I now what you mean. I use Google Search and Gmail, but Google Desktop was a bit much for me. I think the problem is that it was too good. I didn't use it much so my paranoia outweighed the convenience.

if (enjoyProduct && site == "Slashdot")
{
if (productCompany == "Microsoft")
astroTurfer[poster] == true;
else
astroTurfer[poster] == false;
}
I did (tried to do) that in C# so I'm astroturfing as well.

Apple is still taking an unfair advantage, and IMO even without a monopoly this is still bad. Goes to show that the top management at Apple runs exactly like MS in a lot of ways, they just don't have the OS monopoly to take advantage of.

You can see it with the iPod; there's a lot of stuff that's proprietary that could have been standard, especially when it comes to docking stations that only work on iPod. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but docking stations that can use both the iPod and other MP3 players need to have a separate port for both? That's the vibe I get from this article (admittedly from an MS affiliated site).

For anyone who is seriously cancelling their account (not necessarily the parent):

Seriously? You hate MS that much? Yahoo accounts are more for other features and less for search anyway. Well whatever, if you're going to do it, do it quickly so they'll know the spike in cancellations is due to this. I guess the overall goal is that no other company will ever deal with MS again for fear of losing all their users over it. Even if it's the only way they can be competitive in a field.

Seriously?

See also: the Comics Code Authority. Some links:
Wikipedia
TV Tropes

Gun. Head. No one.

Firstly, I gotta agree with the GGP; putting in so many amps at once is IMO not important. If you have a cheap recharge station where you park at work, and one at home, and a battery with enough storage, dumping in so much power at once is not needed.

Now about what Dan667 is saying about pollution, He's probably talking about the additional power you would need from power plants, but a) they aren't as bad as burning gasoline and b) they helps centralize power generation which makes it easier to push for greener power plants. There's some mercury, etc, in some types of batteries, but as long as there isn't much, it's not as bad as the alternatives.

The idea has been pushed back for legitimate and illegitimate reasons, but the technology will be too good to ignore pretty soon. in the meantime, he's right about 'em being expensive, because none are really mass-produced. The Volt seems fairly close to being a non-gas vehicle though, so hopefully that'll come out as 'planned'.

And yes, I do like that movie, for the most part. The same movie also says hydrogen is BS, and I'm inclined to agree, but I'm not an expert (my guess is GP threw this in to attract fanboys of the movie... well it worked!). In that movie they also say EVs cost less to maintain. I'm somewhat doubtful but if it turns out to be true, it's another thing to factor into the cost.

For anyone who is confused, the movie is "Who Killed the Electric Car?'. Like most documentaries, there's lots of opinions and bias in there, but the facts are pretty solid and I recommend you give it a watch.

One technique I thought would be effective (at least for getting people who are willing to pay for something they can get for free), would be for sites like StumbleUpon to accept donations, and then (after keeping a tiny cut for admin purposes) split your donation evenly across sites you gave a thumbs up. Or something. Just some sort of model where a big site takes a lump sum from you and splits it up. Maybe that sounds too much like PayPal? But more web 2.0ish.

Clearly the protesters are emitting some sort of electromagnetic interference, probably from some sort of terrorist super-weapon, and must be detained. Problem solved!

I'll tell you what's actually coincidental (though it was inevitable): this is the China Anniversary of the massacre.

It's nearly acceptable if you replace "by" with "with".

Oh, and you must be new here.

Also, every search engine blocked except Bing.

There's a wonderful episode of South Park that gets into this. Near the end (Cartman goes back in time) it's revealed that the founding fathers created Democracy because it let them do one thing while saying another. If you don't watch a lot of South Park, I recommend this episode.

If "get over it" isn't enough for you, here's another piece: "walk away".

And yes, defamation is more direct harm. People might believe you, stop trusting your target, or even be violent. If they do that to your target just because you were hateful to him, well, they either they were about to do it anyway, or they're very stupid.