You try to compare different playing fields.

One is the playing field where the elected representative is being influenced by lobbyists with deep pockets, the other is where voters are being influenced by the press, including bloggers.

The first one is reprehensible, the representative has to work for his constituents, not the guy with most money.

The second is exactly what democracy is about, the constituents are influenced by whatever rocks their boat and then they vote.

But how's this possible?

The USofA ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it demands the freedom of association: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...

Hey, this is about the USofA, not some commie fiefdom.

I mean, the US has ratified the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights that makes a clear statement about the freedom of association...

Anyway, the rich guy would have a great advantage over a poor guy and that's quite contrary to the one man, one vote principle of democracy.

No I didn't forget it, but it's an American thing and 'we' don't do them :)

You bet this has to do with cost!

My opinion is for example that a steering lock (bolt) operated by an electromagnet can be build smaller and simpler than one operated by hand as the open and close forces are more predictable. An added benefit is you no longer need to install it at the top of the steering column.
Mechanical and electrical problems on a conventional ignition lock are not unheard of and not cheap to fix while another piece of logic in the firmware is first of near free to build and second does typically not require maintenance.

Additionally car manufacturers are in a fight to lower the weight and thus fuel consumption so every gram counts, electro magnetic systems are lighter than mechanical ones operated by hand.

Do you remember when TV's had big switches to change channels and buttons to change the sound? (and hue in the US :) )

The first remotes were to avoid getting up to change channels and they were expensive.

But as soon as IR became a single chip option the TV manufacturers jumped on the remotes to save cost on the much more expensive mechanical switches.

Why would it need to be different for cars, these electronic switches are simply cheaper to manufacture.

Maybe you should get out it little more, I mean out of the US.
I just had a look at the UK and German Ford sites and they confirm you pay some €1200 - 2000.- more for an auto.

Hmm, I have a 1943 Dodge without an ignition key, there's just a switch on the dash and a push button on the floor next to the accelerator.

My 2011 Nissan is also 'missing' an ignition key, it has a proximity sensor for the fob and a push button to start and stop.
The brand new Renault hire car I have has a push button on the dash plus a keycard that has to slide in the centre console, exactly like the company Renault I had in 2004.

Over the past 60 years I don't see much advancement, maybe except for the proximity sensor.

What are these 'foreign' language characters you repeat twice?

Sorry but it is over a 'restricted' area, wait till it's back over Disneyworld.

Just saw the video via the Youtube link below.

That phone was awesome!
But I would also like to see some footage out of the sun or on a gray day.

The site is slow to load (surprise?)

I assume the obvious difference is going to be the depth of field or DOF.
The Galaxy will have oodles of it but lacks the ability to isolate the subject, the Canon will make a nice sharp shot on the subject leaving the surroundings vague.

And then there's this thing with zoom/ interchangeable lenses...

Indeed, what others write.

For obvious reasons I don't have a Facebook or Twitter account yet Facebook mailed me with the positive message I should join them so I could communicate with good friends like *name1*, *name2* and *name3*.

Meaning my daft sister and a somewhat remote cousin/journalist had stupidly and carelessly dumped their adress books on Facebook who dutyfully analised their input for links and found me as a common point.
I have cursed both and written Facebook I was not impressed by their spying.

Strange enough they did supply a link where I could free myself from receiving further mails from them.
But for eternety I'll be watched by them and those they deal with, see my sig.

Be glad it's solid commercial software developers were paid for.

Uh no, I understand very well how fracking works, it's (a small) part of my job.
I agree some of the chemicals used in the US fracking business are unpleasant but the quantities are very small and like fracking of a one-off nature.
All oil and gas wells produce 'associated' water and it is always a health hazard, similar to the oil and condensate from the same wells.

In other words, when treating the fracking chemicals exactly as the associated water from these wells there is no health hazard at all.
Other countries have regulated the type of chemicals used, this has not at all stopped companies investing in those places, the process depends mainly on water, sand (a ceramic called proppant) and high pressure.

Oh yes, the frack itself costs per well between half an hour and maybe two hours at the most, plus a couple of days rigging up and down.