storage no longer available, and would need to be cleanly unmounted from the attached PC before removal too.

There are other issues that FAT has no security around it, which is required for many internal and other applications in android.

MTP solves the mount/unmount problems, by presenting a higher level file/directory access that is filesystem agnostic. The computer or any other connected device does not require to understand the file system layout, etc, hence the OS can use any FS it likes internally. Indeed it can even present a virtual directory tree if it wants. It does not require to be unmounted, and can guarantee writes (no caching). It also does one op at a time. This is what makes it seem slow, there is no write caching, nor multi tasking on this.

However, I find that in terms of actual transfer, MTP on my Galaxy S2 is only very slightly slower than the USM mode when transferring large files(>1MB). Smaller files take a little longer, but still not that bad.

The nexus does NOT have a FAT system, and since it only has a single partition, it cannot expose itself as a USM. However, you can use all storage for apps.

The Galaxy s2 partitions its storage into separate ext4 and fat partition, therefore has a (fairly well hidden) USM mode for both internal and card storage. However, it ends up limiting the Application storage space to just 2GB of ext4.

The NEXUS 4 has a single filesystem allocated for the runnign OS.

No relevant similarity was identified between the putative peptides and known allergens and toxins, using different databases.

...don't you understand from the original paper?

I'll just link to this post that explains what the news reports misunderstood. It contains quotes from the original authors of the study whose results are misrepresented here.

I believe the article was referring to the UK. I don't know what the laws are there, but here in the U.S., a company would be closed down quickly if it were found the meat had been adulterated like that.

Oh boy, you're in for a shock then. Meat (and in general, food) safety in the US is way behind most of the EU countries. Eric Schlossers' excellent book - Fast Food Nation - details the US meat packing industry (from wikipedia's summary):

In his examination of the meat packing industry, Schlosser finds that it is now dominated by casual, easily exploited immigrant labor and that levels of injury are among the highest of any occupation in the United States. Schlosser discusses his findings on meat packing companies IBP, Inc. and on Kenny Dobbins. Schlosser also recounts the steps involved in meat processing and reveals several hazardous practices unknown to many consumers, such as the practice of rendering dead pigs and horses and chicken manure into cattle feed. Schlosser notes that practices like these were responsible for the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, aka Mad Cow Disease, p. 202-3), as well as for introducing harmful bacteria into the food supply, such as E. coli O157:H7 (ch. 9, "What's In The Meat"). A later section of the book discusses the fast food industry's role in globalization, linking increased obesity in China and Japan with the arrival of fast food. The book also includes a summary of the McLibel Case.

There is much more material, but this should suffice as a quick summary. The book is a decade old, the problems are current however.

I'm going to undo a bunch of mod points with this post, but I wanted to point out that the blog post you cite is flat out wrong.

I'd like to say that I'm for building more nuclear plants of 4th or later generation design and that even with the LNT model, the maximum number of deaths from Fukushima might be on the level of a single bus accident. That said, the blogpost is incredibly misleading. It took me a while to track down the original source that the post claims to cite from UNSCEAR and it's this paragraph:

In general, increases in the incidence of health effects in populations cannot be attributed reliably to chronic exposure to radiation at levels that are typical of the global average background levels of radiation. This is because of the uncertainties associated with the assessment of risks at low doses, the current absence of radiation-specific biomarkers for health effects and the insufficient statistical power of epidemiological studies. Therefore, the Scientific Committee does not recommend multiplying very low doses by large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at levels equivalent to or lower than natural background levels;

What they are saying in short is that the statistical uncertainty is strong enough at low levels of radiation doses WRT cancer risk is that it's not possible to tell whether the LNT model is true or not and THEREFOR it shouldn't be used to say "this many people will die from this much low level radiation". They aren't saying that LNT is wrong. They aren't saying that LNT is right. They are saying we don't know.

The quote from the report is from here. It's from the latest report to the general assembly, page 16.

This is exactly what I wanted for my home: to measure temperature/light/humidity with 4-5 various sensors placed around the house that transmit data wirelessly to a base station which is capable of logging / exporting / graphing the data in fairly standard ways, without the proprietary junk.

I was considering this controller with some sensors, but at $150 each, it's a tad expensive. I could probably build it myself from some raspberry pi derivative, however I'd rather not reinvent everything from scratch.

I was really surprised not to find a much less expensive solution and an open source ecosystem that provides this kind of home monitoring solution (with the possibility to base some home automation on this)

See thats the problem, Apple got good quality supplies from Samsung, however Samsung is also a competitor. Apple should have used some of the cash they have to actually work on sorting out alternative suppliers earlier. Instead they got involved in their thermonuclear games for far too long, starting lawsuits etc, without actually coming up with alternatives.

People talk about apples cash pile as a good thing. In business it is not always a good thing to have such a large pile of cash. It is seen by investors that the company is just relying on milking the goose that laid the golden egg, rather than spending on research. Apple has spent some of their cash on lawsuits, but win or loose, they are achieving a poor reputation in the industry.

They have not paid much dividends in recent times either, therefore what incentive do stockholders have in KEEPING apple stock, while at the moment its going down? These are all the concerns about Apple going around in the market. Yes their are investors praising Apples performance, but notice they are often stock holders themselves, therefore they may have some self interests.

Nevertheless, Apple has made some tremendous blunders in terms of how they conduct their business. Steve Jobs may have been a legend, however he was dying, and knew he was dying. It is quite likely in the last couple of years or so of his life, his decisions may have not been brilliant. Pair that with Apple continuing how "Jobs would have done it" after he retired, might have been a mistake too.

A company does not succeed on just tech products, they need to run a business well. Currently they are coasting on a huge cash pile, and a huge fan base, but they need to get their business process back on track, otherwise Samsung will really start eating in.

I bought my wife a Galaxy Note 2. its an incredible device that is innovative and unmatched....

Samsung are not stupid to copy any of the Apple designs, unlike other issues, these manufacture contracts have plenty of Clauses in them. Plus they don't NEED to, they license ARM designs themselves, and develop their own processors (Exynos). They also use Qualcomm chips in some US models.

3d (Not holographic) has already been done in Android already.

Why is it you always assume Android is always "catching up" and stating it as a fact? There are cases where Apple came out with stuff before android, and there are times when android came out with stuff before apple (Dual Core, etc).

Your comment would have been insightful had it not been for that nasty bit of "Blind" non objective fanboism you demonstrated.