was she able to continue her conversation per hands-free feature on cellphone?

They are still around but soon they will be no more. You will have to subscribe to a cellphone service and have a connection (lots of luck in rural areas). There is nav systems built into cars that contains maps in memory (but have to pay I heard a few hundreds every year to upgrade). Call me a luddite but I liked the Thomas Guides (map page and grid). Unlike large foldout maps, these are like a book. With paper maps I can quickly look at general spot of my destination, then do an overview on how to get there, then zoom in with my eyes to see specifics and cross streets. But the Thomas Guides are now out of print, I heard new versions are all screwed up.

These days you address by GPS coordinates (great for flying a helicopter or firing a cruise missile) but give me an address. These car nav systems are kind of dumb if you ask me. Ok so you key in the address and it will speak specific directions. But geez I don't want it to say, "turn on El Camino, drive 1.73 miles, turn right to enter hwy 85. turn left to 280, turn. " I know how to get on freeway to SF, it is the specific address in the big city I am interested in seeking.

I don't like using maps such as http://quickmap.dot.ca.gov/ on smartphones, screen too small to see detail unless I zoom in but then lose the overview.

2014: none
2004: none
1994: none
1984: some gaming on those machines at college social centers

and all quoted by sales/marketing and other non-engineers. What has changed is this new term STEM. Scary thing is STEM jobs, like pilots and actors, will become a two-tier system. Those that make a good livable wage, and those barely scraping by.

yes, an asteroid in motion has a lot of kinetic energy. I ask same question considering the rock was not equipped with pyrotechnics and no O2 on the moon. And yet FLASH! it must be physics when a multi-ton rock comes to a screeching halt, energy has to go someplace. Besides light, think of the heat generated. There's probably slabs of cooled molten soil all around. Let's see, maybe I'll look into my Resnick and Halliday and do some calculations.

Going somewhat OT, it's not that Microsoft is evil, they are a corporation. A corporation is a machine, it has no conscious, no feelings, no empathy towards humans. This is why you can have lots of people with good intentions but they are in a machine that proceeds along its way. Of course there are those at the helm that can steer direction but I wonder if some of these corporations have become so big (i.e. those with one name but several different kinds of enterprises) that direction is dictated by stock markets and whatnot. Way back when these "machines" became so powerful it was necessary for The People through elected officials to create regulatory agencies such as FDA, SEC and the Fed. (though in reality their creations were not as simple as what I just wrote). Many of these govt agencies exist but fallen to regulatory capture, SEC and Fed are excellent examples of failing to prevent stock market abuses that have bankrupted US (both country and us commoners).

Communism was envisioned as a way to regulate corporations by creating a government where private businesses can exist, get rid of business that gets rid of problems big businesses create. This seems a good idea but only applicable for two-tier societies of very rich and very poor but difficult to implement when you have a middle class or trying put everyone on equal scales. And then there's the old joke of Capitalism is where man exploits man, Communism it's the other way around.

Yep, and along those lines the bumper sticker says, "Food comes from farms, not supermarkets." In central Calif along highway 5 there are lots of signs of "Feinstein/Boxer/Pelosi created the water crisis." And it's these areas which only Republicans hold seats. Though large part of central Calif population are immigrants so they can't vote, but that's another story. Overall, vast majority of voting population of California are in cities so farm policies/plans don't seem to get much attention in the legislature. I wonder if better use of water can be done. I've not spent time but I'd like to see some numbers of water users. i.e. industries, farms, residence, etc. Where is most effective use? It seems most have not a clue. Getting back to farms, they want "their" water but much of it comes from other areas. Fortunately it is one big state. I wonder if it were two states or smaller states if there could be a war started between the two battling over water. I don't have the answers but it has to be a balanced approach. Farms need water or we'll all starve. Cities need water because that's where the people are. Water should not be drained completely from wildlife regions, huge break in ecosystem can have huge ramifications on everything. i.e. what happens if several critters go extinct when food chain broken. i.e. honey bees all disappear and many plants fail to get pollinated.

Documentary showed a clip of history class at West Point, instructor says, "Who was the strongest military in 1915? And if you say Germany, you answered wrong. It was Great Britain." Yep, and 25 years later GB was fighting for their very existence but the US came to their rescue. Instructor went on and said US is most powerful military but what were to happen if we get into same situation. Who will save us? This was shown in 2001, and it seems to stick in my mind there's 12 more years to go.

I read someplace (I think Parachuting's Unforgettable Jumps Howard Gregory, http://www.amazon.com/Parachut... ) where Billy Mitchell had an idea of flying aircraft and landing troops by parachute inside enemy lines to attack from the rear. Because at that time only way to advance troops is directly into front lines. But the war ended before an Airborne Div could be formed.

Getting back to failed strategy, how many of you think this kind of thinking still goes on today?

another problem is everywhere they went, they all speak English.

In another /. I ranted about spend $50M on CGI, $5K for writers. Someone replied, "why don't you contribute to this group making a sci-fi using pre-CGI techniques?" And a link to a Kickstarter type of webpage as this indie group relied on donations. I didn't followup so missed their deadline. But this indie group intend was to do what used to be done. Take a compelling story with engaging characters, have some special effects to add to the story. But since their special effects was not superior to current Hollywood, they relied more on story and actors to keep audience interested.

And there is the 1970s BSG cylon with a cup and sign, "replaced by CGI."

And there is "Hollywood Accounting" (I read someplace all Harry Potter movies lost money. Distribution costs ate up the profits so movie makers didn't have to pay taxes). I also wonder if there are some that make lots of money, others not so much except bragging rights. Perhaps going OT, an article about music piracy/studios losing money, etc. someone posted a link to an article written in 1990s about several musicians that have "sold" millions of albums but received meager amount from the studios. And some even owed money back to the studio. Author described how expenses are tallied to the gross revenue (all those expenses from production/distribution/promotion is "necessary") but end result is artists didn't get much to speak of. These accounting procedures were virtually like those portrayed in "The Harder They Fall" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...

On the subject of large scale ventures, author Dennis Wingo wrote, " think what having access to rights over a billion kilos of platinum would do for your corporate portfolio." http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...

ok, maybe going OT but reminds me a line from a movie: "How much taxes will Soviet govt make on $50,000?" Peter Lorre as a Soviet commissar answers, "$50,000."

my vhf/uhf units may not have the flash and dazzle of smartphones, but no way to kill or hack my units.

/. beta, so far I can continue using Classic (and hope to continue using it)