Water isn't wet. Wetness is a description of our experience of water; what happens to us when we come into contact with water in such a way that it impinges on our state of being. We, or our possessions, 'get wet'.

Is he a dot, or is he a speck?
When he's underwater does he get wet?
Or does the water get him instead?
Nobody knows, Particle man

Only in America could something only 50 years old be considered an "historic" artefact, archaeologically.

Crap, by that standard my wife can be considered a historic artifact.

Um, don't tell her I said that, okay?

While I don't think the lack is a safety risk - and I do think the headline is just the usual sort of attention-whoring we expect from the media these days - having an FM radio is very useful if there is a regional emergency. And since most people are usually carrying a phone anyway, locking out that ability does them a disservice.

The summary reads like an NAB astroturf campaign. Their "free radio on my phone" ad campaign is a beautiful example of fear mongering. One of their radio spots even invokes 9/11 and insinuates that the aftermath would have been much better if only there had been some way to broadcast information to the masses. The amount of FUD they push is appalling.

The unfortunate part is that they're probably right, that having everyone already carrying an FM receiver probably would be at least marginally beneficial in a disaster situation. But that's not really the reason they're doing it. They're just self-serving assholes using fear to prop up their faltering business model as people abandon broadcast FM for streaming. This isn't about public safety, this is about the loss of revenue and using FUD and conspiracy propaganda to get it back.

For a chilling documentary of airline hacking you need look no further than the first episode of this.* Watch, and be scared!**

* Hey, if they're going to claim "based on a true story" in the title credits, I'm going to call it a documentary!

** Oh, you'll be scared all right. Not to mention revolted and sickened. Just not necessarily at anything having to do with airline safety.

Actually Oliver was doing something very valuable with his interruptions. Forcing Snowden to refrain from technobabble that the general public would not get.

I agree. At first I thought Oliver was being a real jerk. He's always opinionated and blunt, but he seemed determined to be an asshole about it. It wasn't until he pulled out the dick pics that I actually figured out what he was doing. After that I thought it was a great interview, kept on-topic by constantly bringing it back to that one absurd fear -- "They" can see your dick. Literally and metaphorically. We're all exposed.

We've got people like Bruce Schneier interviewing Edward Snowden for all us geeky types who understand the technical issues. I think Oliver's interview boiled it down to something understandable by non-geeks. Lack of privacy means the NSA gets to look at your privates. That's something anyone can grasp.

The Hyundai, make nice looking cars with a lot of features that make them seem like they can compete against the big luxury names... However the features/price comes at a cost of vehicle quality.

I actually wish I could find, a basic Car, without any fancy features just, do what a car does, and do it well.

Sounds like you want a Hyundai. No, seriously.

Two years ago I was looking for a basic car. I had three hard requirements: 30 or better MPG; can seat a 6-foot tall person (my 15 year old son) in the back seat *comfortably* for long trips; and priced under $20K. The Hyundai Elantra GT (the hatchback version of the Elantra) was one of the few that hit all the marks. We have a 2007 Hyundai Accent that we bought used and was going strong several years later. The good (if no-frills) experience with the Accent pretty much sealed the deal.

Both cars are still doing just fine. The Accent has needed some body work, but that's more the fault of my son learning to drive than it is of the manufacturer. Both have been perfectly reliable inexpensive basic cars. Would buy again.

I don't think the point is really that the subject matter is inherently sexist. I think the point is that it's crude humor, which men stereotypically enjoy and women stereotypically don't. I think if the project was named SHITS or PUS they'd have the same offended reaction. It's not sexist because it's male anatomy, it's sexist because it's crude and sophomoric.

Of course, one could reverse the argument and say that the offended people are the ones being sexist, because they're the ones applying the "women don't like crude humor" stereotype. What these people should be saying is "I am offended by this", not "My entire gender is offended by this."

And in that I'd agree with them. I'm a straight white mid-western American guy. I have a low threshold for this kind of humor. It's funny in small doses, but gets tiring awfully quick. I personally wouldn't want to be associated with a project where dick (or shit, or bodily fluid) jokes are a constant running gag. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be allowed to have a project like that, or that they're somehow creating a hostile environment for people like me. Just that if it were a persistent theme I'd move on and find another project more suited to me.

Now, for causing real problems, PSUs win by a landslide.

Yeah. I picked PSU not because I've had more die than some of the other parts, but when they do die it's often not obvious and it's a major pain in the ass to figure out. Fan bearings scream, you know they're dying, you go buy a new fan and that's the end of it. A power supply starts to go, and... Memory problems. Graphical glitches. Mysterious hard crashes. You have to try a bunch of other stuff before saying, well, maybe it's the power supply. One bad PSU is more problematic than half a dozen parts which have failed in obvious ways.

In some way most Americans CAN NOT vote until the final round. As an independent I am not sure I am allowed to vote in the primaries. We need open primaries.

