Amen to that. I edit the code of others on a daily basis, and I'd have to agree completely. High level languages are expressive for a reason, and using clear variable names and code formats can easily speed things up. Our computers these days are incredibly fast, and come supplied with a considerable amount of memory, and while there do exist situations where that isn't the case it has still largely become the norm. There is no reason we can't optimize our code style for readability and for performance at the same time. I dare say that's ultimately what all developers should strive for.

By that logic human bodies are entirely software as well, but that obviously isn't correct. Our DNA was used to create our entire body inside of our mothers similar to how the RNA in a virus is used to turn a cell into a virus factory. The maturation chamber and injection mechanisms differ, but the RNA, and DNA in both instances completely describes the physical form to be created. However, once formed there is a very distinct permanency to the physical body that makes it hardware and not software. It contains senses, and mechanisms in order to interact with the world directly. In other words very distinctly hardware and not at all software.

Not just that, but the Virus's physical form is simply a payload mechanism to inject the virus genetic code into healthy cells. The healthy cell that was infected now becomes a virus factory creating tons of new virus cells until it explodes releasing them into your system. There is a very cut and dry hardware to software paradigm here. If we consider that a virus is nothing but a genetic delivery mechanism it instantly becomes the greatest tool humanity has for this type of work. Nothing we can currently create would be even a fraction as effective.

There was a case this year where a Goldman sachs employee stole source code when he left the company. The courts sided with the employee saying that the source code didn't constitute a physical object that could be stolen. Google it. The only reason he got by was because the specific wording in the law didn't explicitly outlaw the act even if it was implicitly implied. The law doesn't work properly when its vague. Too often the spirit of the law is lost in the wording.

Honestly, considering the age of the children involved I'd go with the xbox. It has the same multimedia capabilities of the ps3 (minus the obvious blue ray), and it even has a web browser now so for you the differences probably won't be that big. However, the children would probably have a better experience on the xbox. Each controller can be logged in under a unique user account which allows kids to play with each other while logged into their own personal accounts. The ps3 is much more limiting on this front. Also, the xbox tends to have more age appropriate games. There is a whole slew of games made for younger kids. I also find that the kinect that comes bundled with offers a much more unique experience for children in the realm of motion gaming.

In legal issues whenever something isn't explicitly mentioned that leaves the door open to any number of interpretations. The best thing we can do now is to update the bill of rights to include technologies and situations that were not possible when the original bill was written. This will slam the door shut on any interpretations that run contrary to the true goals of the bill of rights. Here is a fun bit of info. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/apr/13/goldman-sachs-programmer-source-code-theft This was news from earlier this year. A Goldman Sachs employee stole proprietary source code, but walked away a free man after the court cases. Why? Because the source code was not a physical object. The law needs specificity in order to be applied correctly sometimes. This example shows how lawyers could argue, and make a case, that any digital file you have isn't technically covered by the bill of rights. It needs to be extended to support new technologies before lawyers set dangerous precedents.

I started one here. http://wh.gov/XLym

Thus why I started this petition. Help me get the 150 votes required to make it fully visible! http://wh.gov/XLym

This is why I think we need a digital bill of rights to stop this stuff from happening before it even gets going. I started a petition on the we the people sight. If you agree go sign it! Apparently I need 150 signatures just to get it properly listed. http://wh.gov/XLym

Considering it specifically calls it a Bill in the headline this seems to be one of those situations where anyone with knowledge of how the system works would automatically understand what you said anyway. Otherwise, even without your additions the argument wasn't really enhanced in any real way. The privacy problem is still very real, and the legislation should be stopped immediately. The fact that this is "only" at the bill stage doesn't diminish the realities of the privacy violations here. Aside from the fact that this likely is unconstitutional as a violation of the 4th amendment. However, to be fair, we need to update the fourth amendment. It currently reads "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." We need to expand on this to account not just for papers, but to digital documentation.

Those keys frustrate me daily!

They Qwerty keyboard layout was specifically designed to prevent jamming in typewriters while at full typing speed.It optimized the usage of the levers to prevent those jams. This functionality is useless in the modern world, and there are in fact better alternatives. It may not be broken, but it's not necessarily the best tool for the job.

Iran bragged about doing this to the US's drone months ago. *Yawn*

I used to have a temporary insurance (before I got full time at work) and I paid as low as 50 dollars a month. Sure the deductible was 5k, but its still cheaper than paying the tax, and that's not even good insurance. The point here is that one way or another everyone should have health insurance, and that there are plans out there that can give at least some degree of coverage. With that shitty plan I still had 20 dollar copay and generic prescriptions. That's still considerably better than nothing.

I am not in a privileged position as you claim. I pay out of my paycheck just like everyone else. I pay $1200 a year on my health insurance. More than the tax I'd pay if I didn't have it. You know what though? If I get in a car accident I don't have to worry about being billed out the ass for an accident. It's worth the extra money so that I don't have to worry about going into debt because of a random occurance.