Same reason pacemakers don't exist.

In your opinion, do you think an Al Gore administration would have led us into war with Iraq?

Yes! Because whether or not that person is actually a murderer is something to be determined by an unbiased jury. If a jury member in incapable of putting aside their fear of murder, if he or she is willing to find against anyone simply because they were accused of murder, that is an unacceptable bias.

Some minor tweaking and it's an SD card icon, all good.

From my reading of the FCC's Internet Access Report, that analysis came from people with >200 kbps connections. Basically, for ISPS advertising broadband service, how many are meeting the new requirements. That figure does not indicate how many people only have the option of dial-up.

Of course it can be taken away; the big bank can acquire the little bank. Just like how a lot of people left AT&T for T-Mobile, so AT&T tried to acquire T-Mobile. Fortunately we have an administration that respects consumer rights and put good people in charge of the regulatory agencies, so that attempted acquisition was blocked.

That doesn't appear to be true. While the first test result for any given sample has come back clean, that potentially just means that he's been ahead of the curve on using doping methods that avoid detection. The USADA reports indicate that some of the re-tests on samples have come back as indicating doping. We'll probably find out more as they take their case to the ICU.

Of course this whole thing from cycling to baseball to the Olympics is ridiculous. With shades of Futurama, it'll be a relief when we can put all these stories behind us after performance enhancing drugs in all sports are mandatory.

The original conscience ceases to exist, but why would this mean we aren't just machines? We aren't static machines; as with a computer, we have memory. But memory is still a physical part of the machine, its electrochemical configuration corresponding to the information it carries.

("reached", not "research")

I understand the sentiment, but please reconsider your choice. Chick-Fil-A did not come under attack because of its CEO's statements, although those statements did fan the flames afterwards. Chick-Fil-A came under fire for its funding of hate groups. And I'm not using "hate group" here in a wishy-washy, "anyone who disagrees with me is a hate group" way. I'm talking about groups that are pushing for Ugandan law to make homosexuality a capital crime. There's some confusion out there about much of Chick-Fil-A's millions of dollars of donations research that particular organization, but I would anyone involved in supporting GLBT issues to find any association with that hate group to be reprehensible.

Glad I stuck to my Ubisoft (and EA and Blizzard) boycott even in the face of the big Steam Summer Sale. Here's hoping more gamers will stick to their principles and force developers into customer-friendly behavior, though sadly it seems that most people prefer to boycott companies just until a new title is released...

Sounds familiar. For anyone following the Smart Grid work, this is exactly why Smart Energy 2.0 is a fiasco. All of our major standards organizations (IEEE, ANSI, IETF, etc.) have been taken over by bureaucratic-minded industry and government consultants -- parasites that feed first on the drawn-out work within the standards organization that results in a "flexible" specification (meaning that it's not a specification at all), then feed on any group that tries to implement the standard because they'll need the "expert" insight in order to make the "flexible" damn thing work at all.

It is unethical when it relies on deception and preying on ignorance.

Wal-Mart does not want you to use their website. Online shopping allows for informed decision making: you can easily compare prices of similar goods both within their own catalog and competitor's. You can find product and manufacturer reviews, look at price and sales history, etc. All of that runs counter to Wal-Mart's methodology of preying on underinformed customers. Wal-Mart maintains a low-price reputation by a small subset of inventory. That subset is indeed cheap, but visibly so: poor materials, flimsy construction, awkward designs, etc. But their other inventory isn't priced the same way, typically it's priced higher than you find elsewhere. So people who come for the cheap item but, seeing how crappy it is, go for the "next model up" pay more than they need. People who come for and buy the cheap item but end up with other impulse buys pay more than they need. People who do all their shopping at Wal-Mart because they assume the advertised pricing on the cheap subset is reflective of store-wide prices pay more than they need. Having informed customers would be terrible for their business. Sure, with their tightly integrated supply chain management they could turn a good profit even if they acted more ethically, but Wall Street looks down on executives that grow a business organically.

That is irrelevant to my point. The GP made a blanket statement that Islam is evil, while other groups (religious, political, or social-issue) are fine. The GP is wrong when s/he makes sweeping generalization about those who identify as Muslim. Not all Muslims are violent Islamic fundamentalists; not all Muslims are sympathetic to violent Islamic fundamentalists. The GP is also wrong when s/he ignores the violent fundamentalism based on other religions.

Whether violent fundamentalism is a more common trait in the Islamic world compared to other religions is a fine question--but would be a completely separate topic. One complicated by the roles of poverty, political organization, neighbor relations, land resources, etc. But a religion is what its adherents make of it, and clearly there is a sizable population of Muslims that make their religion one that can coexist harmoniously with and within a diverse, tolerant society.