Nevermind I found the preference setting. I would edit my message but I can understand why *that* particular feature isn't allowed.

I wish I still had the bottle but I don't. A few years ago I found an old glass bottle buried in my backyard, clearly stamped on the bottom with a low 6 digit patent number (started with a 1 too). I typed the patent number into google and it directed me to a copy of the patent clearly listing it as a perfume bottle and including a single diagram picture of that exact bottle. Not only was it interesting, I think of it as sort of a personal milestone in the evolution of the internet. That was the day that Google's knowledge expanded to the point that they KNEW WHAT WAS BURIED IN MY BACKYARD. The bottle itself was pretty awesome, it was designed in such a way to hold the liquid inside by surface tension even when tipped upside down, and would dispense a single drop when touched to your wrist. In other words, patent worthy. P.S. Why doesn't the form submission on a technology oriented website save the paragraph breaks? This isn't 1998 anymore is it?

I don't use Hulu, but I don't think it would matter much on Youtube. I've got a 10/2 from Verizon FIOS, and as noted by a few previous comments they are one of the few that actually do a good job of providing the maximum throughput at any given time. I swear a few times I've actually gone over 10Mbps.. Anyway Youtube seems to have very aggressive... hmm no, "optimistic" streaming settings on the server side, and will grudgingly dole out just enough chunks to keep it a few seconds ahead of the playback whenever possible. It is rare I use even a 10th of throughput on any given video, and I've taken to pausing anything I want to watch for 30 seconds or so, go do something else, then come back and hit play to avoid any potential interruptions.

That's why you look for them at night!

Wait..what? Leap years dude. =]

I always laugh when I read this. AGW is not some sort of diety that you can choose to believe in or not, it's a scientific hypothesis. It may be a hypothesis that turns out to be wrong, but it certainly will not be because of your 'disbelief'.

OK so IANAS (sailor...) but I thought the ability to tack against the wind was due to the interaction between the hull/rudder and the water. There's nothing to um, grab onto in space, so I can't see how you can get any impulse in any direction other than directly away from the sun?

...removing all the juicy tidbits before releasing 400 million pages of meaningless filler.

Sounds like you are hitting the limits of either your ram or disk cache. (in FF) Install the Cache Status addon. Sure it's a bloated interface to what is essentially a few preference settings, but it gives you a visual status in your um, status bar.

I like the cut of your jib. Complex games are great, and when I was younger I could sit down and play 8 hours of Wasteland or Legacy of the Ancients. Now I get my gaming in smaller chunks, but it means I have dozens of epic games with various save points that I can pick up at any time. Come to think of it, somewhere I have a C64 emulator ROM saved game for Wasteland, and stored somewhere at my brothers house I bet I still have a saved Wasteland game on the original floppies. Heh.

Stop being so pedantic or I will hack your internets.

Tired of this misconception. Seriously. I've been using Windows software for 14 years, and I have NEVER had to do a full system reinstall. EVER. People who need to reinstall Windows all of the time are doing something really really wrong. I'm not sure what, nor do I care. I'm not a zealot, Windows sucks in more ways than I can shake a stick at. I've done my fair share of cursing and screaming at it over the last decade and a half, but there hasn't been a damn thing I haven't been able to fix without the need to reinstall the whole thing.

There is a large overlap of SVG and VML features, and framework libraries available if you don't feel like working them out yourself. So not impossible, and VML is even supported by IE 6.

"Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers. At present the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. No tradesman of good repute will have anything to do with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law: and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot. On which side indeed should the public sympathy be when the question is whether some book as popular as Robinson Crusoe, or the Pilgrim's Progress, shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress? Remember too that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop. The public seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create. And you will find that, in attempting to impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, annulled those restraints which now prevent men from pillaging and defrauding the living." from: A SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON THE 5TH OF FEBRUARY 1841 by Thomas Babington Macaulay

All of the things you mentioned are straw man arguments that no sane climatologist would maintain. That aside, as far as you question of whether AGW can be falsified. I'd maintain it doesn't really matter. This entire issue sets my teeth grinding every time it pops up, from both sides. Climate change is a meaningless term, of course the climate changes. Anthropomorphic climate change is a meaningless term, of course humans affect the climate. The questions of course are how much, and in which direction, and does it make a damn bit of difference or is it a statistical blip buried in the overall climate drivers of water vapor, solar output, earth's axial tilt and/or pink unicorn farts. No, AGW cannot be falsified in any meaningful human timescale, because we're talking about things that take thousands of years at a minimum to make an impact. So for everyone on both sides of this meaningless debate who have already decided you know all of the answers, congratulations. Good thing you won't have to worry about the consequences of being right or wrong, because you'll be long dead by the time the human race knows with any degree of certainty one way or the other.