Pretty funny considering the incredible demand.

MRI is considered to be for passive viewing - I is for imaging. With TMS, on the other hand, the S is stimulation. It's intended to create an electrical response in specific areas of your brain using a specially shaped and targeted magnetic paddle. It's not that magnetism in general is beneficial. It's just that magnetism was used in the specifically targeted electrical stimulation. The benefit of using magnetism with TMS is that the stimulation is indirect - it doesn't require wires and brain surgery, just a paddle pressed against your scalp. Your story sounds like either the placebo effect or coincidental timing.

MRI is considered to be for passive viewing - I is for imaging. With TMS, on the other hand, the S is stimulation. It's intended to create an electrical response in specific areas of your brain using a specially shaped and targeted magnetic paddle. It's not that magnetism in general is beneficial. It's just that magnetism was used in the specifically targeted electrical stimulation. The benefit of using magnetism with TMS is that the stimulation is indirect - it doesn't require wires and brain surgery, just a paddle pressed against your scalp.

Not many districts have such "extreme" candidates available. And even if they do, the deficit spending issue is wrapped up with all the other issues of the candidate. I think it's fairer to say that centrist voters do not often choose deficit spending as their key issue.

You told me what I truly WANT in all caps, but have issues with me characterizing that as "mind reading"?

You state that the article and summary must be accurate or there would be an issue on file with the EC. I asked for some support of this statement. I have no idea what your response meant. Are you okay? Let's try this a little more explicitly...

The EC and Google are doing some business. It is only tangentially related to Apple, in that the EC is taking this opportunity to say something incendiary about Apple, that they have "done nothing." The Verge (linked to in the summary) says that the EC is off base in this assertion and mentions ways that Apple has done things in the past and more ways they have announced in iOS 8.

The fact that Apple is included in the summary at all, but especially by repeating the EC's flamebait without comment or even the context of "(The EC says) Apple has done nothing" makes me think the summary is also flamebait. A little context would have been easy to add and clarified the story, but it was not added. I believe this was done to get a rise out of people. It worked on me and printman.

The summary can be both accurate and incendiary. Being flamebait does not mean it is inaccurate.

In this case, the EC considers the actions Apple has made to be insufficient. That's a less biased way to state the same information than "Apple has done nothing" is.

Citation needed. Why do assume that the EC is functioning at perfect efficiency? There is no situation in which there isn't a filed issue?

Citation needed. I have issues with the way Apple's App Store works. Your mind reading leaves something to be desired.

This is exactly right. The article at TheVerge even states this:

The summary is flamebait.

From The Fascinating Article:

In other words, both the top-down and the bottom-up scenarios play a role, but the bottom-up, by virtue of starting smaller, gets a head start by millions of years!

The answer is not assumed to be binary.

Citation needed. (Unless this was meant to be funny.)

They're charging for cloud storage, not for the software. It's free software which comes with iOS and Mac OS X.

Neuroscience is a whole field dedicated to learning how the brain works. Do you really think that there has never been a video made of whole-brain neuronal activity? Ever heard of fMRI? That's the most common way to track activity over time, which - guess what - makes a video. There are many other imaging modalities which can be used to measure activity over time.

It's the first time this method was used to make a whole-brain record of activity. And it's cute that it uses visible light instead of magnetism or radioactive decay, but that certainly doesn't make it the only video.

I disagree. It's rough around the ledges.

Wouldn't this cause a rain shadow? The midwest would stop being useful farm land if all the moisture coming from the gulf stopped at the north end of Texas...

Apple IDs can be set to require two-factor authentication. Microsoft and Google may implement their killswitches and authentication differently. We'll have to wait and see.

You don't want a killswitch because you think the cost of an unauthorized use outweighs the benefit of an authorized use. Other people have other opinions. Many businesses, for example, require such features on devices they supply to their employees. So... perhaps your estimation of the likelihood of getting mis-used could be a little off?

Computing devices lend themselves to such features. Pants, wallets and whiskey do not. I'm not sure where you're going with this part. Also, the politician mentioned in the article is a local district attorney discussing local thefts and prosecutions, not a federal politician. You seem to think this is a government mandate, but don't provide any support for this.

I was wondering about the trolling because of the strangely aggressive tone towards victims of theft, not your purchasing preferences. I no longer think you're trolling, just sharing your verbose ill-informed opinions. Have a nice day.

> What's to prevent ... (the wrong person using a killswitch)?

Well, on an iPhone, you have to log in using your Apple ID. So there's that.
Find My iPhone: http://www.apple.com/ios/featu...

As for the Google & Microsoft implementations that the story is discussing, you'll have to wait and see, I guess.

> don't use them in sketchy places

Another option is using an app that will automatically call 911 when needed:
SafeTrek: https://itunes.apple.com/us/ap...

> do you usually flaunt valuable possessions?

My car is highly visible in public. It's not unreasonable to have a smart phone. Why are you blaming the victims? "It's your fault if you get robbed, not only because you were flaunting it / asking for it, but also because only fools buy smart phones in the first place." Are you just trolling?