Which is by far the majority (even the ones breaking the law by drug dealing, etc.). I'm Canadian, which first of means I don't think my country is "much" better, but secondly I think that Americans get a pretty bad rap worldwide based on the idiots governing the place. I've met hundreds of Americans, and they have all been as normal, friendly, and polite as any Canadian I've met, despite our stereotype here.

So, wait. Your premise then is that monitoring stopped when the Snowden documents came out? Who ever said that?

OK, OK. I'm not sure "this fad" will ever go away. Maybe we'll get better screens less prone to fingerprints, but even then, why is your screen getting so dirty anyway? If you're eating cheezies (Canadian thing) while you're using your tablet, you're doing it wrong. I've been using Android devices for about 3 years now, and with every device, the screen's brightness made up for any fingerprint issues. And on the tactile response front, it's called haptic feedback. Your device shakes a little when you press a button. There's no way that glasses and gloves will take over from current touchscreens, unless the whole world decides they want to look like complete dorks all the time. Granted, I welcome looking like a dork, but my wife will probably object the next time we go to a party.

Having accounts is not a security issue - is about what you post. In the same way a drug dealer will talk in code on a cell phone, just don't post things that you don't want the world to see. It's not as if Facebook monitors your every move.

Sure. But you certainly don't help from strangers who want your business to survive. Good luck with that philosophy.

Your sense of altruism is admirable. Good idea for an individual, but horrible for business. The only way to succeed in business is to minimize expense and maximize profit. To work for the greater good is more suited for nonprofits (even if I personally agree with the idea).

Bull. I live near Saskatoon Saskatchewan, a small city by north american standards. When my wife and I bought our home, we were forced to choose between the ghetto (where crime is DOUBLE anywhere else in town) or to move out of the city. With our first child on the way it was a no-brainer. To move to a downtown area that isn't crime-ridden would cost TWICE what we're currently paying. It is undoubtedly worse in larger centers.

App updates, including updates to Google Play Services, always ask for explicit permission if the app's device permissions change (if an app needs to use GPS and hadn't previously, for instance). When apps haven't changed their requirements, you can still turn off automatic updates in order to prevent any app (once again including Play Services) from updating without your explicit permission. If you don't add a google account to your device, you won't even be alerted about possible updates, let alone see them applied without permission (once again, this includes Google's Play Services). And in the very extreme case of an entire system update, you are always asked for explicit permission before upgrading. In other words, even when your device comes with Google Play Services by default (as most do), you are NEVER forced to apply system or app updates without authorization.

Shouldn't you be boycotting? I understand the anti-beta posts from last week, and the boycott, and altslashdot.org. I will certainly even visit it and sign up, but I at least hoped that this week I could enjoy Slashdot without the first post being another anti-beta rant. Well written, but off topic, and at this point ridiculous, as you all threatened to leave us as alone for a week. At this rate, you'll have a flourishing community on you new site, and STILL be trolling here long after it's no longer beta. Last week it wasn't irritating, it was even a bit inspiring. Now it's just stupid.

And you are an asshole. Pot -> kettle.

While I personally don't see the need for guns aside from hunting, and we all know that the US's gun proliferation is directly correlated to it's staggering gun violence numbers, I can accept that that's what the constitution says and it's valid. However, the "right to bear arms" is completely separate from the "right to buy arms". Here in Canada, I can smoke pot, I just can't legally own it. Different situation, I understand, but a good analogy.

I've always noticed this too, and I also noticed that the "warmer" eye was always the one with more bloodflow. Lie on your side for a while, and notice that the eye that's lower is also the one that's warmer.

Most injuries and deaths due to gun violence are not killed by terrorists. They're killed by people close to them who happen to have guns because they're easy to obtain, armed intruders who again have guns because they're easy to get, and gang members who - you guessed it - have guns because they're easy to get.

Now, while I agree that people who are out to murder will find a way to do so either way, but it's exponentially easier to kill somebody with a gun than with a knife or baseball bat. Consider the problem of children getting shot due to accidental discharge: A baseball bat can't accidentally kill someone - you pretty well have to do that on purpose. In the case of a kitchen knife, there are two differences between them and guns (aside from the obviousness of it being a close range weapon): 1. people use kitchen knives every day, so children are accustomed to them and know how very dangerous they are because they're constantly reminded, and 2. knives are usually kept out in the open, and are used to cut food, so they lack the "cool and secretive" aspect that guns have, which is likely one of the main reasons a 7 year old would even be interested in a gun.

Arguing against gun control because it won't prevent ALL violence is ridiculous. It's like arguing against seatbelts because "some people will still die in car accidents".

What's the legitimate way to obtain a copy of the film Song of the South or the animated television series Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea?

The legitimate way was to have bought a copy when they were available. I'm not saying I agree with the current length of copyright, but if I start to sell copies of an artistic work, and then stop doing so, that's my prerogative. This would be the case even if copyright only lasted a day.

could have. not could of