Keinesis contoured keyboards. A little relearning necessary, but much faster in the end. You can even get them with DVORAK layout, I believe.

http://www.kinesis-ergo.com/

They sell lots of ergomatic stuff. Look for the keyboards with two wells of keys, one for each hand.

To see the relevent bit of that nice interview, seek to about 30:00.

Same thing happened with Made in Japan: decades ago, you were better off saving your pennies for good old American stuff because the Japanese equivalents were horrible. Nissan's first imports to the US (when they were known as Datsun) were a joke. So were Honda's. But now, the Japanese imported goods are top-notch and deserving of hard-earned respect. Korean goods followed the same path. Taiwanese, to a certain extent, although they don't seem to have fully realized their potential, yet. Chinese goods are just starting to get better as they, as a country, learn manufacturing. Given that they have vast resources to throw at the problem, I fully expect Made in China to, within a decade or so, mean something is quality goods, and we'll be looking to Made in Viet Nam, Made in Thailand, Made in North Korea, or Made in Kazahkstan with derision.

Off the top of my head -- heat of accretion, radioactive decay, partial nuclear ignition delaying cooling, tidal heating from it's previous orbit before it was ejected, . . .

But that's all speculation rather than applicable knowledge.

Apple, a very common word, is trademarked.
As is Lion.
And Aperture.
And Motion.
And Safari.
Etc.

Microsoft plays this game, too --
with Office.
And Windows.
And Surface.
etc.

Is there a strong standing for Memory not to be allowed the same protections that AAPL enjoys on it's corporate branding? Not enforcing the request would be hypocritical at the very least.

Journals are a business. The money to run that business has to come from some place, and it's a zero-sum game between authors and readers. The short-sighted open access proponents (not all are short-sighted, but many are) think that the words "open access" mean "free of cost to anyone involved". Not true. Open access journals shift the burden of funding their operation from the readership (such as with the traditional subscription model, regrettably known derisively as closed access) to the authors. Instead of being free to publish (which means that *anyone* can publish), open access means only those able to afford publication can get their results disseminated.

Open access means the author pays. That's it. Nothing more.

In particular, it says nothing else about the quality of the journal. While the quality of the journal in question here may be highly suspect, and while a lowest-tier journal might not be able to survive in other than with a a business model that includes payment from authors, being open access is orthogonal to quality. Even the highest tier journals have options for the authors to pay for open access, but, repating for emphasis, the authors must pay for it.

Don't forget things like reliabilily, (defacto) portability, professionally written documentation, a massive 3rd party training literature, and an even more massive 3rd party help literature on the web. And, for many readers here, the ability to use a work-alike open source tool instead.

Developing an in-house solution for a spreadsheet is, bluntly, an idiotic idea. MS hatred or not, Excel is a well-developed tool that just works. If the company is looking to save money, then deploy LibreOffice instead.

The renewal is from radioactive decay in rocks, and the helium nuclei get caught in the small crystal grains in every rock. Extraction requires heating the crushed rock above 90C at which point the helium gets thermally liberated (there's an entire field of geology called thermochronology based on this fact; a good friend of mine has published a handful of Nature papers on the subject). Renewal is extremly slow, so that once we have mined the radiogenic helium, the replacement rate is essentially zero. It can be man-made in nuclear reactors (fusion and fission), but there are practicality issues with both approaches.

I share your views almost entirely.

KDE is, however, programmable (and has been since at least the early Fedora Core releases) to go to an absolute desktop via keyboard shortcut. I have the Fn keys bound to bring me immediately to virtual desktop n (ie, hitting F1 in any application brings me to desktop 1, F2 to desktop 2, etc., all the way through F12). I never liked the next- or prev-desktop keys. Relative desktop selection is a bad model when there's an absolute map of desktops presented in the pager.

I don't know if you're a US citizen and lost a passport abroad, but you can get a new one in a small number of hours (for a fee) if you are near a US Embassy. That's been true for at least decades, since the time I lost mine in Athens, back in 1985.

So, I'm not sure about the "being up to date" requirement you're positing.

The great thing about paper passports is that they work *everywhere*, even in the backwater crossing from Poland to the Czech Republic that I transited a few years back where they most definitely did not have more information infrastructure than a telephone. Hell, the nearby airport wasn't much more than a bus station. But my paper passport worked just fine.

More important than that to the end-user is that using money decouples in time the supply you can generate, and the demand your needs create.

If I need toilet paper at 9pm on a Sunday night, I can go to the local drugstore and buy it with the cash I earned some nebulous time earlier when it was more convenient and efficient for me to generate. Who knows if I'll have a spare half dozen eggs the next time the toilet paper runs out, and if the store owner will need eggs at that point. Decoupling those two parts of the transaction makes the economy vastly more efficient.

We deploy a new instrument and are puzzled and amazed at the results. This is incredibly wonderful, but shows how little we know about the universe. It seems to happen every time we deploy a new instrument. So much to know! So much to learn!

And opening themselves up to anti-competitive legal action.