Actually, they're pretty good at predicting broad trends. It's just that they're not good at predicting specific outcomes. In the same way that understanding the odds of roulette doesn't let you predict what number will come up on a specific spin. The only way to really use the odds is to bet across the entire table to take advantage of the trend - that's what the house does.

Right, because Anonymous and /b/ in general are such guardians of good taste.

Both of these examples are rather bizarre, and I don't really see how they would be fundamentally different than warrants for stuff IRL.

In situation A, if you'd been keeping journal entries on paper, you'd have to show them to cops who had a warrant. Why should it be any different if you had typed it on your computer?

In situation B, someone could leave a locked safe on your desk instead of encrypting some files on your computer.

The law doesn't have to account for all possible options. It's generally trying to prove beyond reasonable doubt. For the most part with encrypted stuff, if it's beyond reasonable doubt that the person knows the password, I don't see why they should be able to withhold files on their computer when they wouldn't be able to withhold files in their filing cabinet. Just because it's digital, I don't see why it's different.

1. Why isn't something this widely useful (publish/subscribe messaging) a protocol - logically, an SMTP extension - rather than a proprietary web application?

Because the folks at Twitter made it, and seem to want it that way. Not ideal, but if it had been launched as a protocol it would be basically impossible to get updates and tweaks happening. There's probably a lot more to this, but basically it boils down to the fact that VC sponsored ideas are not likely to become protocols.

2. Why does it have to be limited to 140 characters?

This seems arbitrary, but it's a key part of why Twitter is good. You can't post long, boring diatribes. You have to be snappy and concise. That makes it possible to follow a bunch of people, since none of them can flood your feed with TL;DR garbage. The downside is that you can't discuss a nuanced topic or hold a decent debate on Twitter. But that OK, because that's not what Twitter is about.

Well, you got the first part of that statement right...

And again in the late 2650's. ;)

Nope. fail + fail = win

But thanks for playing.

Um.... Whooosh?

Using 'grammar' as a verb is one of those linguistics jokes I love. (Actually, I love all linguistics jokes.) My usual explanation for when I've done a grammar edit on my posts (on forums which support it) is 'Edit: I'm don't grammar'.

A key clue to this being a joke is the use of the word 'fail' which these days is often associated with LOLcats. Those damn cats have raised the use of deliberately bad grammar to an artform in and of itself.

I was weirded out by Google's results too, but Yahoo!'s seem to show some interesting volume spikes.

Note that there's one huge trade before things go pear shaped (2:32pm). It's a bit conspiracy theory, but if you wanted to dump a heap of blue chip stock to trigger panic selling, make some good buys in the ensuing chaos, and then rebuy the blue chip (2:49pm), it would look a lot like what happened yesterday...

Michael Bay? Is that you?

All of his/her senses? Hmmm... I think I'd rather they don't use their sense of taste, if that's all the same to everyone else.

If this is allowed to continue then we'll soon be crowded out by exponentially renewing pines! We have to stop this process now!