I doubt it. People who go to Elliot Bay probably aren't looking for the most popular books, as it's not the kind of place you'd find stacks of Twilight novels, and Amazon is not going to have a very large inventory in Seattle to acommodate every purchase. And we might be at the point now, where the people who go to bookstores are always going to go to bookstores, no matter how convenient online shopping gets.

I was recently at Powell's in Portland (which just had major renovations) and it was crowded on a weekday afternoon. In Seattle, Elliott Bay and the University Bookstore are often hard to browse due to all the people. It's not just Amazon employees, but a lot of people just enjoy browsing books. On the other hand, the cashier lines at any of these places are not as long as they'd been in days past.

I'm sort of in that category. I got my actual name, but my only tweets (~200 of them) are actually from a russian hacker/spammer that generously disappeared and left my account intact.

I wasn't necessarily talking about Candy Crush, but 350? 425? I had no idea it went up that far! And come to think of it, I do pay a dollar at a time to advance to the next set of levels, which I think is perfectly fair.

I agree. I've spent more time playing Kingdom Rush for like $3 than many playstation games which cost $60. I'd happily have paid a few bucks for Candy Crush, but it's free. My only complaint is when the game is impossible to defeat without micropayments. It's not even so much the money as the fact that I effectively have to cheat in order to win.

I like that little poke at journalists:

t it is not just journalists who fall for the mistake: I recall seeing official documents from the department of commerce and the Federal Reserve partaking of the conflation, even regulators in statements on market volatility.

In other words, it's not just journalists who fall for the mistake, so do educated people.

I have a feeling it'll be closer to

while(muslims.count() > 0) {...

His two options are to turn himself in to a government that tortured its last whistle-blower, or commit treason (if you could even call it that). He's literally being forced into the latter position.

Does it matter that Brazil and Germany aren't enemies of the U.S.? Also, he's being forced into that position since it's literally his only chance of not being tortured in U.S. prisons. I give him a pass for that.

It's not 'flamebait' just because you disagree with it. This man drinks the kool-aid that the Obama administration is serving, that if the press releases any information that could theoretically be used by our enemies, then they're traitors. When smart people read about Snowden's leaks, they realize there's nothing specific about the leaks that could possibly help any enemy, unless they were stupid enough to think the U.S. wasn't capable of doing these things. Despite what some corrupt judge says, this a clear violation of the 4th amendment and has been used to spy on the press, and, who knows, probably political opponents as well. If the NSA is 'infinitely weaker', then it's only politically, not on the basis that they can't protect the U.S. effectively, if they ever cared about that anyway. If Snowden's leaks cause political damage to the NSA and the Obama Administration then that's almost proof that, by the very nature of a democracy, the leaks were justified. If Snowden has to leak to Russia or China (which there's no evidence of) to continue to survive, then that's the result of the U.S's ridiculous policy toward leakers.

it'll have to be regulated to hell, because drones can carry bombs too, and it could be almost impossible to track down who detonated it unless every drone in the sky was monitored and licensed. I don't like fear mongering, but sooner or later, this is probably going to happen somewhere if anyone's allowed to have a drone.

"I'd like that" is not the same as "I think it's just" :) I would definitely love to see that

I think the OP meant anyone who was being criminally negligent or just malicious. If a security guard shoots a random person for no reason, he should be just as liable as the company he works for, if not moreso. Or if a software engineer puts a backdoor into his company's software so he can steal stuff from customers, then that software engineer should go to jail. I've never seen any insinuation that a random accidental bug should lead to developer jail time.

Wrong. Mine was impeccable.

True, but he's saying that all the shootings happened in gun free zones, therefore, gun free zones have caused the shootings. What I'm saying is that there could have even been more shootings without gun free zones. I honestly don't have any reason to believe that's true or false, but if he's going to bother to make an argument, he might as well try to be logical.