A map by territory shows places that are pretty empty but have a common language.

A map by population has problems handling multiple languages in use in one location.

A map by language density using vertical bars or color shading to imply pop density might work, if dithered properly.

From the most common hacked password (password) to the second most common password (death)

Or using their cat's name, found in all their FB pics, instead of their dog's name (same thing).

Yeah, that will do it.

Not.

No dispute there. The problem, though, is not that we make easy things simple and hard things possible (pace, Larry Wall). It's that we have of late developed a tendency to simplify too far. Microsoft is famous for making systems administration and certain types of programming 'click-and-drool' easy. And hyperbole aside, the cost to society of the half-competent people who found gainful employment due to this charade can be measured in the many billions.

You're absolutely right in that commercial flying is safer than ever, notwithstanding the tendency in airlines to pressure senior pilots out in favour of cheaper, younger staff. And those working in HFT would likely be wreaking havoc by other means if they didn't have software and fibre-optics to enable them. I guess my tongue hadn't entirely left my cheek when I wrote that last para.

BUT... Microsoft has contributed significantly to a general downward trend in the quality of software and systems integrity. And they've done so by marketing the idea that with the right tools, tool users can be commoditised. And that really, really sucks.

You must be new here :)

Agreed. 'Software that makes it easy for non-experts to do expert tasks' will one day be recognised for its role in causing the downfall of civilisation as we know it. By then, of course, it will be too late.

Some among you may think that's overstating things. Some among you are also .NET developers, so what do you know?

Seriously, though: From the Airbus crash to high frequency trading to the Sony hack, examples abound of how enabling and empowering mediocrity is the first ingredient of every modern tragedy.

The problem with electric pianos is likely to be the speaker, not the electronics.

A nuclear reactor has a life span in decades, and needs more than a decade to pay itself back. There is no way anyone is going to make that investment when the business case involves something as speculative as tar sand. Tar sand is barely profitable now, who knows what it will be like in 2 or 5 years, never mind the 20+ you need to justify building a reactor.

Science fiction isn't fiction that has elements that aren't science but might appeal to geeks who like science....Science fiction is science that is fictional. Very different animal and naturally restrictive.

You are using a defintion of a term, which is at odds with the defintions of that term used by almost every other educated native speaker of English. This will probably make it hard for you to communicate. You might want to look to that.

Oil from a well causes considerably less CO2 emission compared to oil from tar sands. The tar sand does not boil itself.

More or less, yes. An actual extraction tax which would provide revenue (and replace harmful wage taxes) would be infinitely preferable, of course. However that is not on the table,

The difficulty of transporting oil away from the tar sands works as a tax on that oil. A tax which is applied right at the production of the worst kind of fossil fuel we currently have. Keystone XL will remove most of that tax. As it is, tar sand oil is right on the cusp of being economical, and therefore lowering the costs is going to increase production a lot.