You can still agree with me--the "usually" means it doesn't apply in every case.

A healthy balance between any extreme is usually ideal.

More like playing to the media. Much like asking any athlete after a playoff game loss whether they still have a chance to come back... only rarely will you get an honest answer, and when it happened recently (down 3-1 in a best-of-7, captain's answer as "probably not") the media raked him over the coals for being defeatist and having no confidence in his team.

Short version: the media, both sports and politics, ask some really stupid questions.

Yes, I see a logical flaw there. You deliberately left out parts of the story to paint the Republicans / TP as innocent bystanders.

The Democrats worked in the spirit of compromise for years on the ACA/Obamacare, and the Republicans / Tea Party took that as a weakness and excuse to demand more concessions and even the total destruction of the ACA.

Finally the Democrats and the President said no more, and gave the Republicans / TP a dose of their own bull-headed, no-compromise medicine. The House Republicans forced a shutdown, and then Boehner exacerbated it by refusing calls for a vote in the House because he knew enough moderate Republicans would vote against the TP extremists, risking civil war within the party.

Then, by waiting for the Senate to work out a bipartisan plan, House Republicans saved face--the moderates could still vote against their TP colleagues without actually opposing anything the TP had put on a bill.

On this specific point, Walmart (of all companies) is reversing the working hour cutbacks and rehiring 35,000 people as full-time workers, with ACA coverage.

Why? Funny enough, simple free-market principles: "While the company’s trend toward temporary employees has allowed the retailer to avoid its responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act [...] they’ve managed to tank their store sales in the process."

The number of the dramatic licenses (i.e. deliberate errors, not nitpicks) to generate and sustain the peril were too much for me to fully enjoy the film, though I have no problem saying it's a great movie. A friend didn't think the inaccuracies were that bad, and wrote them off as "it's Hollywood." True, but he doesn't know space physics and orbital mechanics as well as I do (relatively speaking; I'm not in the field either).

Then the next night we're watching a movie about mountaineering/climbing, which he actually does do, and then every time he pointed out a flaw it was my turn to rib him with the "it's Hollywood" line, which was acknowledged with a wry chuckle.

Name one high-traffic moderation/comment system that's better than Slashdot, and explain why.

Even if you manage that, the point still stands that /.'s system is far better than 99% of the sites out there.

Many people, probably a majority, *don't* know how to think without an authority telling them what to listen to. That "authority" is not necessarily government, or church leaders, or politicians, it's *anyone* who's charismatic enough that people trust what they say or write. Rush Limbaugh, Steve Jobs, Greenpeace activists, Jenny McCarthy, market analysts, parenting experts, a non-techy's tech friend, etc. Most of those in turn have their own authorities that they listen to.

I don't drink coffee, nor energy drinks, and tea only rarely, but thanks for playing.

That practice is not unwise at all, but it *is* unwise to assume the car(s) in front will accelerate as quickly or constantly as your own car. I've had idiots tailgate me right off the green light, and then have to brake because I drive full manual in a country where 90% of cars sold are automatic, and no matter how fast I shift there *will* be a 100% loss of acceleration for at least a half a second, and another half to build it up again.

In this particular UK case though, the rear-ending driver somehow missed that the car in front was at a complete stop, and hit hard enough to cause death. That's a whole different kind of inattention.

Considering all the passenger videos of takeoff and landings that are on Youtube, some all the way from the gate pushback, taxi, all the way up to level flight, they haven't been doing a good job of enforcement anyway. And it's pretty clear modern personal electronic has little to no impact on operational safety of the aircraft.

It seems you missed that I was supporting your argument with an analogy, which of course isn't exact.

1) no matter what evidence is given, the disbelievers will demand more proof that it wasn't faked, "ad infinitum."
2) Irrespective of all other evidence, the reputation of the challenger (no need to be a market competitor) is all the supporting evidence needed.

The difference obviously is that the CCC's reputation bolsters their actions/claims, whereas the reputation of the USSR as the USA's chief adversary and the circumstances of the Cold War bolsters their inaction and lack of claim.

A nice and convincing argument. I've said something similar about the "faked" moon landings: never mind all the science-y explanations, if the Soviet Union didn't raise all hell and denounce the USA for faking the landings, then the landings were not faked by the USA.

While true, one of the supposed reasons/excuses the iPhone screen remains that small is one-handed operation, i.e. when held normally by an adult with average-sized hands, their thumb can extend and reach almost every part of the touchscreen.

Folder open/close animation is slightly but noticeably longer, and the springboard/homescreen loading takes twice as long as under iOS6. I can see this clearly on my iOS7 4S vs my iOS6 5. These seem to be built-in to the animations of iOS7 itself, rather than being caused by older hardware.

I wish this didn't change my perception that iOS7 is a bit slower, but it is literally visible as soon as I start using it (unlocking to springboard/homescreen). 3 years ago when I experimented with jailbreaking, one of the best ones was reducing all animation time by half.