How about a multi-site reputation system?

That's not true in my experience. While a pro-Microsoft post requires a little more explanation and good reasoning, I've seen plenty of them with +5s. Sure, a one-sentence pro-Microsoft post like "MS just does it better!" isn't going to be received favorably, but Microsoft posts with reason seem to be up-modded by some and not down-modded by those who hate everything about Microsoft.

I don't think this is true. A Microsoft troll may be, but I imagine someone who consistently makes well-reasoned posts about the virtues of Microsoft would at worst have a neutral karma, and probably has pretty good karma. If you have a counter-example, please provide UID.

I'm not so sure the "war on anonymity" is carefully being orchestrated, though I certainly hear the loudening beat of its drums. And there are certainly forces that are very much behind the cause.

What worries me most is the support for it I hear from those who aren't very interested in the topic. I think many people see horrible comments on websites or blogs, hear something like the "Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory", and just assume that's the problem, with the obvious solution being banning anonymity without thinking about the negative consequences for true expression of the unpopular, embarrassing, and taboo.

Systems using pseudonyms and reputation systems are up to the challenge--while not obvious at first, a little thought into the problem shows this. You could even have adding your legal name give you a reputation boost (doesn't Amazon do something like this?). But with all the blaring bile about how humans are not capable of having the power of anonymity without reverting to sub-human pseudo-demons, too little attention is being paid to the real solution that doesn't stifle discourse.

I hope that the problem is that the pseudonym+reputation solution isn't obvious to the person who is first confronted with this problem, and that over time it will become clear and a consensus will build that anonymity doesn't need to be removed--we just need to add a reputation element. There are certainly forces that will push against this and favor getting rid of anonymity as soon as possible, but I'm far from convinced they will succeed. [Perhaps this is too hopeful?]

I agree completely. I think most of the Internet's commenting problems don't require legal names to be revealed at all and that they can effectively be solved with pseudonymity and reputation systems. Essentially, reputation is being conflated with legal identity in most of the reports on these problems. I hope it's just accidental and short-sighted thinking and writing, but it sounds increasingly like a war drum against being able to have a voice on the Internet without revealing your legal name and having it permanently attached, in one way or another, to every comment you ever make.

Why is there so little talk of building systems where creating a pseudonym and establishing a reputation are important? Perhaps a real identity could be divulged to gain reputation outside of the normal system, but what benefit could it have beyond that? Such a requirement will just kill the discussion of many worthwhile (though perhaps embarrassing or taboo) subjects on the Internet.

If that's true, that's only because they don't know what it is.

Most people, if told they they could get the 16GB tablet now and add another 16GB later if they need it, would consider that a nice feature that makes it so they don't have to spend the extra $100 on the 32GB tablet "just in case".

Clearly it's not important enough for the average consumer to buy one tablet over another based solely on this feature, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great feature (or, more realistically, a horrible omission by the market leader to fleece more money from customers).

This tablet also has an SD card slot for storage.

I don't understand why publications are so focused on presenting the varying built-in storage options but not even mentioning whether a memory card slot of some type is present. I'd much rather know if the device has cheap expandable storage than know how much the company is going to overcharge me for the largest built-in storage option.

Not true! They said Sega must be defended!

That is, if the organization's not a false flag.

Do you remember when, not so long ago, Apple was popular among Slashdotters? Back when their primary focus was on computers and not appliances? It's almost amazing thinking about that now.

It would be interesting if there were some way to plot the volume of comments about Apple over the years that have been positive and negative with their corresponding moderation totals. I can't think of any topic that has gone from overwhelmingly positive to overwhelmingly negative in the past six or seven years.

What you say about radio stations is true. One of the newer tactics is enticing cash strapped colleges and universities to sell their radio stations/frequencies (usually to the great dismay of the communications department and the community). So instead of having a community service or an educational tool or both, you end up with something probably legally classified as a "religious nonprofit" set up as a repeater of some remotely-produced dogmafeed. [Did I just make that term up? No search engine results from the majors. I think it's appropriate for this type of station.]

With digital book platforms where your purchases along with page numbers and dates are stored, you might be right on.

It will be a sad day when there is no way to legally obtain and read a new book without having your name attached to it in a database... if we let that happen.

Exactly--a preoccupation with "news" stories is the opposite of being well read. Being well read involves understanding the depths of artistic works / events. News stories provide the opposite, especially from the establishment media. They provide surface-level summaries of what some people have said that generally serve corporate and political interests.

I don't think anyone's immune to being interested in the latest happenings, waiting for some great or tragic event to bolster or destroy a cause or bring salvation or damnation. But this superficiality works against a true understanding of what's going on, and such a reward system incentivizes chasing "what's new" over what's true or what's good.

So what is your preferred spreadsheet application?

Open/Libre Office is good for a number of things, but it still doesn't have the full feature set (which doesn't matter for a large number of people, but it does for me, as someone who used to use Excel quite a lot and who appreciates what it can do). It has a lot of functionality in addition to a user interface that allows discovery to some extent. I think it's still pretty good--i.e., I haven't seen anything better for its common uses. Even though I use LibreOffice for most of my personal uses.

Not a troll--I'd really like to know.

No matter how you feel about WikiLeaks, it is not illegal to publish classified documents in the U.S. There is no "state secrets" law like some other nations have. While there are laws that can punish the person who is entrusted with a classification and uses that to leak information, there are none about publishing it. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court after the publication of the Pentagon Papers. Newspapers publish classified information all the time.

Not sure why you felt the need to add this rather than providing some evidence, but again, it's not true.

You gotta--I say you gotta hear that whoosh over your head, boy. Whoosh, that is.

Bitcoin has the design of and potential to be a useful currency.

Bitcoin could have been created as or could be primarily used by others as a ponzi scheme.

Even if this incarnation of the currency fails like a ponzi scheme, the system still is potentially great as a currency. The initial creation and distribution this time just failed to be broad enough.