While the titanium M9 is sort of dumb the sensor is "full-frame" (24mmx36mm) so it's going to be a whole lot better than a point-and-shoot. But no better than the regular M9 which is "only" $7000.

Really, the thing about file management should be taken as a knock on modern file systems generally. The file system concept is increasingly an anachronism; for a decade or more it's simply lacked the capabilities demanded by modern applications. It's not surprising that when developers (on whatever platform) want to do things that don't fit neatly into the filesystem model, they tend to ignore the FS structure and go at it alone.

There have been attempts over and over to fix the FS, but that's been a spectacular failure despite massive investments (WinFS, the ambitions of ReiserFS4, etc). I think it's become clear that each application is going to want to structure data according to its own needs; while the FS served us well for years, a growing amount of user data doesn't fit neatly into "file" and "directory", and even when it does, users want files without names (photos), files which appear in more than one "directory" (music), etc.

With each app's data structure turning into a sort of "unique snowflake", if you will, the idea of a single interface that could manage data across all your applications (the Finder, Explorer, etc) is simply unrealistic. Users have become accustomed to thinking of their data as existing within their applications because no other concept is really workable. The big question is how data will be moved around within these "silos", but that isn't a new problem anyway.

That's kind of odd, since uppercase letters are all similar to each other, and harder to distinguish (custom isn't the only reason people hate them). The only advantage of uppercase letters is that they are mostly slightly larger. Using all caps may be easier, but simply using a larger font size may be more effective.

You've got to be kidding. Since careful analysis and research has nothing to do with how average people make decisions in their daily lives, insisting that government decisions be driven by careful analysis and research is tantamount to just turning the country over to an uncaring, common-sense-lacking elite.

What people want the government to do (including those here on Slashdot, apparently) is to make decisions based on snap judgements. If 6-year-olds are getting run over by cars backing up, obviously the problem is the driver (especially helpful because this doesn't lead to any solutions at all). Never mind that it's hard to see a 6-year-old out the back of a car; even a sedan. It's better for there to be no real solution, since the possibility of a solution might entangle us in annoying moral obligations.

Sigh, that isn't even close to what happened. Steve said something about how he didn't like task managers; then Apple releases iOS 4 which includes a task switcher thing. Haters gotta hate I guess, but pointing to the task switcher and screaming "haha you admitted you blew it" is really stupid. (For one thing the iOS multitasking implementation had already been written at the time of the quote, but I digress.)

Look guys, the task switcher isn't a task manager; it just lists recently used apps. Important point: it lists recently used apps *whether they are even running or not*. It's almost all interface. The only manager-ish thing it does is that when you remove items from the list, they are killed if they were even actually running. This is not very useful for improving battery life, since they aren't likely to be using any battery unless you see the "playing music" icon or "using GPS" icon (but go ahead and clear things out if you like voodoo). Mostly the app-killing feature is useful to reset apps that have gotten themselves suspended into a bad state.

Who cares whether the machines can save images or not anyway? Any screener with a camera phone could just take a picture of the screen.

Hype? They just said you wouldn't forget today. Have you forgotten today yet? No? STFU and come back once you have.

Since the Electoral College amplifies majorities, how does it "check" the "tyranny of the majority"?

How dare we determine our government by population, rather than by imaginary lines drawn on a map! Why, one imaginary region might have less influence than another!

"Reality"? That's a bit of a stretch. Who decides what a country is "really" called? You're just going to accept the decisions of whoever has the most guns?

I get that, but I think my point is that the GP is going on about "Blizzard's attitude toward gamers" as if the cheaters are some sort of innocent victims. Nobody's speaking up for the players who want to play fair.

Maybe "Blizzard's attitude toward gamers" is that they want the gamers who pay for the product to have a good experience. Such as, I don't notice the DRM except that I have to type my password. And it's great that I can play on any computer, and I don't need the DVD, etc.

And maybe Blizzard doesn't want to fight cheaters one-at-a-time, searching through the server logs: "was he cheating in that multiplayer game? Did he have the cheat installed but not use it? Did the fact that he had the cheat available to rebuild his economy if needed affect his strategy so that he could win that game without it?" Why should someone playing fair have to lose to a cheater before they get banned, anyway?

Cheating is the great scourge of Internet gameplay, and Blizzard has plenty of experience with that. Cheaters drive out paying customers. There's no reason to treat them lightly.

BTW, I don't really understand the argument about single-player cheats. Ok, hacking the game lets you do more, but what's the interest or reason for that? Do players really find the single-player on Easy mode so hard that even the built-in cheats aren't enough?

Because what it sounds like, is someone hacked the game and developed a cheating tool that works in both multi-player and single-player, and Blizzard banned some people who used the tool but only used it in single player. But why did they pay for the tool just to use it in single-player? I don't get why anybody would need or want to do that.

Really I feel like a lot of this is revenge PR from the company that made the cheating programs; I suspect that the players who were banned fully intended to cheat at multi-player eventually.

My experience has been that SC2 matchmaking is pretty reasonable, and there are a TON of totally bad players out there to give n00bs like you and me a reasonable win percentage. So yeah, you'll be ranked super-low but your win percentage will probably be okay.

Just because there was a problem does not mean the environment is now "worse off". Clearly this is happening to a tiny fraction of overall cars.

10 is (somewhat) commonly used as a base for logarithms, so someone who doesn't understand logarithms might think of the powers of 10 as somehow specially "logarithmic".

That's all I can think of anyway.