What he means, I think, is that most computer companies make "consumer grade" machines and "commercial grade" machines. I've not has an Asus or Lenovo, but I've had Toshiba, HP, and Dell. With respect to Dell, I've had both consumer and commercial grade machines, built to higher specifications. Most recently I purchased a Dell Latitude 5000 series laptop--in Dell's explanation of this computer in comparison to the 7000 series, it gave the 5000 series a build quality of 3 out of 4 stars, it gave the 3000 series 2 out of 4 stars (still Latitude--which implies the consumer grade stuff is 1 out of 4 stars for build quality). The consumer grade machines seem to be designed to last about 2 years or less. The commercial grade machines are designed to last more like 4 years.

The problem is, you have to pay a premium for the commercial grade machines.

With Apple, there is no "consumer grade" and "commercial grade"--they're all made to high specifications.

So, if you take the thing to its limits, you'd better remember to get out before the battery completely dies. Because when the gyro stops turning, you can't put your feet down (since there is a vehicle body in the way) to keep the thing from falling over.

Not that I think the idea is a bad one in general.

I saw a Kickstarter campaign just the other day using this concept to replace training wheels in kids' bikes (a gyro goes in the front wheel). Personally, I think it was a better idea in the kids' bike than on a motorbike. And that Kickstarter video had actual footage of the concept in action, with kids riding bikes, and a shot of the bike rolling with no one on it and self correcting when somebody smacked it several times in a manner that would normally knock a bike over).

Two things:

1) According to the picture on the tracking thing, this was not a Dell, it was a Lenovo Thinkpad, which is a Chinese company, which Chinese company probably does not install "special firmware" for the NSA.

2) However, the picture actually doesn't say it is a Lenovo Thinkpad, it actually says it is a Lenovo Thinkpad KEYBOARD. I guess I haven't dismantled a Thinkpad lately, but it doesn't make as much sense to me to intercept a keyboard as it does to intercept a computer.

Combine this with infusions of blood from your grandchildren and you'll be good to go.

This is why, as of late, manufacturers have realized that the brake must mechanically override the throttle.

How does one test a lethal injection drug?

The summary says that Google is testing cars in Mountain View. According to this website, with respect to Mountain View:

I think it is safe to say that it rains there, as compared to, for example, Disneyland (18% of cold season days have precipitation) or Las Vegas (12% of cold season days have precipitation).

This only applies to a small percentage of women.

This applies to approximately 100% of women (including the subset of sexy women), so, no, coinreturn had it right.

I haven't read the paper to say whether or not this is true, but, if it is, why does that justify getting this guy's emails? What will his emails say? "I decided to leave out a medieval warm period...." His emails have not been released and yet you know these flaws in the paper. You can show the flaws in the study and produce a better study. That does not require accessing somebody's emails or other underlying work product.

My understanding of the idea and purpose of an academic research paper is to lay out a hypothesis, method to collect data to test the hypothesis, data (results), statistical analysis of data, and conclusions. A properly written research paper will not be published in a peer reviewed journal unless the method of data collection is clear. This makes the research reproducible. The publication of reproducible research is a crux of the scientific process.

What the proponents of the FOIA request are doing is trying to cheat. If you want to disprove research, you may:
- Show that the method of data collection produces biased data
- Show that using the same method of data collection produces different data than that shown in the original research
- Show that statistical analysis was not done properly
- Etc.

All of this is done by hiring experts to analyze the methodology and statistical analysis and by commissioning a study to reproduce the original research. If the research is not reproducable, then there is something wrong.

That is how science works--you make reproducible research and then other people reproduce it. When they can't, the scientific community tries to figure out what went wrong. Maybe the underlying scientist made an error, maybe s/he made up data, maybe there is no explanation.

But this idea that you can cheat by looking at the researcher's emails? That's new. And not useful. If the study was not done properly, then reproducing it will catch that. If the research was done properly, then it needs to be reproduced anyway in order to determine the strength of the conclusions. So, don't try to cheat the system, just do this the old fashioned way--reproduce the research.

Mod parent up. This is absolutely true. For example, listen on Car Talk to "Click and Clack" discuss how cruddy cars used to be and how much better and more reliable cars are nowadays. Compare a mid-90s Hyundai Excel to Hyundais now, for example.

UPDATE: I just signed up for insurance through the Obamacare exchange with the very insurance company that rejected me for "question of Marfans."

I totally feel for you. I am lucky enough to be insured, but when I was shopping around for cheaper insurance, I also was rejected for trivial stuff. My grandmother (who is not a doctor) said to me several years ago: "I think my mother and uncle might have died from the effects of Marfan's Sydrome (which can cause aorta rupture), and I think I have some of the symptoms, so you should consider getting checked out." At my annual checkup I ran it by my doctor, and he said: "I doubt it, but there are a couple cheap tests I can do to be more sure." In the end he concluded that I do NOT have Marfan's Syndrome.

Fast forward 2 or 3 years. I apply for insurance with a company other than my current insurer. They request permission to do a medical history check. "No problem," I think, because I've been given a clean bill of health by my doctor.

Insurance company decision: Coverage rejected for reason--"Question of Marfans." In other words, they don't trust what my doctor said with enough confidence to risk taking me on....

Part of the idea of Obamacare is that crap like this shouldn't happen anymore.

I think that "negotiation" was in quotes there because it isn't really negotiating. If you can negotiate a price lower than the sticker, it is because the dealer had no intention of charging you that price unless you were stupid enough to not ask for a lower price. The sticker price bears little relationship to the actual value of a vehicle.

Also, I think the author fails to consider the idea that Netflix likes to keep things simple. If a move studio said "Netflix, you can license this movie for streaming, but only if it has the following limits on viewing..." or "...only if you charge an additional $___...," I think Netflix would say "No." Otherwise it would have to segregate its movies into categories with viewing limits and those without. And it would be a slippery slope. Some movies would have strict limits, others would get looser limits, and before long very few movies would have no limits. I think Netflix wants to keep things simple--if a movie shows up in instant view, it is available to watch all you want without paying extra. Period.

If you would like evidence that limits would be a less good (I won't say bad here, just less good) business move, I can only provide anecdotal evidence with a very small sample size, including only myself and my immediate family members: Amazon Prime--Amazon has a ton of content on there, some of which is free and some of which is not. Where do I go first when I want to watch something? Netflix--because I know that if it is there, I can watch it all I want for free. On Amazon, it might come up when I search, but that doesn't mean it will be free, and if it isn't free, I probably won't watch it at all.