Perhaps.

I've never had that problem with the MS keypads that I use.

If I did, I'd just glue a silicone sticky-pad to the back of the keypad. Only adds a few grams. Problem solved.

I know that everyone has different UI proclivities, but I have trouble understanding this one.

Seems to me, the ideal interface would allow the surgeon to use it without removing their hands from their work, or wasting energy flailing their hands around to get the info they want, or moving their vision elsewhere, etc.

If voice control doesn't work for them, I'd suggest a set of foot pedals to keep their hands free. That works well for guitarists, who also have to make precision hand movements.

Also perhaps a heads-up display. That works for fighter pilots, who need to stay absolutely focused on task.

That said, since my life could be quite literally in a surgeon's hands, I want them to be as comfortable as possible with whatever UI they choose. So having another option is good. :)

Erm...no. My perceptions of NASA are based on the NASA bureaucracy's historical behavior over the last 4 decades.

This was just an amusing anecdote that I thought might be modded up "Funny", not "Insightful", as it was. Apparently other folks agree with my perception of traditional NASA behavior.

I am sorry that you're having a bad day, but please don't take it out on me.

The initial research, back in the mid-1980s, with technical users, showed that Trackpoints were radically more efficient than moving your hand off the keyboard to access a pointing device.

Subsequent research, with mainstream consumers, showed that most people had trouble learning how to use it.

It isn't the technology; it's the ability of most people to get over a learning curve when they have another option readily available.

Try the Trackpoint again...try a little harder...and I bet you'll never go back to a mouse. :)

I don't agree that the keyboard on a high-end Thinkpad is much better than the keyboard any other high-end model of another brand.

I see this comment in paid reviews very often, but it seems to me it's just parroting a marketing line, a carryover from the days of the excellent old IBM keyboards.

FWIW my main machine (on which I'm writing this) is a Thinkpad X-series, and my desktop machine uses a Thinkpad external keyboard. I've owned/used about 20 different laptops over the years, and still own/use a couple of Dell Latitudes, MacBooks, and old Compaqs.

The Trackpoint, however...THAT is radically better than other brands. The Latitudes, the older Compaq, an external Samsung keyboard, and a Keyspan presentation remote, all have point-sticks too. But there is something distinctly better about the response and accuracy of the Trackpoint on the Thinkpads. I'm guessing they patented something about the acceleration algorithms. Hope the patent runs out soon.

I would love to see a MacBook Pro with a 3-button Trackpoint. Never happen though.

Someone please mod parent up, Funny or Insightful.

I'm assuming the OP's problem with a USB keypad is that it requires a cable or dongle. A bluetooth keypad does not.

I have a couple of MS bluetooth keypads that I use with my X-series Thinkpads. These bluetooth keypads are very thin & light, work for many months on a single AAA, and just simply work every time I pull them out. Personally I think it's the best product ever sold by MS.

One huge benefit of a wireless external keypad is that you can place it in the most ergonomic position for your data-entry arm. Or remote-control arm. Or whatever task you're using it for.

With a built-in keypad, you either have a behemoth of a foldable computer (not really a laptop), or a squashed set of keys (not full size) or both.

From TFA:

They just keep following the old script, even when things change. Fresh blood, in the form of the private space industry, is great.

Aborting a launch automatically based on sensor data is not a failure; it is a success.

I'm sure the folks on the ISS have enough toilet paper and freeze-dried icecream to make it through the weekend, until the next launch window.

Remember the spectacularly huge Netscape IPO in 1995. Then this quote would've been:

Observe spectacular failure of VCs who failed to think for themselves, and just followed the herd long after the peak had passed.

Same story, different year. The smart money is still investing in biotech, which actually has a real impact on our lives. Nothing to see here...move along...

A lawsuit does not have a "size" in terms of damages, until damages are actually awarded. Until then, the size of the suit is determined by its costs.

If you are sued, spend $100K defending the suit, the judge dismisses the suit as frivolous, and the judge awards you 2x your defense costs ($200K)...that seems more than fair.

If you don't agree, you can sue for whatever other damages (loss of business, etc) you may have incurred as a result of the lawsuit.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff.

Fair enough, but if he meant what he wrote, it was entirely off-topic and should be modded down.

I assumed it just was a lame reference to Ed Saverin, in which case "renounced" is the right word.

There is plenty of precedent, at least in the US, for the courts awarding 2x or more costs to the defendant, or requiring the plaintiff to post a contempt bond before filing any other lawsuit, when the plaintiff files a frivolous suit.

The tricky bit is determining what is truly frivolous.

Ask: Why did the early investors/founders in FB increase the number of shares they floated in the last few days (to 15% of the company, iirc), and radically overprice the IPO instead of pricing for investor excitement/momentum/growth?

That's right. They know that the end game is right now. This is just one reason.

On a related tangent...anyone heard anything about the latest with Paul Ceglia?

Ceglia was briefly represented by a huge global law firm (DLA Piper), claiming a contract with Zuck showed that he owned half the shares of FB. DLA Piper mysteriously dropped off the case. But other lawyers have been happy to pick it up, and then mysteriously drop off the case. Hmmm. What's the definition of "strongarm"? ;)

It's not just about scripts.

Simply loading the little F icon/image from facebook.com gives them your IP address and a pretty good fingerprint of your browser, as part of the HTTP request.

Turning off scripts is not the solution. You need to keep prevent your browser from making any request to a site that you don't want to track you.

When your credit rating drops and your insurance premiums rise, because of your browsing patterns, or the post contents, or the risk-profile of your social-network acquaintances, you won't know that this is the reason.

The corporations will only tell you your new lower credit rating, and only tell you that insurance rates went up. No explanation required.