This fan fic already has a few episodes in the can. And it's so good, that even the most horrible episode in the bunch (the one with the Orion slavegirl), is simultaneously unwatchable, and completely watchable on its merits as a very faithful recreation of a typically bad episode from the original series. These guys have got it down pat. They know exactly how to faithfully remake an honest homage to an average bad episode from the original series. And it's certainly doesn't hurt that the episode's guest star was none other than Lou "The Incredible Hulk" Ferrigno. As an Orion slave trader. In full body green makeup!

It's eery watching Chris Doohan in this series. The guy is a spitting image of his old man. Looks like a younger Scotty. Close your eyes, and you can't tell it's not Scotty. I thoroughly enjoyed watching the episodes as they came out. They were far more entertaining than either of the two terrible reboots. I refused, on principle, to pay money to watch the crap reboots in the theaters. But if these folks ever manage to crank out a reel, and it makes it down to my local megaplex, I'll be the first in line to buy a ticket.

My favorite ploy is the agencies who stalk me on LinkedIn. When I move to a new contract, they call my old employer to ask if they need any additional help.

I found a very easy solution to this problem, a long time ago: I simply do not provide enough details to precisely identify any of the companies I've worked for in the past, on my publicly visible LinkedIn profile, and I locked it down so that nobody, except me, can see my connections, and try to figure it out. All that anyone sees is my connection count, and nothing more.

Gee, the government isn't siphoning as much money out of Americans wallets, as the bureaucrats in Washington, DC were hoping for. That's a major problem, a crisis of unprecedented proportion, isn't it?

Don't you stupid drivers know that the only reason you're driving is to put more money into the government's pocket?

I should say that Tesla's offerrings are nowhere near what my pocketbook could accomodate. Having said that, I wish nothing but good luck to them.

Dealerships are useless, blood-sucking parasites, and I won't shed a tear for them, if those massive wasters of useful oxygen will disappear from the face of the earth. Even though I've gotten the art of buying a car down pat, keeping my actual interaction with those vermin to an absolute minimum, and even if, by my own estimates, I reasonably avoid having to deal with maybe 90% of the bottom feeders a typical car buyer would be subject to, I'd still wish them to burn in flaming pits of hell.

I have to laugh at their PR spin, when they claim how dealerships are the best way to buy cars. Blah, blah, blah. I can safely safe that, having bought 3 cars in the last ten years, dealerships are always just a waste of my nerves, they add absolutely nothing of value, and only inflate the price of a car through their markups. I wouldn't actually even mind if all that having these dealerships around do would add a modest markup to the price of a car, in exchange for a little bit of service. If that was all to it, then I don't think I'd mind it at all. But that's just a small part of the problem, and I'm sure it's quite clear what I'm talking about, so enough said...

Let's just say that I'm rooting for Tesla, even though if they win it would do absolutely nothing for me directly. Indirectly, yes: not having to deal with those parasites, the next time around, would be a big plus.

$Dayjob$ hires talented interns from local scrools of higher learning, every summer. Many of them come back for a few years, as they finish up their bachelors.

Your university most likely has a few beaureaucrats in some kind of a career placement office, of sorts, that are likely have leads to local companies who have open summer internships.

A few of the best $dayjob$'s interns get a job offer, after they graduate. And all of them earn some beer money during the summer, and have something to go on their resume.

I've been saying this for many years. The reason why US broadband sucks is because the original breakup of Ma Bell has mostly failed. The fault line of Ma Bell's breakup was set to be the local service vs long distance. What should've happened instead was that the Bell system should've been broken up at the physical plant level. ILECs should've been left owning nothing more than the physical plant, selling access to it, at tariffed rates, to any CLEC that wants to provide voice or data service over the last mile.

I'm at pessimist at heart. At best, we can hope that this mega merger is going to get canned. But of course, one can dream about FCC saying to Comcast and Time Warner: "You want to merge, ok, but you end up owning only the physical plant, and anyone who wants to provide video, voice, or data service, can pay you for maintaining the coax, and other than that, butt out."

All that Google did here is implement a fifteen year-old RFC. As Benny Hill would've said: "Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig ...deal."

This is nothing earth-shattering. I coded an unsubscribe link in sqwebmail, for exactly the same thing, circa 7-8 years ago (too lazy to trawl a bunch of dusty CVS logs to get an exact date). Really, every time Google goes ahead and does something related to an obscure, unimportant RFC, it's front page news, these days.

Agreed that beta blows chunks. It's nothing more than change for the sake of change. It doesn't add any more features, it nothing but eye candy. Well, it's intended to be eye candy, but the problem is that eye candy is in the eye of the beholder. I challenge anyone to find any actual change in beta that's not eye candy.

Having said that, I'm going to demand my money back. Oh wait...

Thinking about this situation, a bit: as much as it sucks, I see no reason to really get excited about it. It's not like I'm paying for this shit. I looked at that eyesore briefly. and I figure this: if, and when, its the only way to waste time, around here, if I find that I can live with it, I'll live. If not, I'll find some other place to waste some time on. I've got plenty of stuff bookmarked. Dropping one entry won't make much of a difference, in the grand scheme of things.

I do agree that the "99% versus the 1%" movement in American politics has some striking historical parallels. However, I don't think that Nazi Germany is the best comparison. A more appropriate historical equivalent would be the Bolshevik/Communist movement that culminated in the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshevik_Revolution).

The contemporary rhetoric from the left wing of America politics: i.e. "the 1%", "make the rich pay their fair share", etc... Is nearly word-for-word the same rhetoric heard on the streets of Russia, adjusted for a century's worth of elapsed history, urging the "proletariat", the working people to rally against the "bourgeoisie", i.e. the rich, and the "kulaks", the ultra-rich. Led by the Bolshevik movement, it culminated in the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. The word "Bolshevik" is directly translated as "ones belong to the majority". In other words, "the 99%". All the great unwashed I saw on the boob tube at various "Occupy " events, in the last couple of years, are the sons and daughters of the Bolsheviks a century ago. Whether they realize it, or not.

Actually what Reagan said was: "My fellow Americans, today I've signed legislation that outlaws the state of Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

That's how a real leader sounds, instead of President "I don't know/I had no idea/Nobody told me".

Well why should the President know about most of this? If some guy in shipping fucks up your order, are you shocked when the CEO of the company isn't personally aware of the status of your package?

Splendid. So, when "some guy in shipping fucked up", and told that president that Iraq has obtained weapons of mass destructions; and the president went ahead and made some decisions based on that information which later turned out to be wrong -- when that happened, I'm sure you were also defending the president, because he was only acting on the information he received from his subordinates.

That's what his Secretaries of State are for.

I'm genuinely curious: when the president's cabinet, which includes the Sec Of State, and other Cabinet members, informed the president that Iraq has obtained weapons of mass destruction; and the president acted on that information which later turned out to be wrong -- when that happened, were you also defending the president because he was merely acting on the information that he god from his subordinates, and "that's what his secretaries of state are for?

Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm???