My first thought was "Don't let this guy move to any future Mars colony, he'll end up founding the Red movement..."

I'm pretty sure this "article" is really just Dell advertising.

I suspect humans make it there and create permanent settlements the crime and war situations may change rapidly.

Speaking of which, I should finish reading Green Mars...

Well, I more often find myself thinking "I need to get to [some address], on a map it's right around this intersection, I wonder which stop is the closest". That's almost always the initial problem you face when you're about to go somewhere with a public transport system you're not intimately familiar with. Only after this do things like "which station should I change trains at?" factor in.

Add to this that may times public transport systems will have a stop/station named "Something Street" which is actually not on Something Street but rather it's ~50m from one end of Something Street and is only named Something Street because that's where Something Street meets the street that the bus/train/tram runs on and the stop you really wanted was two stops earlier which is called "Random Park" and happens to be on a street parallel to Something Street (and right next to the place you're going to).

But tablets and smartphones aren't minicomputers.

This sounds more like an attempt to return to the minicomputer era.

Perhaps you meant to say that the microcomputer fad is coming to an end? Of course, I doubt it's accurate to describe it as a fad...

Lule is also acceptable if trying to approximate how the name of the city is normally pronounced.

While it was pitched that way it actually dealt heavily with various political and ethical issues. That was what made it great, sure there was technobabble and bits of "space western" mixed in but overall it was speculation about the future and the present.

The "new trek" is just action movies IN SPACE which makes it "sci-fi" in the eyes of Hollywood.

Seriously, if you're still using tables for layout you probably shouldn't be doing web development.

Tables are horrible to work with yet I still see horribly hacked-up amateurish table-based layouts that are almost impossible to modify and work with cranked out by developers who should either consider that HTML has changed since 1999 or stick to writing server-side code.

Based on my experience I suspect you also never use <!DOCTYPE> tags, use deprecated elements, nest your elements in nearly unparseable ways and don't quite grasp how to write even basic JavaScript (I'm not claiming to be a JS expert but the incredibly poor quality of JS that some people with CS degrees and 10+ years of experience come up with makes me wonder how they have jobs in the first place).

Except the UI for GIMP is a pain to work with. Photoshop's UI may not be perfect but it's a lot better than GIMP's UI.

GIMP suffers from having a UI designed by programmers, what it really needs is a complete UI redesign (and it needs to be the default UI for the latest and greatest version, not some GIMP-with-a-decent-UI fork that's two versions behind and suddenly doesn't get updated anymore).

In fact, it needs a UI which is not just almost as good as Photoshop's, it needs to be good enough that an experienced Photoshop user's initial reaction to it is "Huh, this is different but I like it" (right now it's closer to "Why is this user interface such a mess? Why should I take the time to learn this?").

Oh yeah, because double NAT always works so well, especially when the end-user's precious uPnP is no longer a viable option.

There will be a lot more issues with CGNAT than with end-user-controlled NAT (just another example: services which assume "one user = one IP", works fine when your home connection is shared with one or two others, doesn't work so well when you're sharing an IPv4 address with dozens of other users).

Well, if Adobe thought they had real competition they'd probably feel the need to be competitive, one way to do that is by having cheaper and less restrictive licensing.

That said, I think Apple would do a better job, Aperture is downright reasonably priced and IMHO the UI for Aperture is better than Lightroom (not that it doesn't have its flaws, I'm just talking about the general workflow).

I'd say a lot of Adobe CS users are just as locked to Adobe's software as Windows users many times are.

However, this could change quickly if someone decided to put a lot of effort (and money) into developing a viable alternative to Adobe's software (especially Photoshop, while there are currently alternatives on the market Photoshop is definitely the baseline that other software is compared to).

I really wouldn't mind if say, Apple and Autodesk both decided to take a stab at creating their own Photoshop competitors. They both understand the target user to some degree.

Well, it depends on whether you're uploading something which others can see and also whether the persons you've filmed/photographed are clearly the subjects in your video/photo or just random people who happened to be there.

If you stick a camera in someone's face and then upload it for the world to see then yeah, you need permission. If it's a newsworthy event, a celebrity/politician or simply that the person was in the background when your friend did something funny then you don't need permission to upload it.

Here in Sweden you're allowed to photograph or film anyone in public as long as you aren't specifically harassing them. Publishing photos on the other hand...