I'm comfortably easing into using my passport. Currently on day #3, so far so good.
The passport's keyboard is very well done, they have put a lot of thought into the user interface and hardware: here is an interesting video of the keyboard in action. Limiting the physical keys to just 3 rows of letters actually works really well with the virtual rows that can pop up on screen.
I'm sure I will find some things about the passport that I dislike, I just haven't found any thus far.

Nice :-)
length: 1.076 cubits
diameter: 0.643 cubit
net weight: 0.069 stone
shipping weight: not shippable

What is the exposure?
If your company was ever hacked, what would the consequences be?
If the consequences could be serious, follow the advice of educating your decision makers as brilliantly outlined by Captain D, above.
Otherwise, what difference does it make if your company's machines and network(s) were actually compromised?
I mean, what difference will a few more zombies in some bot-net actually make?

oops. thanks for the fix

http://www.nerdswithoutborders.com/

Nerds in action: 'Nerds Without Borders' help solve North Carolina's thorny Turtle problem

Flying Stingrays? Sounds like a movie plot. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2724064/

Wait. Aren't they saying that static typing needs more defect-fixes and dynamic needs less defect-fixes?
Relevant parts highlighted:

Isn't the real message here to choose static typing if you like fixing bugs?

A fun read... http://www.amazon.com/Dealers-Lightning-Xerox-PARC-Computer/dp/0887309895 excerpt from summary:

reasonably good voice recognition? Maybe, for a given value of "good'.
Voice recognition is hit or miss for me on android now... it works "reasonably good" provided I have....
1) Low background noise.
2) Solid network connection to upload & process voice sample on google's server farms.
3) In a place where I can talk and don't care if others hear what i'm saying.

So when it works I am suitably impressed, but it doesn't work often and I'm not always able to use it.

Just a data point: my ancient Palm smart phone had more usable voice dialing than my android does today, and that thing was 100% local processing. None of this "busy icon" for 30 seconds to time out and say "Please try again" because 4G data skipped out or something, which is what I see often enough to be a pain when I'm voice dialing or map searching etc.
(and yeah, I would probably complain about my flying car if I had one :-) I am amazed voice recognition works as well as it does, it just isn't at 100% yet.)

Kirk vs Picard: White and Nerdy (Weird Al), excerpt (2:13):

And no, it isn't deep, nor profound. But it is funny.

+1 for parent; I'm just learning about Vyatta. If you want to build your own as a research project, cool. Otherwise read up on this: vyatta and see if it might do what you want.

r.e. .8 vs .85
argh :-)

I'll start by saying thank you for the analysis; that was thought provoking.

The numerator above seems off: what is 6445 ?

For the weight of a big tub of petroleum containing 4.75t carbon, I think you'd have:
4.75 tons of carbon / .85 = 5.938 tons of petroleum.

To see how many Liters of petroleum that would be, we get:
5,938 Kg of petroleum / ( .737 Kg/L ) = 8,057 L.

Using that average fuel economy of 5L/100Km yields a range of
8,057L / ( 5L/100Km ) = 1,611 / (1/100km) = 161,100 Km
(Or 100,040 miles for our readers in Burma, Liberia and the United States.)
Which is indeed a LOT of driving in one year.

The oracle of Yahoo Answers suggested that 19,000 to 24,000 km (12,000 to 15,000 miles) is a more reasonable average.
So by carbon weight, yeah... the gp's claim for Carbon is roughly a factor of 8 too high (161,100 km / 20,000 km/yr).

You raise a good point considering whether the gp meant 4.75 tons of CO2 instead of carbon.
To do this I think we need to revise our petroleum footprint.
You'll recall we first derieved that above based on just the target carbon weight.
We'll take the same approach for our target CO2 weight.

So... to get 4,750 KgCO2 emissions we need to burn a certain amount of petroleum.
That works out to 4,750 KgCO2 / (2.331 L/KgCO2) = 2,037.8 L of petroleum.
Which yields an alleged annual distance of:
2,038 L / ( 5L / 100Km )
= 408 / ( 1 / 100Km)
= 408 * 100Km
= 40,800 Km (25,351 miles)

Which is closer, but still off by a factor of at least 2 unless maybe they were talking fleet cars.
*shrug* don't know... it is hard to tell what point they were making.
(and yeah, this was much more fun to do over lunch than reading yawn-inducing project requirements :-) )

If you want to be with your family, be with your family. Read a book to your children. Play a game. Do something with them.

So... just what kind of interaction are you going to have with your "wife and children" while you're working on a deadline sitting in your recliner? Maybe this will help you more than a recliner: https://www.lifesizecustomcutouts.com/CustomCardboardCutout.

When I want to spend time with my family or my friends, I make it a point to leave my ipad turned off, my smart phone in my pocket, and my laptop closed. If I get a phone call I need to take, I excuse myself and go take the call and come back when I'm done. I find it pretty rude to "spend time" with anyone whose attention isn't there; if I'm putting my tasks and goals aside to spend time with people, I expect them to do the same for me.
And when I need to get work done, I focus on that.

Oh well... at least you've got the whole proximity thing going for you.

I'll just leave this here...
foil "how to" video