The F-350 is a truck. Why on earth would anyone lust after a truck? It's only practical purpose is hauling stuff around and the ones that are built today are rarely, if ever, used for hauling anything other than groceries. They eat gas, they fit only two comfortably because the back is taken up by the huge bed which nobody ever puts anything in. They cost about as much as a small 3 bedroom house. Nope, can't see any reason to lust after that.

I would like to see proof that straight pipes by themselves do anything for the cars performance. The stock muffler provides a certain amount of back pressure and the engine is specifically tuned to work with this type of pressure. Eliminating this pressure is more likely to reduce rather than improve performance.
Of course every teenager with $100 thinks that a bolt on part (which fits all models of Honda, Nissan and Toyota!!!1!!ONE!!) is somehow going to improve the performance of the vehicle better than the hundreds of Japanese PhDs that designed the car.

And what does that make people with 8, 10, 12 or even 16 cylinders? 6 seems downright emasculating at that point.

That is the same as contracting anywhere, if you are an employee of the contracting house. You are paid salary and the company is still billed for hours you work over 40, you just don't get paid for it. That is why you don't be an employee of a contractor, you be a contractor. Or you find a contractor house that will pay you for all of your earned time. In that case, though, they will probably expect you to take some of the risk and not get paid when you don't have a contract.

You mean it was brave of them to say 'this format is working well for Babylon 5, I wonder if it will work if we do it with a series with a lot more brand recognition and a much bigger budget?'

This is true, but those times also had significantly higher ice concentrations. Paint a big chunk of the ground (and sea area) white and you'll see the

If you can say this with a straight face, then you have no idea of the history of the climate.

Not even slightly. It has assignment, it has things with defined execution order that have side effects. There are declarative query languages, but SQL is not one of them.

Boo hoo. Contractors are paid by the hour aren't they? Every other company in America is demanding 50 hours of their salaried, overtime exempt (only in name in most cases) employees. So again, boo hoo.

Well, AC thinks they will scrap another minute because they are fear-mongering lefty scientists. If they add time, then he is wrong. But I would have to agree that if they take a minute out, then they are just fear mongering, or trying to make a political statement about the environment. In truth, nuclear devastation is a real threat to life as we know it and could happen in a matter of minutes. climate change is an affect to the climate which could take decades to have any noticeable affect, although we measure it daily. Not that the climate isn't important, but it doesn't justify changing the nuclear doomsday clock. Yes, it is the nuclear doomsday clock, and has been since 1947. The word "Climate: did not show up in the reasons behind adjusting the time until 2007, despite the fact that man had been affecting the climate since before the idea of the clock arose.
If they need to make a Climate change clock and set it to 100 years until Climate Change midnight, that is fine, but there is no reason to hijack another clock that already has a stated purpose.

Well, you initially said "statistically", which is just wrong. Of the estimated 30 billion or so people that have died since Homo Sapiens became a species, 0 of them have died of an asteroid strike, so statistically, it is at the bottom of the list, along with sun going super nova, alien invasion, space herpes, moon colliding with Earth, giant space turtle stepping on Earth, Earth being swallowed by a black hole, etc.

Doesn't Windows come with one of these built in? I might be remembering from the Server version, as it's quite a few years since I last ran Windows, but in Windows 2000 it was something you could enable in the services management interface.

It's quite difficult to argue that something that is a transparent cache and will always provide the requested data, just sometimes from a local copy, is equivalent to something that either requests or does not request the remote data and instead substitutes something else based on some external policy are equivalent.

One of the big supermarkets in the UK used to have warnings on the backs of peanut packets saying 'Warning: may contain nuts'. I was confused by this until I found a packet that had been filled entirely with air due to an error at the factory. Then I understood the warning.

Although on further reflection, it's still a bit confusing as peanuts are peas, not nuts.

Every single article in the ECHR looks like that. They're all basically of the form 'Governments may not do X, unless they really want to'.

If you think moving to China gets you away from greedy capitalism, then I can only imagine that the last time you saw any news from China was some time around 1960.