It was great... until it went on a rampage and murdered your data. I kid, but I'm also serious. When it was in current development, no other fs was as efficient with small files, and there's a lot of those on the average Unix system so that's of great interest. But it also was the least reliable filesystem in common use. So it was really never worth using.

You can't opt out completely, not if you want to be a functioning member of society, but you can mitigate the issue by choosing to buy as many products as possible which are not advertised. One of the nifty things about the web is that you can actually find those products now...

Motorola made an e-Ink candybar phone for India at one point, is that still around? Would it be useful in any other countries, given the frequencies? It was supposed to have more or less best-ever battery life, like a month of standby or something nutty like that, and days of talk time.

For people who don't understand what they are doing, they still are making a notable streak of disasters, with an odd distribution.
The average moron gets things right by accident sometimes.

Fine with me, I already played through the 360 version. I imagine there's been some new content since, but I don't figure I'm missing that much.

There are linux drivers which run in userland.

Uh, what? I most certainly can list the apps installed on my laptop, in a variety of ways. What kind of moron are you that you can't?

Haiku answer.
Yet
that one too
is mostly floppy.

An alternative theory for the same conclusion, which I favour because experimental data is more accessible is:
Climbing mountains implies the increase of possibility of falling to great depths. Which means that, statistically speaking, when you go to the mountain you have indeed less mass beneath you than if you walked and occasionally fell elsewhere, where the depth is lower, or in the sea, where you float in mass denser than air.

Gotta love science.

Visiting China with such tools on your laptop? Pretty stupid, unless you're going there to spend a lot of money.

Less mass beneath my feet? That depends very much on how you measure "beneath", right? I'd argue that if your load is being distributed into something, it's beneath you. If I'm standing on a mountain which is sufficiently sharply pointed, then almost the entire mountain might be engaged in supporting my weight — cue fat jokes. But anything it's standing on is going to be the same thing, so wouldn't that make it more mass "beneath" my feet?

Anyway, I RTFA (my geek card is in the mail, it should be back at the processing facility shortly) and the article is all gushily excited that "thereâ(TM)s far more crust underneath the mountains than there is in the oceans!" Wait, was this a surprise to anyone? Mountains happen when earth gets shoved up into the air. They're not pimples.

So in short, the article comes to completely the opposite conclusion of the truth: they say that "if you wanted the least amount of mass beneath your feet, youâ(TM)d climb up to the peak of the highest mountain" when in fact, there is more mass beneath your feet if you stand on a mountain than if you stand on the seabed or in a valley, because of all the mass that by definition can't be beneath your feet if you're standing at a lower altitude.

Tunneled down into the articles, http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=... has the patch. I'm building a system with 4.0.4 right now so this was material to me

It is not difficult to be "clever" at all. Look at various "bean" frameworks. Use their object marshaling features. Throw in some of their aspect-oriented programming features.

Now you usually have a bloated, incomprehensible mess. Sure you can easily read any couple of lines of code in isolation. But the system as a whole is a huge pile of gratuitous redundant layers of abstraction and confusing action-at-a-distance creepiness.