Honest question: so the car won't let you lock the doors once you're inside it? That must make driving through dodgy parts of town a bit scary.

The Pebble was supposed to have an e-ink screen, but it turns out they're using some type of LCD sort of like your standard digital wrist watch.
I guess the problem with e-ink is that even the fastest displays are too slow for interactive UIs. E-books sort of pull it off since the benefits while reading outweigh the horrible interface responsiveness, but for a smartwatch I think it might not work.

I don't care much as long as it's easy to plug in and take out, like with an inductive charger, then it should be fine.
A lot of people I don't typically wear their watches at home, and I guess for even those who do, most don't sleep with them on. Especially if it's a heavy piece, as smartwatches will be for the foreseeable future.
For me, dropping the watch in the charging pad next to my bed, or the door won't be a big deal.
In any case I don't see a big difference between needing a charge every 2 days or every 5. You'll be getting into the habit of charging it every night or risk forgetting to do it when the battery is running out.

The most important bit is the battery life. The Pebble is supposed to last 2-5 days and the Samsung Gear will last you a day if you're lucky (but that's a beast of a watch, hardware wise).
Nobody is sharing details on the upcoming Android Wear devices, which is annoying but expected. Hopefully it'll be at least a week, but honestly I'm not too hopeful.

I've been quite interested in smartwatches in general because I actually think they can be quite useful, depending on the implementation.
I haven't had the courage to get one yet since technically the current offerings seem to be a bit on the weak side, and they tend to look the equivalent of those calculator waches from the 80s.
The Motorola watch seems to be the first smartwatch to actually look the part, and hopefully the Android Wear thing will cover the other part. We'll see.

Anyway, I do not see the watch as redundant to my phone, but rather as an extension of my phone's screen.
Take the following scenarios where you'd typically be fetching your phone from your pocket or holding it in hand for a long time only to glance at it from time to time:
- Jogging
- Using walking directions
- Checking why the phone just vibrated (or if it vibrated)
- Controlling the music player and the volume
- Checking the time (ah!)

You don't need fancy hardware for any of that. You phone already does all those things, so all you need is a screen, battery, weak processor and basic input.

Look at the reverse situation: why would you want to watch a video on your phone if you have a huge flat-screen TV in front of you? Ideally, you'd make that TV an output to your phone and watch the video there - the kind of thing which is starting to be possible with devices like Chromecast, or those DLNA boxes.

That's short sighted. Smartwatches serve as much to tell time as smartphones serve to make calls, i.e. it's one of the basic functions, but it does so much more that the original use is not even the main one any more.
Nobody will charge their watch every night just to tell the time, but they may do it if they think it's worth the hassle for the extra functionality.

Of course, there's still the argument to be made whether those extra functions are something people will actually want, but it just seems these companies aren't even asking themselves the right questions, and may be setting themselves up to a very big surprise.

It's only for video. Vertical pictures do not get the overlay.

In fact, the new app now allows for vertical panorama shots, which is something I had found lacking ever since that feature first appeared on Android.

Don't worry, over-the-top airport security is bringing it back.

Not to defend Kay, but the system not booting is the result of another bug which was immediately fixed: systemd had some assert which was wrongly spamming log messages when debug was activated.

The discussion then turned around the more general idea of having a user-space application listening to kernel debug settings instead of listening only to settings under its own namespace.
I don't feed qualified to answer on the technical part, but from what I read it was at least clear to me that Kay's general arrogance and unwillingness to cooperate towards a solution have completely justified Linus' action.

I find I use the internet a lot more when I'm visiting some place than when I'm out and about in my own city - when I manage to find a convenient way to go online, which is rare.
This is because in my home city I don't need to check my maps to know where I'm going, I don't care as much about the weather since if the weather turns I can always find something else to do, I don't need translation services nor do I need to look for a decent restaurant as often, and I don't need to be checking for hotels since I have my comfy bed waiting for me.
I'm also a lot less active in social networks when I'm at home because there's a lot less interesting going on to justify posting.

I don't mean to say that I'm glued to my phone when I'm on vacation. In fact it's the reverse: I can optimize my time by searching for what I want more efficiently and get back to tourisming.

It wasn't my intention to imply that these techniques are unique to git.
The original poster mentioned liking SVN better because of the command structure, and I was pointing out that that's possible as well with git. My point was that for certain corporate environments (or large teams in general) git can be made more centralized without losing many of its benefits.

I've used git in a traditional corporate environment, and done right, it can be a lot more powerful than SVN.

"Done right" means you have someone dedicated to the role of "git master" who merges the team's commits into the master repository.
This is what Linus does, and it works to great effect. The great advantage is that individuals and teams can very easily work on their private branches before merging into mainline.

The second method is to set up a server which runs automatic tests on all commits and guarantees at least that the git history remains clean and contributions do not break the build.

From my experience, people tend to resist git because the concepts are a bit difficult to get in, especially when coming from other SCMs. It doesn't help that git uses many of the same nomenclature as other systems for slightly different operations.
However once the concept starts to settle in, git is actually quite simple and its use becomes second nature.

I don't know mercurial that well. From my experiments and what I've read on the Internet, it's essentially the same as git. Some people have strong opinions (like you seem to have) towards one or the other, but I've found that it's mostly down to small differences.
However, to me it makes no sense to use mercurial when almost all open-source projects already use git. Using mercurial only means you have to deal with two SCMs rather than one.

If you already have an Android phone you already take everywhere, then it makes more sense.
An independent device would certainly be more useful, but that would greatly increase cost and size, and increase battery drain. And most of that would just be replicating things your smartphone already does.
Given the hardware constraints, it seems that this method is a decent compromise, at least for a first-generation device.

Personally I think the round version from Motorola looks good enough that I'd consider wearing it. It actually looks like a watch, even if a bit too thick for my taste, though I like my watches to be as thin as possible (I tend to buy Skagen).

The LG just looks too much like a gadget to me, sort of like the Pebble and the Samsung Gear, which is why I never got any of those.

These watches have a touchscreen

That's not true. Alternative medicine has been tested, in some cases extensively, and proven not to work beyond the placebo effect.

In the rare cases that it does work (some traditional herbal concoction turns out to actually have medicinal properties) it stops being labelled "alternative medicine" and joins the ranks of "real medicine".
That's the irony of alternative medicine -- if it does work, it's no longer alternative. Proponents of alternative medicine are essentially trusting their health to the exact therapies which have been proven *not* to work.

That's rich. Nice choice of words there.
I bet you could also replace the Windows kernel with Linux "with enough effort".
Or turn a car into a space shuttle, "with enough effort".
Or move the great wall of China 10 meters to the left, "with enough effort".

That actually makes sense, and wouldn't surprise me at all.
Considering that dogs and humans have evolved together for the last thousands of years, if dogs' brains have adapted, why wouldn't ours' have as well?