http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A_h2AjJaMw.

Also, it occurs to me that the guys who climb 300' towers should be paid just as much as the 2000' towers, since you're just as screwed in the event of a fall.

Judging from the history of these things, Apple probably has the entire supply tied up for the next 18 months.

I think the most interesting part of this by far is how the FBI managed to undermine the credibility of Wikileaks by getting them to leak arguably bogus material: Sabu actually used FBI equipment to hack Stratfor while under their employment. So... next time an intelligence leak rolls around, how are we supposed to know it wasn't a three-letter-agency spreading disinformation?

Is there any reason why NASA can't start working out a 'asteroid impact playbook' right now instead of scrambling to make one when the big one does come, even if it's not this one? I fail to see how that would be a worse use of taxpayer dollars than, say, the shuttle program was.

If you mean 'Columbia' as in 'the District of Columbia', then I guess not. If you actually meant 'Colombia', the country, then yes, it is quite stable these days.

While it's nice to pine for the days of old when reading was a solitary escape, it's also important to acknowledge that things have fundamentally changed, and there is no going back. How many people really go as far as to hide their smartphones while reading a printed book? The fact of the matter is that we are immersed in a world that is inherently more connected and more distracting than ages past. There are downsides to this, but apparently they aren't considered sufficiently compelling for most people to forsake cell phones, email, blogs, social networking, streaming video, etc. Whether these things are accessible from the iPad a person uses to read a book or from the smartphone in their pocket or the laptop in front of them, makes very little difference.

Unlike, say, Iran, NK doesn't actually need nukes to level its sworn enemy. It would probably be faster and more convenient to just level Seoul with conventional artillery. Is there any doubt that their nuclear program is just a bartering commodity for aid?

This is wrong in several ways. First, New Jersey is not a country. Second, being gay is not technically illegal in NJ, believe it or not. Seriously, did you not read the first 10 words of the article? i.e.:

Exactly. I'd love to see the US call Iran on their bluff and have them demonstrate their ninja hacking skills on a test drone.

The real scenario:

Drone crash-lands in Iran due to software bug.
Iran hauls drone away in pick-up truck, gives it a paint job, and makes it the centerpiece of a propaganda campaign.

Never attribute to advanced spycraft that which can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Hi, I'm Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I deny the holocaust ever happened, think Israel should be wiped off the map, and wish death to America. That said, you should really, really trust me when I say that our 31337 haxors downed that drone unscathed via a heretofore unprecedented GPS spoofing attack, guided to a safe landing in Iran by our top-secret, ultra-accurate, stealth-ignoring radar. We can do this at will, of course... we just choose not to most of the time. And if you're wondering why we chose to brag to the world about it instead of the tactically superior option of keeping it mum and pretending the drone downed to a technical malfunction, well, it's because our super-secret military skynet command-and-decision AI was hacked by the Israelis. Damn Israelis.

Exactly which option is more psychopathic? Giving 100,000 Chinese a job, a place to stay, and something to eat; or firing those 100,000 Chinese in favor of paying 10,000 Americans to do the job, at 20x's the pay, just because they were lucky enough to have popped out of a vagina located within certain latitude/longitude bounds at the right time?

HaDOOOOOOken

FTFY.

I'm no climate-change denier, nor am I a human-induced climate-change denier, but this is a little too sensationalist for my liking. Saying that the earth is getting hotter and implying that this itself implies that humans are to blame just gives deniers room to say, "A-ha! Well, if that's your evidence for human-induced climate change, you're wrong!" It may be tempting to trot out these soundbites, but I think it's an unwise rhetorical strategy in the long run.

LMGTFY: darwin kernel compile