Write smaller functions. Your code will be better for it :-)

Both people have other disabilities. The only guy was in London England which is scary enough to drive in... but when you see he has limited control over his hands you really wonder how on earth he can drive.

The other guy lives beside me. He appears to be deaf(ish... not totally). He also doesn't appear to move too quick.

So, I am freaked out because of what I perceive is their slow reaction time. Having never driven with either of them I cannot say for certain that it is a problem or not though...

I have met two people in my life that drive and use wheel chairs. They whole idea freaks me out... but they can drive and they need wheel chairs to move around.

*** for this think wheel chair ramps and the like ***

I can understand that they have to make PUBLIC buildings and locations (state, federal, etc) accessible, but, this almost implies they are going to require that private business (eg the note about small business exceptions) HAVE to put their places up to some form of handicapped accessible standards?!?!

WTF?

If a business doesn't cater to anyone handicapped (I guess it could happen), or just is ignorant enough to not do so and lose that business, that should be up to them.

No one is holding a gun to the person accessing a building, nor should they be holding a gun to a private business to cater to any specific crowd.

There is a reason why such things exist. It is to ensure that all persons have free access to things. For example black people and the front of a bus etc...

Be sure to set it to vibrate first...

Well that isn't true: if I can download content at speed X and I do it at 100% capacity 24/7 for a year and you can download content at speed X/2 and you do it 100% capacity 24/7 for a year you will have downloaded half as much as I have.

The "unlimited" one would either be slower or more costly. Bandwidth is a limited resource... to keep speeds up they need to purchase more of it, and thus raise their rates, or not purchase more and let the speed suffer.

Net neutrality doesn't prevent charging based on usage (which is what they should be doing). Note that that is different than charging based on sites accessed or protocols used. ISPs should not be degrading P2P traffic, or restricting access to sites, what they should be doing is charging users based on their consumption.

Ell given that everything in a header file is public if you want source compatibility they have to have the same names.

I, admittedly, didn't read 100% of all of the links, but the slightly more then skimming I did do did not show me anything that was the same that couldn't have been for achieving source compatibility.

It would be like complaining that glibc defines EXIT_SUCCESS...

To make it more like reading a physical book... isn't that... "obvious"?!

It is still mimicking the real world, and is thus obvious.

You can see through to the other side in many cases, so not transparent but translucent depending on the lighting.