It's all photons - get over it. Only the observer knows how what is being shown is being processed.

Have 2 carabiner clips - my usual configuration is:
clip 1 : my car key and my house keys (2 separate rings) - ad other rings if you require
clip 2 : an "inka" pen, a "utili-key", my RSA key, my work ID, and a lanyard

Usually the two carabiners are clipped together and I usually have that clipped to my pants. However, it's very quick to rearrange for the appropriate solution and keep at most 2 sets. The lanyard is handy as a quick grab/hang hind of thing. I typically have my keys around my neck when running out the house this lets me lock the door quickly regardless of all the other crud I'm juggling.

*whispers* I tend to take my ID carabiner + car key (leaving others in car) when flying. I've flown + 20 times with my utili-key and that hasn't been an issue.
I'm sure there's a Layer 1 thru 3 analogy in my keyring arrangement somewhere.

About once a year I read a comment that I wish I could nominate for "insightful comment of the year" or some other slashdot-esque award. You sir/mad'am receive my nomination.

Exactly!

RFID and the policies that surround it can make for an easy blanket "attendance required" policy; a bureaucracy with no flexibility. Typically this policy is, say, 10% for attendance. The slackers couldn't really care while this can be very detrimental to serious students .

I worked 40+ hours a week while enrolled full-time in college - it sucked. However, I had an open dialog with my professors and they knew about the absences and the causes. With their cooperation, flexibility in attendance policies, and understanding I ended up graduating first in class*. If my campus had RFID attendance I doubt I would have had this flexibility.

* Actually I firmly believe my work overload helped me earn good marks. I was forced to learn time management because it was blatantly obvious I would fail otherwise. Come to think of it, this is probably one of the greatest things I learned while in college.

I'd say it's PG-13 at best.

Marriage in this country is sanctimonious. Many other governments actually require separate ceremonies wherein the wedding is for symbolism only and does not confirm any legal status.

I agree with you, and would even be willing to extend the abstraction further: An adult picks an "important party" that is their legal representation. By default, this is your Guardian until 18, after that pick someone - *Any adult*. This scares people because it sounds random, but it is just as random as picking someone to marry. I argue that the selection may be more, uh, rational. It could be the person you are "married to" (religiously) and I would image that would be the common case. I can see many of the legal benefits that are bestowed on a spouse as useful to give to someone else. I feel that requiring marriage to confer those rights to someone else "discriminates" against those that wish to remain single. For example, I am married, but if my wife should die, I should be able to confer these benefits upon my friend since the age of three If I desire. It's a matter of trust, not marriage, not emotion.

This abstraction could be useful for other issues such as mental illness where the guardian, or the state, could remain the "important party". Unlike today that requires More Laws And Paperwork to allow this to workout.

PS I've yet to figure out what to call myself. I'm typically cast into the "liberal" category by those more "conservative" than my self. Then again I'm fiscally Conservative. Not sure if you were trying to knock "liberals" but I agreed with everything else you were saying.

I worked 40+hrs a week while enrolled full-time in college - it sucked. However, I made the professors aware of the situation and were aware of my attendance gaps. They knew it wasn't because I partied to hard or decided to grind for xp. They worked with me and I managed to graduate first in class*. Most professors like to teach (shocking, right?) and those that don't are at least happy when someone shows interest in their field. What scares me about this RFID concept is that it automates the attendance policy into a bureaucracy that could be outside of a professor's control. If 10% (say) of your grade is based on attendance then you are are at a great disadvantage if you are a serious student. Yet if you are a slacker that just wants to squeak buy then it's not enough to really mean anything. *To this day I firmly believe I would have been a worse student if I would have worked less. My schedule forced me to develop time management skills; it was obvious I would fail otherwise. Come to think about it, time management might have been one if the best lessons college has taught me.

Do long multi-year projects typically take inflation into account for budget overrun analysis?

*Everybody* cheats on Hello World. After all, that IS the point of hello world.

Correct for CAN. Though as for any protocol - garbage in; garbage out. The value(s) transported in CAN's payload may have been corrupted in memory or even in the CAN driver hardware* Actually, the "cosmic magic" is more likely to corrupt bits in static locations than represented as a voltage potential traveling along a differential bus with an active low being the dominant state. Of course, I have nothing to base this on, but I am posting here - *shrug*. * I designed both hardware and software for redundant CAN implementations.

If I saw a "out of town" rate display, without reading the article, I wouldn't have known what it meant - because I would be an out of town tourist. An interesting twist: actually charge out of town riders more for riding a taxi and residents less. This would encourage residents to rely even more on publicly available transit.

"But, no matter what you do, it will never be perfectly, 100% risk-free to fly. Or to drive, or to walk, or to do anything." I find that very appropriate given the current topics so often discussed here.

There's no feedback of requested speed; the feedback is the current speed of the car. You can request an increase of speed, but there is a finite time in which the car can respond to the requested increase. Given the variance in terrain it is quite possible that you are, after some time, requesting a speed that is significantly higher than the current speed resulting in sudden increase in acceleration toward an unknown target speed. This will seem as an unexpected reaction, as you are looking at the current speed as the target speed which isn't the case. Essentially, the feedback loop isn't closed correctly, and people cant do calculus that quickly in there head. I've complained about this for years.

...never works. This has been known for nearly two decades (TFA): "The U.S. government has known about the flaw since the U.S. campaign in Bosnia in the 1990s, current and former officials said. But the Pentagon assumed local adversaries wouldn't know how to exploit it, the officials said."

hmmm maybe Josh had it right! Ching-wah tsao duh liou mahng.