The biggest problem with primaries is that every state has different rules for them. Some are open, some are restricted to members of that party, some let you vote in either primary but not both, etc. It's awful. And, as another AC responding to you has pointed out, primaries are artifacts of the political parties. Why should they allow anyone not in the party to vote? I'll take it a step further... Why should the state use public funds to support what is an internal party decision?

Another problem with primaries is that you end up with spoiler votes. Primaries might be good if everyone voted for the candidate they thought was best, and the winners moved on to the next round. That's not how they work, though. Open primaries are begging for people to game the system. You'll be happy if any of your party's candidates win, so you don't vote in your party's primary. You vote in the other party's primary and pick the biggest schmuck! That makes it easier for your party to win the general election.

So, my proposal... First, get rid of the notion of a candidate belonging to a party. They don't. The parties may *endorse* a candidate if they want. They may give money to a candidate's campaign. But they don't have exclusive rights to calling the candidate "theirs". This puts political parties in more of an advisory role, similar to the League of Women Voters (though they don't actually endorse any individual). And hey, if there's a centrist candidate that both parties like, both parties can endorse the same person. What a concept! This guy could be endorsed by the Democratic Party and the Teamsters Union and the Green Party and the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. That guy could be endorsed by the Republican Party and the Teacher's Union and the Libertarian Party and the Society for Creative Anachronism. The parties hold no more sway over the candidates than any of the other groups.

Next, get rid of the primaries. Each party chooses which candidates to endorse however they see fit. If they want to have the party brass meet in a secret smoke filled room, that's fine by me. If they want to have a primary election by their own party members, that's fine too. But since it's purely a *party* decision *the party* can foot the bill for the election. No need to spend tax money printing ballots, setting up polling places, etc.

Lastly, take the little (R) and (D) designators off the names of all the candidates and politicians on CSPAN and the news channels. You have a Senator, not a (R) Senator or a (D) Senator. Just *a* Senator who's not beholden to the party machinery.

Marginalize the parties. At best they're just labels for the lazy, at worst they're obstructionist ideologues. Emphasize the actual candidates. Elect people who best represent your own views, not who best contort themselves to fit the preconceived (D) or (R) molds. It's a big country and we don't all fall into two strongly stereotyped camps.

Yeesh...I guess those of us who played Zork should be in a nursing home.

Man, can you imagine how AWESOME a Zork reboot would be? Think of what you could do with it these days. User-selectable fonts, boldface *and* italics, and... dare I dream?... SUB-PIXEL RENDERING! How spooky would it be when your torch goes out to have your text dim turn by turn until you're finally eaten by that grue! To have subtle changes in typeface be a clue in the maze of twisty passages, all alike? To bask in the awe-inspiring majesty of Flood Control Dam #3 as represented by 72pt text?

Damn, where's the Kickstarter page? I wanna pledge NOW!

Science is a really good methodology to get at the *truth* mainly by testing your hypothesis (scientific method).

No. Science is a really good methodology to get at a model approximating the truth. It's rare that new evidence completely invalidates a model, but it's common and expected that new evidence will necessitate refinements to a model. Science never gives us the *truth* about anything. It merely gives us a method to asymptotically approach the truth as new discoveries are made.

Until the public turns away from head-injury sports, they will be with us, and the aftermath of all those head injuries will be with us and our health care system for years to come.

Which is precisely why these matches should be fought to the death! It's a lot more exciting for the spectators, you almost never see anyone take a dive because they've been paid off by some gambling cartel, and there are no pesky lingering injuries. There are no downsides! Well, except for the loser I guess, but isn't that what losing is all about?

Living on Mars time is difficult when you're living on Earth and are subject to Earth's day/night cycle.

Exactly this. 24h40m days are exhausting when you're embedded in a 24h day/night cycle and have to mesh with others on that cycle. It's tough being out of phase with your surroundings. On Mars everyone else is on the same cycle you are, and the only contact you have with the 24h civilization has a significant time delay which makes real-time conversation impossible. Give it a few sols and you'll be right on track.

40 extra minutes of sleep per day... Not exhausting at all!

On the one hand, I know flash is bad and HTML5 is good. And even though advertising is bad it follows that advertising in HTML5 must be less bad than advertising in flash.

So, um... yay?

The premise reminds me of Unexploded Cow from Cheapass Games. There's a free print-it-yourself version and a $25 deluxe version.

Europe. Summer. 1997. You and your friends have discovered two problems with a common solution: mad cows in England and unexploded bombs in France.

You've decided to bring these two powderkegs together just to see what happens. And you wouldn't say "no" to a little money on the side.

So round up your herd, march them through France, and set them loose behind the Cordon Rouge. If you're lucky you'll come home rich before Greenpeace figures out what you're up to.

Either way, there's something magical about blowing up cows.