Not all religions agree with one another, and some (i.e. Unitarians) are actually fervent supporters of gay rights.

I don't recall saying anything about books but, um, okay.

No, religious beliefs are caused by someone (typically family, ministers, etc.) telling them to you, and then by you believing them. Psychotic episodes don't cause completely original viewpoints to come into ones mind.

You may be interested to know that there is a researcher in the US called Feelma Vulva who has done some even more exciting work in the study of people responding to things that weren't actually said. Check it out.

I don't need to enlighten you. All I do is toss your questions into my Relig-o-Matic 3000 system-for-telling-right-from-wrong and...*poof*...out pops the answer, thus proving my point. By the way, most religious leaders would quite obviously find those things to be wrong. How you and so many others (with similarly sized chips on your shoulders) can't see that is beyond me.

...because religion neither exists in, nor is a part of, modern Western civilization?

Life is not a series of black-and-white dilemmas with obvious answers. For the not-so-obvious issues, the theist turns to his faith while others may turn to the study of ethics. And then there are those like yourself who seem to deny the existence of such issues while having misplaced knee-jerk reactions to the (completely unspecified) beliefs of others.

Huh? The world's religions, each and every one of them, are a system for doing just that!

Religion does not cause schizophrenia. That is a scientific fact whether you choose to believe in it or not.

Yeah! Especially those darn Unitarians, always abusing pedophiles and other minorities!

FTFY

Whenever I'm preparing my next spam campaign. I mean...duh! You've got to check all 500+ of them to make sure you're getting inbox delivery. *ducks*

Sorry, I meant sodium bisulfite. Apparently, sodium bisulfate is generally recognized as safe by the FDA, and therefore, generally recognized as unfit for hot sauce by yours truly.

Actually, it's the Potassium Sorbate and Sodium Bisulfate that make Sriracha (at least the Huy Fong variety) so darn tasty. How do I know? Try buying Sriracha sauce at Whole Foods. It tastes like ketchup fermented in a goat's ass because they ban those ingredients.

Thanks, but the real opportunity was back in 1999 when they limited your password to two characters. Now those were some good times!

From TFA:

I wouldn't doubt for a second that MS would go with the first option. They are, after all, competing with Yahoo :-) Also, wasn't it Microsoft that came up with the oxymoronical term "reversible encryption"?

On the other hand, Hotmail was originally built on FreeBSD by non-MS types, so who knows? To this day I still find it amusing to think of all the difficulty they must have had porting the platform to Windows.

...because leading a comment with superfluous CLI output is exactly what a smarter Slashdot would want you to do, right?

(Protip: There's a code-post mode if you really need to do that)

The order form collects power settings for my left and right eye, but has no place to enter cylinder and axis information for my astigmatism correction. For this reason I chose not to place the order.

Traffic analysis does not require decryption. Someone watching the traffic can still see that you are on Wikipedia, what time you were on the site, how long, and the approximate size of the content you downloaded...or uploaded for that matter.

Say you submitted a post; even encrypted its still possible to see that more bytes were sent than in a normal GET request. Even if your IP is hidden behind your WP login, it is feasibly possible that the timestamp combined with the approximate byte count could be used to identify you. Of course, HTTP keepalives would make this more difficult, but other tricks like checking the referrer header when clicking off to another site could betray you. Even if you are just clicking around, it could be possible to establish a fingerprint of your traffic pattern, using things like byte counts, number of concurrent connections (to identify the number of images on the page perhaps?), etc. that could be used to identify the pages you visited.

No, I'm sorry, but your analogy is flawed. What actually happened was that Judge Dredd used his Lawgiver-II grenade launcher to destroy a car that was ilegally parked. Within seconds he triumphantly announced that justice had been served via his megaphone. Minutes later, other cars in the megacity were trembling with fear. It wasn't until several hours later that the coucil of judges came up with an adequate rationaliztion for what, on the surface, appeared to be an egregious misuse of police force.

FTFY.

This article reeks of FUD. The technical challenge alone is pretty unbelievable when you think about it. It's one thing to set up layer 3 policy-based QoS on a handful of service provider core switches, but to coordinate that policy across hundreds of access level devices is quite difficult to say the least...assuming those devices even support it. Never mind that the relationship of consumer to service provider has been less the focus of net neutrality policy than the issue of fairness to content providers.

That's unfortunate because, as others have noted, the hosts file "feature" is indeed a relic of a bygone era that should be laid permanently to rest rather than being broken for certain use cases. There seem to be two camps here; the ones that say "leave our beloved feature intact!" and those who say "kill it for the sake of the enterprise!" They are both right -- What MS should do is not break the hosts file or make it behave inconsistently, but replace it with something better.

A Windows service that allows DNS names to be overridden by user request is what is called for here. It could be added as a supported feature ...something that is controlled by group policy and managed through Windows RM to satisfy the enterprise IT folks ...something with a nice UI and possibly new features like pattern matching for the ad-blocking/web-developing user base.

Practically speaking that probably won't happen, as it's always easier to shoot a piece of software in the head than actually improve or replace it...