I had Lifelock when the Stratfor hack went down. Stratfor told us all Christmas Eve IIRC though the hack happened in early December. I and thousands of others verified our cards were in the wild, took action, cancelled cards, etc. Finally, in mid-January, Lifelock informed me that my card had been compromised with a single e-mail, long after I already had my new card.

Totally useless.

So go elsewhere.

WHY do you have to climb to 45,000 feet to depressurize the cabin? a normal Flight Level of 35,000 feet doesn't have enough oxygen either. There's no need to climb if that's what you intend to do.

Climbing costs fuel. Descending to 20,000 some odd feet ALSO requires fuel because it costs more fuel to fly at lower elevations. And tHAT lessens the range.

The phones weren't "ringing." the ring tone the relatives heard was supplied by Central Office Equipment to give the illusion that the phones were "ringing." That's what happens when someone picks up the phone and you say, "But it hadn't started ringing yet." Yes, it had. It's just that your simulation-ring hadn't reached you yet--two different tones. Think about it. There is only a single cable pair that hooks up a typical phone. How could you possibly "hear it ring"?

The cell network mimics the POTS network. It's just part of the "aural interface" phones have used for over a hundred years.

I did, too, for years. I used a single-cup cone and filter with freshly ground beans. There's really not much difference, and the Keurig approach is a whole lot cleaner.

COST: About the same per cup. Unless you buy from the local market for $1.00 a cup, you ought to be able to get the K-cups for about 35 cents or so apiece. Compare this to buying a pound of coffee at fair trade prices (about $13.00 per pound where I am) and for a single cup a day you go through about that much. You're going to pay some serious money for a good grinder (not those horrid centrifugal force pieces of crap that break every year) the same as you'll pay for a Keurig machine. So on a cost per cup basis if you're a single-cup-person, it's about the same cost to run either way.

QUALITY: If you're getting "watery goop" (as one said here) change your brand. K-Cups can brew excellent quality coffee--or not--your choice. Shop around and go for "bold" brands and you ought to do fine.

CLEANLINESS: Keurig hands-down. No muss, no fuss. No time needed. Spill a cone full of hot coffee and you've got yourself a disaster. Been there; done that more than once. Unless you have hard water, Keurig runs clean.

I've had my Keurig for two years or so after having done the cone atop the cup trip for several decades. I spend no more on coffee than I used to. For those of you who brew pots and drink lots, a Keurig makes no sense and is way too expensive. But if you are content with a wake-me-up cup most days, a Keurig makes a lot of sense and is cost-equivalent to other ways of brewing.

Ha ha ha. Delusional. I have a very nice heirloom quality "conical burr grinder" and you WILL clean it every six months or so. Hopefully you'll be outside because the mess that rests in there is going to get everywhere.

With a third of the people answering that Valentines has no meaning for them, my guess is that you are correct: They don't.

Age and number of jobs.

You are correct, of course, but you don't understand the effect of size. my state is bigger than England, Scotland, and Wales combined--with 10% of the population. And that's just one state. I can travel 400 miles inside my state from one city to another and I'm still in the same state. When I travel 400 miles in Europe, I'm in a different country with a different language.

The distance from London to Paris is a bit over 200 miles. Going from San Francisco to New York City is about 2500 miles. The scale is enormously different and comparisons that sound so cool in writing are in practical terms irrelevant.

Public transportation is great when you're not going all that far anyway. It's great that you can commute from Bath to London by train. That will get you from one end of Los Angeles County to the other. I'm not saying bigger is better here. It's a problem, and so are the comparisons.

You still don't get it. You've taken this thread off-topic. And THAT gets under MY skin! Look at the title of this thread. It's about liability. Lots of people, including you, are touting the advantage of driverless cars because they "drive better" than a human, at least according to you. One more time:

THAT - IS - NOT - THE - POINT

The POINT is, if a driverless car crashes, WHO is liable? Can you deal with that issue for a minute rather than extoll the virtues of an unproven technology? The fact that you think a driverless car can "do better" even the majority of the time is irrelevant the first time it screws up and kills somebody. If the person is the "driver's seat" is actually a passenger, how can you hold him liable?

Unless you think a driverless car will have perfect programs, perfect technology, perfect execution, etc.

in which case, you're delusional.

That's not the point, and it is decidedly not insightful. The point is liability. It's not that a driverless car can "do better" under certain circumstances, it's what happens when it doesn't.

Depends on the state, but there are generally at least two additional endorsements; One is for school busses and the like, called an "Intermediate License," and the other is for "combinations" called a "CDL" that entitles you drive semis (tractor + trailer(s)).

Motorcycle licenses used to be a single license, then they changed it based on cc's of the engine so that a license for a 55cc would not qualify you to drive a 1200cc, but this was changed back to a single license when the stats showed it didn't make any difference.

Hope you are not suggesting this really happened: http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthouse.asp

That's funny. Every single thing you list as lacking I had to do for my driver's test--in real traffic, and the written, just like you, was one on a computer, including the braking distances.

In terms of accidents, the UK is indeed the best, but Canada, the US, and most of northern Europe are right up there, too. You just don't want to get caught driving in Turkey or Egypt, where the chances of death are astronomically higher.

Look at my sig.