I visited Universal Studios just before Season 3 started, and they were handing out "Battlestar Galactica: The Story Thus Far" DVDs to everyone as they left the park (if you don't remember, that was a 1-hr special designed to get new viewers up to speed that Universal aired on NBC, SCI-FI, USA, Bravo, Universal HD, and Sleuth, and which they made available online for free).

Yes, of course the EFF would help you sue Cory Doctorow, who is a former EFF staff member, recipient of EFF's 2007 Pioneer Award, and a current EFF fellow.

I don't even see why this is news. I had an HP printer with "HP Instant Delivery" 12 years ago (in 1998), which could print out a customized newspaper each morning based on your preferences. You would choose the types of stories, the sources it would pull from, and the length. And yes, the newspaper included small ads. It was actually quite handy for reading during the morning commute.

I just finished my taxes last week, and in one of the last steps after e-filing TurboTax offered to post a "I just finished my taxes with TurboTax and I'm getting a $XXX refund!" message to my Facebook profile.

4.2.2.2 and their ilk are free and non-redirecting. You can use 4.2.2.1 4.2.2.2 4.2.2.3 4.2.2.4 4.2.2.5 or 4.2.2.6

They are run by L-3 and sitting on major backbones, and the ip addresses are pooled, so that you will likely get a server that is geographically near you when you use one of those addresses.

Actually, they often wouldn't even bother with consultants. I got to tour the set of Voyager while it was shooting (S01E13, "Cathexis"), and many of the shooting scripts would simply says [TECH] instead of the technical term, and it was up to the ACTORS to fill in the blank. For example, you'd see a line like: "We've got to [TECH] the [TECH] before the [TECH] [TECHS]". They just relied on the actors using a consistent set of gibberish to fill in the blanks.

I know it's Slashdot and we don't read the articles, but at least read the first sentence of the summary:

Beneath the 5-inch, 800 x 480 pixel touch panel (with stylus)

That's bull. You cannot recover lost wages incurred by appearing in small claims court. The only lost wages you can sue for in small claims court are those lost because the defendant physically prevented you from working (i.e. Sony came to your house and smashed your fingers, preventing you from working as a coder). Suing someone is voluntary. To quote the website of one cities small claims court:

3. THE AMOUNT OF YOUR CLAIM: You may ask for money only. No other recovery is permitted in the Small Claims Division. You may not recover "punitive damages", nor lost wages, traveling expenses, costs of obtaining evidence, baby-sitting and the like, incidental to your filing, preparing, or trial appearance. You may recover court fees and interest from the defendant if you win your case.

Waterworld is probably the best example of that in recent memory (and yes, it was Sci-Fi). It cost $175 Million in 1995, making it the most expensive film ever made at the time. The movie was terrible, and only made back $88 million.

And of course, you can't go near a tropical fish tank without hearing some parent saying "Look! It's Nemo!"

I was at the smithsonian recently, and saw off in the distance a tropical fish display. I bet the person with me that if we went over there we would hear a parent say "Look! Nemo!" within 15 seconds. It only took 4.

Technically, the company does exist. Nuvomedia, the maker of the Rocket, was purchased by Gemstar, who merged with TV Guide to become Gemstar TV Guide, who then merged with Macrovision Corp to become Macrovision Solutions Corp, and finally, just this past month, changed its name to Rovi Corp ( http://www.rovicorp.com/ ).

Sprint DOES prorate the ETF for all contracts signed after November 2008. However, there is still a minimum of $50, so your ETF after 18 months would be $87.50

See http://nextelonline.nextel.com/en/services/termination_fee/early_termination_fee.shtml

The added factor in the second case is that a couple with two daughters has twice as many opportunities to name a daughter "Mary" as a couple with only one daughter does.

The reason there is a greater chance in the Mary case, as opposed to the girl case, is that a family with two girls is twice as likely to name a child Mary as a family with only one girl (since they have two opportunities to name a child Mary instead of one).

In the first case, if we choose 1000 couples, on average we get:
250 with Boy/Boy
250 with Boy/Girl
250 with Girl/Boy
250 with Girl/Girl

Since we can eliminate the 250 Boy-Boy couples, the odds of Girl-Girl are 250/750 or ~33%

In the second case, lets assume that 10% of girls get named Mary. In this case we have:
250 Boy/Boy, of which 0 are Mary/NotMary and 0 are NotMary/Mary
250 Boy/Girl, of which 0 are Mary/NotMary and 25 are NotMary/Mary
250 Girl/Boy, of which 25 are Mary/NotMary and 0 are NotMary/Mary
250 Girl/Girl, of which 25 are Mary/NotMary and 25 are NotMary/Mary

Therefore, the odds of a Girl/Girl couple having a Mary is 50/100, or 50%