The term "imminent threat" like everything else as it relates to matters of law is as fluid and malleable as the entity wielding the power wants it to be.

Actually they can, but it doesn't really matter much anyway what SCOTUS rules. These paramilitary groups and pentagon nerds will barely even notice the speed bump. The cops may have to rely more on parallel-construction when they get to the court room but that's the extent of the impact the ruling will have.

Bigelow is providing a module scheduled to fly on the ISS beginning next year. Their more ambitious activities are waiting on SpaceX's man rated launch vehicle.

You're referring to the second stage. The first stage never get's anywhere close to orbit.

As a Minnesota resident I also don't find their statements particularly comforting. An average Minnesotan winter day is still pretty F'ing cold, especially if they are allowing for the wind chill.

Nefarious or otherwise, the security permissions were too course grained to begin with. This just makes the problem worse. They might as well flip everything over to 777 and be done with it for as secure as they've now made things. This isn't going to boost user adoption of apps (at least among people with a brain), it's going to make everyone more paranoid and gun shy about pulling the trigger on the "install" button. Call me old fashioned by I'm not terribly thrilled with the idea of conducting my day to day life publicly exposed, naked and vulnerable. While I'm willing to accept dropping my pants for my doctor in the context of a medical exam, I am certainly not inclined to do so for the convenience store clerk on the corner just because I want a bag of Cheetos.

There is logic to that, especially given the dumba$$ way web content is consumed/provided. First you start with content technology--HTML5, JavaScript, Flash, Silverlight, etc.--whose foundations were that of working/hacking around structural problems with content description and delivery. Then you couple that with a plethora of implementations for consuming that content, each with their own twist on how they interpret that content.

For the provider of said content, the resources required to properly support all the variations in this environment is prohibitive. Instead, they choose a subset representing what they consider a reasonable balance between cost and coverage of users. If they were to simply let open the gates to everyone, any variation in the consumer's environment that isn't being perfectly supported will result in a bad experience for that user. This could result in any number of consequences for the content provider--technical support costs, a lost customer, a tarnished brand, etc.. Better to simple define the playground within which their customers can play, and they can support sufficiently well to ensure the consumers have a good experience.

I wonder if the hex grid might make it not matter so much that the ground beneath behaved like a rippling waterbed.

Your carrier is Verizon I take it?

+1 Insightful

I'm curious how simply curving the screen will make it more likely for me to get up from my couch after viewing a show with gum stuck to my arse.

So you don't get it either?

Their CEOs don't believe they have a future. Better for them to loot and pillage before jumping off the boat.

So instead of leveraging their assets (their employees) to develop new and relevant products they choose to gut the place to appease shareholders in the short-term. What a disgusting waste. The brand HP is meaningless without the talent that once stood behind it.

Err. in case the Nazis show up... "they're".