As somebody who became single in his mid-50s I strongly second the recommendation for meetup groups.
They aren't exclusively for single people, but singles are very "over-represented".
Obviously you want to choose the groups with a large number of people of your favorite gender group.
For me (looking for a woman) the hiking and the arts related groups were good.
Even if you don't find dates, you'll likely have a good time and meet new friends.
Meetup groups give you a low-stress way (because they're not primarily dating in general) to interact with many people
face-to-face.

Also, in response to a different comment. I think that lots of women in their 50s are actually rather
computer literate. (At least the educated women around the major city I live close to.)

(My personal experience is that I met someone via a meetup group, but I wasn't ready for something
as serious as she was looking for at that time. Shortly after that I met someone on OKC and we're still
together 2 years later.)

"A 2012 analysis of the human genome based on in vitro gene expression in multiple cell lines identified 20,687 protein-coding genes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genome

Except at very least the rich countries would want to have their military personnel vaccinated, which would be
a fair number of people.
e.g. over 2 million active and reserve in the US alone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces

My attempts at googling the answer to this have not been successful, so I ask here... (crazy, I know).
Anyway, if there was a ~100% effective vaccine taken by almost everyone, would that eradicate malaria itself, or
could the malaria parasite continue to exist?
i.e. are humans a vital part of the life cycle of the malaria-causing parasites?

Thanks!

Without taking a position on the issue of guns vs. crime itself, comparing rates is exactly what should be done statistically.
i.e. the "rate" (fraction) of gun ownership (number of guns per household) should be compared with the crime rate (e.g. murders per 10,000 people per year.)

However, it may be debatable whether the appropriate number for guns is guns/household or percentage of people who own guns.
(The mean and median number of people per household is probably changing.)

Refereed article on this can be found here:

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1963.html
The surface albedo of the Arctic sea-ice zone is a crucial component in the energy budget of the Arctic region1, 2. The treatment of sea-ice albedo has been identified as an important source of variability in the future sea-ice mass loss forecasts in coupled climate models3. There is a clear need to establish data sets of Arctic sea-ice albedo to study the changes based on observational data and to aid future modelling efforts. Here we present an analysis of observed changes in the mean albedo of the Arctic sea-ice zone using a data set consisting of 28 years of homogenized satellite data4. Along with the albedo reduction resulting from the well-known loss of late-summer sea-ice cover5, 6, we show that the mean albedo of the remaining Arctic sea-ice zone is decreasing. The change per decade in the mean August sea-ice zone albedo is 0.029±0.011. All albedo trends, except for the sea-ice zone in May, are significant with a 99% confidence interval. Variations in mean sea-ice albedo can be explained using sea-ice concentration, surface air temperature and elapsed time from onset of melt as drivers.

In general, the US constitution protects all people within the US, not just citizens. Although there are some differences.
Detailed academic discussion here:
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub

Aren't they the people who award the Oscars or something...?

Citation needed...

Except that the US population is not spread out evenly over the entire country. Instead there are very high concentrations of people (of course!) in urban area. However, even the densely populated areas such as, Los Angeles, mid-Atlantic Washington/Baltimore/Philadelphia/New York/Boston have connection speeds that are mediocre by international standards. It's really a red herring to talk about the national population density as we're not really worried about connection speeds in, for example, rural Iowa.

Except that the "TSA Pre" system is approaching this in some ways. People who have been pre-screened and/or selected by other criteria (e.g. extremely
frequent fliers) have a somewhat reduced (and currently much faster) security screening procedure.
It's not exactly the same, but it does have some commonality.

Just wondering when the US was supposed to be the "land of the free"?
Even after the era of forcefully removing the previous population from their land coming to an end, and slavery ending, there has still been apartheid
(including anti-miscegenation laws) and anti-communist drives until rather recently.
Despite the multitude of current problems, it may well be that the US is the most free it has ever been.

The "nothing we could do" refers to our inability to help the unfortunate child the amber alert went out for.

My girlfriend has Sprint which enabled these alerts previously.
Several months ago we were woken at 5am by a loud alert
at about 5am.
This was an Amber alert. While it's a great shame, we certainly didn't want to woken for this,
and there was nothing we could do.
Although the alert can be turned off, the default was for it to be on, which I believe is not the proper way this
should have been enabled.

Global entry membership requires background check and brief interview. (And membership fee.)
However, TSA Pre is also accessible to e.g. very frequent fliers.
It appears to follow the rationale advocated by some people around here that it's the person who should be considered by security, not the
items that they are carrying.