Yes, well the point is to ban magazines with capacities "higher than we want you to have" (aka, anything greater than zero) and not "higher than would normally be used with a weapon of this type".

Separately, and not in relation to the parent post, but since I'm posting right now... the AC are out in force today!

My concern is how difficult is it to accurately re-dock with the mounting/access ring when the stupid thing is behind you?

In response to the "what for?" in the "Uncle hacked hypothesis" a reasonable scenario exists where this would be of benefit to the malware authors. Specifically, having malware alone on a computer doesn't necessarily generate revenue for them, for that they need to use it to obtain something with a more liquid monetary value - such as user/pass credentials for the users bank, etc. In fact, the ideal scenario from a malware author's point of view is that he wants to 1. Infect a computer, 2. Use the infection for gain, and 3. Spread the infection so that #2 can be repeated elsewhere.

I have to agree with Frosty here. The page that is linked in the summary clearly identifies the problem in the section entitled Rationale; "The decline in new contributor growth is the single most serious challenge facing the Wikimedia movement in the year 2011." Unfortunately they come to the wrong conclusion as to how to address the issue with the very next sentence; "Removing the avoidable technical impediments associated with Wikimedia's editing interface is a necessary pre-condition for increasing the number of Wikimedia contributors."
Quite frankly, it's obvious that the "technical impediments" of the editing interface are not to blame or else there would not currently be 4,099,684 pages of content (which excludes an additional 24,635,011 "other" pages - source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics ) as I type this. No, as Frosty P. states the problem is with the drama that comes with attempting to edit or create articles on Wikipedia. Rampant deletionism (which wasn't a thing before Wikipedia, hah!) abounds and new users are driven away in frustration. In short, they need to work on getting their current volunteers to operate in a more welcoming manner.
No doubt a majority of the problem is caused by a minority of the editors, but like everything else the vocal minority will out-influence a silent majority. This is the problem.

There's been a lot of back and forth revision of the definition over the years. I remember it was originally something like "Any object used outside of its natural scope to achieve a goal." Then people realized this meant otters used stones as tools to open clams so it became "Any object that has been modified to increase efficiency for a purpose outside of its natural scope." Then we had video of apes stripping leaves from branches to stick them in anthills... and the revision continues on ad infinitum because heaven forbid that humans have to share the title of "Tool-maker/user" with lesser beings.

It seems that everything on Android does this. The first thing I do after installing something is to remove the shortcut from the main pages. I have a whole screen with nothing but my apps - why would I want that on my main screen too?

As an aside, Code Monkey's is currently on Netflix instant streaming. I've been watching it since my path was the opposite (knew the song, never saw the show).

I don't know if you have an Android but whenever I download apps there's always a list of permissions it will have. That alone probably constitutes a degree of permission by the user, I'm sure.

I've a friend that's flip-flopped from telling me I needed an iPhone (when I got a Galaxy SII) to telling me how wonderful his wife's Galaxy SIII is. He's not even a tech-type guy and he's talked about the Apple vs. Samsung trial specifically because he wants to get a Galaxy SIII for himself soon.
Customers are fickle (outside of the the fanboy spectrum) and will jump on whatever is "hot" at the time. That's the whole purpose of the "walled garden" that Apple - and yes, Google "Play Store" also - encourages. It's an attempt to lock people into a specific set of devices (ones that you profit from) by discouraging change. Who wants to lose music, games, etc just because there's a new device out that is a little better? The better they can convince people to stay, the more money they can extract.

So yes, outside of the walling of the gardens, I suspect people want those choices. I would find it really interesting to see people genuinely upset that they're getting taken away from them.

At one former job, if anyone announced they were going outside to take a smoking break I would loudly announce that I was going to go outside also for a flatulence break. After some odd looks and laughter the first few times, they got used to me joining them and sitting upwind of their smoke. Of course, actual flatulence was optional but they got the point that I was going to be certain to take a break if they were going to get one.

USB webcam is a great and inexpensive way to go. My dad did this very thing one time - leave it on and set to record when it senses motion. A windy day left him with a bit of extra footage when the bushes would shake, but he also got every single car and person that drove/walked by on the sidewalk.

As a Kentuckian I'm extremely disappointed that the sponsor would even think something of this nature is a good idea. As a Republican (technically) I'm noticing that I'm less and less "in line" with the party as time goes on. It's especially noticeable to me the last election here... I need a party that's young and flexible enough to be smart about technology, strong on individual rights and liberties (but balanced with individual responsibility!), and that has the teeth to take on bonehead moves like this. Anonymous doesn't count.

Whole life insurance policies are usually designed to pay out the death benefit if the person in question reaches age 100, since there is no mortality tables calculated beyond that point. I imagine that would change significantly if longer life spans became commonplace.

If they paid in coins, you might say exact change would be even easier than with dollar bills. No "rounding" required in that case :)

Now that it's banned on twitter, it'll be the number one trending topic.