If she was taking antiretrovirals and maintaining an undetectable viral load in her blood, you were not at risk of getting infected with HIV .

http://www.natap.org/2013/HIVw...

Thank you. Our doc says I will likely live a normal lifespan as long as I'm on meds.
It's anyone's guess what "normal" means.I'm kind of skeptical given my dad passed of pancreatic cancer at 67.
My husband might be at a bit more of a disadvantage given early AIDS diagnosis. However, he also started meds much earlier than me and that could counterbalance things. I still have about 300-400 more tcells than he does, but we don't know how many either of us had before HIV so hard to conclude anything from that. We are both in the normal range - he is on the lower end of the range; though.

Spelling is also not one of your strong points, AC.

Firstable, we are a married gay couple. There was no one getting on the down low. We weren't married back then, though, hence the tests.
I'm not going to elaborate any more with an AC, though.

Yes; but we were infected with identical virus. The difference in disease progression was due to our genetics, not the virus mutating.

I'm somewhat skeptical here. From my very small n=2 study, my husband and myself, infected the same year in 2006 (we both had HIV negative and positive tests that same year) with the same virus, as evidenced by genotype mutations test, I can tell you that my husband progressed from HIV to AIDS in less than a year, and had to go on antiretrovirals right away, whereas I didn't need medication for years and chose to remain without them for 4 years. I was in HIV controller studies. There was no change to my immune system on paper. But I was very tired, and I later chose to go on meds anyway. I had to drop out of the studies for this reason. I don't know what came of them. We are of different ethnicity - I am of caucasian and middle eastern descent; while my husband is asian; so our genetic are probably quite different.

It seems to me that this difference in disease progression between countries may have less to do with the virus itself evolving than it does with people's immune systems and genome evolving and becoming better able to deal with the virus.

Just wait until for the deadly delivery drones.

that money can buy.

Actually, there is no microSD slot on the Nexus 6 or 9 .

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2014/10/15/motorola-nexus-6-everything-you-need-to-know/
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/192061-nexus-9-unveiled-43-screen-64-bit-tegra-k1-soc-android-5-0-and-no-micro-sd-slot

Also, the battery is non-removable.

I will keep my LG G3 .

Your numbers reflect my experience as well except for 802.11ac .

I am getting between 300 to 400 mbps real world throughput depending on how far the wifi device is from the router.
That's with connection rates between 500 and 1300 mbps - the later achieved with an Asus PCIE 802.11ac NIC.

IMO, 802.11ac is a huge advance over 802.11n.

The state subsidies for solar in California have ended for the major utilities.

Agreed.

And the Plug-in-Prius can't even drive 100% electric at freeway speeds.

The "plug-in" part really is a joke on the Prius. It's definitely not worth the extra $5k over the regular Prius.

FYI, I drive a Leaf and my husband drives a Prius.

I live in Silicon Valley and AT&T can't even deliver 128 kbps DSL at my address. No DSL service available at any speed, period.

Burger King went out of business in France a long time ago.

Looks like they are trying again, with a total of 2 (two) restaurants nationwide.

You may want to read the Windsor ruling more carefully, it does not say what you stated.

DOMA section was overturned, which means the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages of couples that were married in states or countries that allow it.

Many of the state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage weren't enacted directly by voters, but by the legislatures. The Windsor case says nothing about the voters in each state.

The Supreme Court also let stand a ruling about Prop 8, which found that a state ban on same-sex marriage in California, directly voted on by the California electorate, was unconstitutional.

The 2 rulings are not in contradiction. Both will be used to overturn many of the remaining state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.