... that privacy 'policies' don't mean squat...

Firefox doesn't have the responsiveness of either Safari, Chrome or Opera, neither does it have the superior one-process-per-tab model of Chrome.
Firefox on linux has particularly sucky performance and some awful problems that haven't been fixed for years. It's so bad, your stand a better chance with the chrome beta.

But I can see how switching to one of the most complained about GUI layouts of recent times may successfully distract people from Firefox's other flaws :)

Though it's a small stretch, a lot of slashdotters sit at work, on company time, using company property to post and read slashdot. It's not your property, and I'm assuming MOST people aren't paid to read slashdot, so we're guilty too.

Does that make it right? No. Does this mean our role-models of justice should play a suspect under warrant's consoles? No. But should you be here reading this?

I understand that they are breaking a LAW, while viewing /. at work may only be breaking a POLICY, but both still have potentially serious ramifications.

Sorry, but no. There is no gene in Staph aureus that says "only grow in hospitals".

Corps don't pay taxes. Taxes are a cost. Costs get passed on to customers, shareholders and employees. They get passed on to you. You who buy any products made by corporations.

True but meaningless: it's the balance between customers, shareholders, employees, and "society as a whole" that makes taxation policy interesting. Tax too high and you drive away investment and lose jobs. Tax too low and you can't run a society. Etc.

*All* crops cross pollinate. Why should GM growers be held to a higher standard? They're just as "contaminated" by the other farms.

If you really want crops without any cross contamination, you can grow them in a sealed hydroponic facility.

You've not developed for OpenGL3 have you?

DX10 came out November 30, 2006 - which gave DX10 devs geometry shaders

The OpenGL 3.2 spec was released 21 days ago (spec != drivers though!), which finally put Geometry shaders into the core specification. That's only, what, almost 3 years after DX developers got them.

So... if you need to use geometry shaders in your game, what GL extension do you code against? GL_EXT_geometry_shader4? GL_ARB_geometry_shader4? NV_geometry_program? or the core spec? Chances are you'll end up coding against all 4, because you can be absolutely certain most cards will support 1 of those extensions, but each card will probably support a different one.

If the Khronos group keep insisting that they must keep the OpenGL APi 3 years behind D3D10, it's not difficult to see why developers aren't all that keen to go with OpenGL. If the Khronos group continue to keep giving us information which they later back track on (like the entire OpenGL3 spec), it's not surprising to see game developers ditching OpenGL3 in droves. To see Carmack ditching OpenGL really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone working with OpenGL3. I've worked with OpenGL for the past ten years or so, and I'm sad to say that I'm currently stripping all OpenGL out of our codebase in favour of the 'other' API. Currently it seems to be what every developer is doing at the moment. OpenGL is just a royal pita these days. Let it die.

I'll take a mouse bite over a whale bite anyday... especially if i's a computer mouse :)

They are switching to this system in Arlington, Virginia, too. Reasons for the new system:

1. No "left over" time. When you pull out, the next person pays in full, even if you overpaid and had extra time when you got back to your car.

2. Fewer old guys walking a beat with a cart that has a special mechanism that the meter collection boxes will dump into.

3. Accepts credit cards.

4. Automatically gives you a receipt.

Item #1 obviously benefits the city, to the detriment of us parkers. (Could benefit tax payers, if politicians don't waste the extra money.) Item #2 is definitely a reduced cost, as long as they don't turn around and add more meter readers, which could benefit us the tax payers.Item #3 is nice, since I never carry change and only have it in the car if I specifically collect it. Not sure who'd take advantage of item #4.

Well, not entirely, but seriously - they've come up with a way to grow new teeth for mammals.

Personally, I would love it if I could go to the dentist and have him replace some of my bad teeth with new ones. One or two at a time would be fine.

Instead of getting fake teeth or fillings when you've abused your teeth to the point where the enamel on the outside of the tooth has worn away, exposing the dentine ... if I could get those replaced? I'd almost be willing to kill for that.

Sure, it'd take time to regrow a new tooth, but I could live with that.

So yeah, screw growing new organs - get me some new teeth!

The thing I couldn't figure out is why do people spend so much time and money, when they could be content with less?

However, in this case, she is only facing audit because she win. If being born masculine isn't qualified, why on earth can she participle in the first place? If it is about fairness, let the test be conducted before the game, not afterward.

Maybe I just think a lot of people here would be frightened to learn how many babies are assigned a sex based on a coin flip by a doctor. How sure are YOU that you weren't born intersexed? A lot of people are never told.

Shouldn't these track and field events be a place where we humans can come together and show how far we're able to push our natural limitations without body modification?

Without body modification, I mean without introducing drugs or mechanical advantages into our bodies. To show how far we can go "naturally".

Rules are rules, and the sport has their own governing authority deciding what is and isn't okay.

1. Logically, if she had a sex change, this would be a modification to her body. How is this any different from doping?

2. Logically, if she was born that way, without any drug inducements, the question is, is she considered male or female?

As someone pointed out, males tend to be thought of producing sperm, and females producing ova. But, where does that leave those who don't fit that definition?

Look at one's chromosomes, and whether one's body is producing the hormones that tend to make one male or female. Is she an underdeveloped male, or is she an underveloped female? This may be an oversimplification, but don't males have more testosterone that estrogen, and females more estrogen than testosterone?

All in all, it comes down to how the governing authority of the sport defines it.

what's wrong with XXY?