Kind of low of Facebook to turn it around and somehow blame the users for their incompetence.
Roy from I.T. Crowd said it best: "People. What a bunch of bastards."

Why make millions and give your customers a good value, when you can make tens of millions and rip everyone off? It's so stupid a fool could see what's wrong, but unfortunately these companies didn't have any fools on the board of directors.

Few people use their cellphone for serious online use. Most of them use it because it is convenient and it is there. Most might be irritated if the cellular telcos put huge caps on it, but in the end no one is really that completely put off by it. Many people will be angry about it but will continue on their merry way paying for it. There is not huge amount of people that would be seriously inconvenienced by it, and certainly not the apocalyptic way it is worded.

Now caps on wired are not gonna be as tough as they make it out to be. The major Canadian telcos charge and arms and a leg for low bandwidth/cap internet, but the lower tier providers offer pretty much whatever they want. At the moment, I'am paying $70 (split amongst roommates) for 25 down/5 up and an unlimited cap. The price did increase earlier in the year by a few dollars as Bell tried to put the squeeze on my provider (TekSavvy)) but it is still infinitely better than any plan they offer. Now I know things are worse a little farther south for those United Statians but I have hope that the telecoms capping practise won't go on for absolutely that long. Eventually something in the country is going to reach a breaking point for the general public, and it just might be the internet that pokes the figurative bubble. I can't say much for other countries, but I've heard mixed reports of excellent/shitty internet from all over.

Somewhat accurate, but a little overblown it seems to me.

I read "Hitachi Develops Board Game With Built-In Explosives" and I thought that is sounded pretty intense.

It always seemed odd to me how much money politicians make and how much more rights they seem to have than us. I've always thought it would be neat if to become a politician, all personal information would be made public, all future communications made public, and their income maxed at the national average. None of this $100,000+ a year bollocks.

Now there are lots of holes in my idea, but I feel like it would force politicians to be more honest about what they were doing. It would bring them back down to Earth at the very least and bring the more dishonest ones to the front to be judged. But such a large amount of information would probably just flood over the relevant information with useless facts about each and every politician, and verification would be almost impossible.

Nice to imagine though, that politicians do what they do because it is right and they want to help instead of just taking bribes from lobbyists and corporations.

Windows being Windows, I don't forsee any real future issues with getting your own apps on the ARM version. Just the nature of Windows will probably make it much easier to work around, and if the userbase grows enough it will move along that much faster. Microsoft is trying the walled garden technique the Apple has going, but I don't foresee it being as effective or foolproof as Apple's.

Sometimes I feel like Microsoft si kind of flopping around like a fish on land when it comes to tablets. Even though they technically had a headstart, they've only just started their move to tablets and it feels rushed. The current release cycle of good > bad > good > bad will most likely continue and Windows 8 will flop. At least I hope it does and it will force them to rethink their stupid Start menu removal, amongst other things.

How can you not love this guy?

Parent is right in the fact that there are so many neat hacks out there that HackADay can cover more and is dedicated while /. has to pick and choose and be more broad in what they feature, otherwise everything else will just get drowned out.

This is the absolute least interested in a Nintendo product. It's shown me nothing interesting or worthwhile yet. I'm still not entirely sure if this is a a revamped Wii or the proper successor. The Nintendo I knew fell sick with the N64, got a little better with the Gamecube and then suddenly died with the Wii.

Their milking of characters is no longer a funny joke, but a sad reality. I never look at the Wii catalog and see anything that peeks my interest. I still believe the motion controls to be a silly idea (except once, ONCE, where I enjoyed using it as the gun in Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles). Their targeting of only children and families leaves me feeling cold and unwanted in their vast wasteland of crap.

I've probably just grown up and out of their demographic, but I still have their previous iterations to enjoy, but this one has absolute no redeeming qualities to me and seems like a bigger waste of money and time then the Wii before it.

How it seems to me, in a simplified way, is that advertisers feel they have the right to serve you ads. Off the bat, I disagree with this notion, however I do see that without ads many websites would not be around or would be forced to hide behind a paywall.
At the same time, what guarantee do advertisers give users that their ads are not a potential attack vector, or what standard do they follow that their ads are not intrusive and degrade the performance of a users machine or overly distract and irritate the users? How invasive do their ads and data collection get to be?

Overall, I see where they are coming from but at the same time all I hear is a bunch of self-entitled whiners. Is there any good reason to instantly get tracked as soon as you visit your first website, or should you be allowed to later reveal yourself to the world if you so desire the features this advertises and data miners claim to provide? The most obvious being targeted ads and more relevant searches when using Google.

What's happened to previous work in this field? I remember years ago an implant that let a blind man (how blind he was, I do not know) see the equivalent of a monochrome 16x16 image. It allowed for basic shapes and object recognition. This one seems to be a step back. What gives?

Shouldn't it be closer to:
$ping shetland.gov

Pinging shetland.gov with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from shetland.gov: bytes=32 time=3,092,644,800,000ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for shetland.gov:
Packets: Sent = 1,890, Received = 315, Lost = 1575 (83% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 3,092,644,800,000ms, Maximum = 3,092,644,800,000ms, Average = 3,092,644,800,000ms
$

No, it's more like you living in London and him in Seattle, then building a tunnel between your houses that takes half the time and cost to travel between the 2, no too mention is is easier then catching 3 connecting flights and a submarine to Atlantis before the UFO transfer and bomb drop to Seattle after which you still need to ride in a cab.

It is significantly easier and cheaper, much more than you are making it out to be.

So basically they are taking it upon themselves to ban you from texting in a public transport, or as a passenger. Many rides are bumpy enough and anyone carrying on a conversation might seem distracted enough for the app to trigger.

All this is going to do is force drivers to pay MORE attention to the phone as they don't want their message to be cancelled by the app.

I'd like to add you lose certain features when doing this, such as the ones mentioned in grandparent, but most people seem to ignore that it is in fact a choice. Those features rely on the data being transmitted. If you don't want to send data, but want the features; tough tits.