Christians today (since Christ's time, actually) are under a new covenant which we call the New Testament. The Old Testament is no longer applicable as law.

You are (sadly) mistaken. There is a reason the OT is included in Christian bibles.

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

Every single word of the OT was commanded by Jesus himself to be obeyed. Why this doesn't tell people that it's all a bunch of mythical hooey I will never understand.

I use Perl nearly every (damn) day, on a very old codebase project. There are things about Perl I like, but there are also things that I really despise. Not through fault of Perl, really -- it's simply old, slow (yes, slow) and outdated compared to other modern languages.

There is no way I would start a new project in Perl, and the only people who would are people who are willfully ignorant of the rest of the industry. Perl is beyond its life. There is nothing it does better than other languages, and there are a whole hell of a lot of things it does much, much worse.

I don't believe you can make the case that Linux wouldn't be Linux without the GPL, had it used some other license. Linux is Linux through force of Torvald's personality. It would be identical if it had used, say, the BSD license. Granted, the tools developed by the FSF gave Linux a good start. But that's software, not a license.

You know what, I imagine it probably does take "bulldozing" to overcome the entrenched existing entities in order to do Really Big Effective Things.

If it takes hurting some feelings to ELIMINATE Polio and Malaria forever (!!), and who knows what other diseases in the coming decades, then that seems fine to me. Polio has been eliminated in India. I'm pretty sure all the millions of children saved aren't too concerned about the fact that Bill Gates is in a bit of hurry to get things done.

Oops, you are correct, sir. Finger fart!

How do you think the concept of Separation of Church and State would fare under President Romney?

Far better than under a 'mainstream' Christian. Who understands better about religious persecution than Mormons? The last thing they'll do is legislate so that one religion is able to dominate more than others, because that dominant religion won't be theirs.

How about your rights to be left alone even after death?

You know what? I'm dead. If it makes my family happy to baptize me in whatever they want so that it eases their mind that they'll eventually meet me in the afterlife, that's fine with me. I'm, you know, dead, so it doesn't matter anymore. If they want to stuff me and put me in the living room, hey, that's great. Whatever makes them happy. Funerals are for the living, not for the dead.

Of course, many Catholics claim that Protestants are "not really Christianity", either (and vice-versa).

I will say one thing about Mormons... of all the people I've met of different religions, Mormons were by far the nicest and most genuine people. They actually try and live the tenants of their religion. I'm an atheist, but if I had to pick a religion to follow because I wanted the culture, I'd pick being a Mormon. I hate alcohol anyway. :)

They're not perfect of course (their support of California's Prop 8 is particularly troubling), but overall having Romney be a Mormon is a positive in my book, compared to, say, Santorum who is a full-blown religious wack job.

Speech recognition is not what we're talking about. Natural language processing is what we're talking about.

Are you a non-native English speaker? Then I could believe you might have trouble with it. But for what it's worth, I find it remarkably accurate, and even more remarkable, I find it useful. I don't have to memorize any voice commands, I just speak in normal English and it figures out what I mean much of the time. It is true that it needs a constant Internet connection, but I think that's why it actually works -- Apple can bring to bear a large amount of processing power. So I'm okay with a useful AI system that needs the Internet to make it work, versus previous attempts that totally suck, but can suck even without an Internet connection.

I don't use plugins. I don't know why you don't get the problem. But there are a hell of a lot of people who do, and I got the problem on every computer I ever used Firefox on.

I haven't ever had memory leak issues with Firefox, at least not in the last 5 years...

Sheesh. If you say you don't experience the problem, why are you commenting on the issue at all? I don't use extensions. And I don't give a crap what the devs think, all they have to do is look through their own bug tracking for literally hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of bug reports on this issue. And ultimately, there is only one bug report that matters to me: my own. IT SUCKS FOR ME. No extension, and the memory grows and grows. And obviously others experience the problem as well.

Why doesn't it happen to you and some other people? Who the hell knows? But that doesn't mean it's not a huge problem for a lot of other people.

Seems like just about every article that comes out about Firefox there's a dozen or so folks that keep complaining about how slow Firefox is and how much memory it leaks.

... And this is the problem with Firefox. The horrible memory leak problems have been traditionally dismissed by the Firefox team as only seen by "trolls". I gave on Firefox because it constantly sucked more and more and more memory, and I had to constantly restart the damn thing when it got over 2 gigabytes with a handful of tabs open.

Now, maybe the Firefox team (FINALLY) fixed it, and maybe they didn't. But we can't tell from this test, because they didn't do a memory leak test. What they need to do is open 41 sites, close 40 sites, open 40 sites, close 40 sites, on and on and see what happens. I know what will happen with Chrome -- since it uses a process per tab, all that memory will intrinsically get given back to the O/S. Firefox -- who knows?

But what I do know is that it's too little, too late for me. I love Chrome, and Firefox has no compelling features to make me come back.

And your attitude is why Firefox is losing. I had the same memory issues reported over and over by people, and the response from the Firefox people always was, "Oh, well, it works for me! It must either be a bad plugin or your imagination. In short, YOU suck, it's not Firefox's fault."

Well, I don't use plugins and it WAS Firefox's fault. When I can open a web site, close it, open it, close it, open it, close it, and observe the memory going up and up and up and up, it's a memory leak. Submit the bug you say? It's already been submitted 1,000 times.

So maybe Version 7 they finally got serious about the memory problems, but I doubt it. And why should I go back when Chrome is better in every way, especially speed?

Eh, I don't think vagrancy laws are clearly unconstitutional. There is clear precedent to having local laws that prevent people from being a nuisance to other people (e.g., freedom of speech doesn't mean you can get out your bullhorn at 3am). Loitering and vagrancy are a nuisance to people and businesses, and causes people to be intimidated and fearful of traveling in their own town.

Vagrancy Laws cover that, as well as loitering laws.