Name one that isn't either hobbled with poor hardware or poor interface. Or one that is really hackable.

The Archos Internet Tablet almost hits the sweet spot for me... but even the Android implementation on it is neutered and not fully open.

I want something that takes the phone form factor, but whose primary purpose isn't phone. The iPhone/droid/touch of the world are nearly that but sadly tied to a carrier.

Think slightly bigger than iPhone, smaller than CrunchPad. Big enough to be useful but small enough to pocket and have with you at all times.

I don't want an underpowered laptop or a netbook. It's stupid. If i want a fragile gadget that takes it's own bag to carry around, I will carry my regular laptop.
What I want is a phone size appliance. I have an iPhone and it does most of what I want out of a mobile device.

What I want in addition to what the iphone offers:
Slightly larger screen
Open platform (like android), no restrictions, fully hackable.
Phone/device not tied to any carrier (most important)

Give me that, and I will gladly pay real money for it.

I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.
I hate it when people like you pull the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately schtick. Listen, just because you can't think of anything doesn't mean there isn't useful science coming out of NASA EVERY DAY.

You should look at the NASA Spinoff page. http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/

NASA is pushing the state of the art in materials, robotics, communications, structural engineering, environment and many others. Things that have real-world impact on our lives today. It's not just Tang and Velcro.

The ISS, despite all it's flaws and short comings, gives us lessons every day in how to survive and thrive in the harshest of all environments. It will give us the technology and know-how to do longer range and longer duration missions than were ever before possible.

Sure, but the fiber installer rolls in on triple overtime, the other guy is on salary and gets to suck it.

Ah... well, hell. Why didn't you say so??

*picard voice*
COMPUTER! Reflangulate the intertank, recalibrate the L16 connectors for the overboard vent pad, then halve the current to the flare dampener in the flare stack to compensate for the excess vented hydrogen. Bake on 350 for 20 minutes and allow to cool!
*end picard vioce*

I have an MBA... I could have told them how to royally screw their investors for no more than $78 million...

Malwarebytes is awesome! The AV2009 malware is a tough one to remove, but Malwarebytes takes is right off.

That will give you a legal, meritocratic approach to being a discriminatory bastard.

Or he could just use the tried and true method of pre-screening candidates to discriminate toward older people: 20 years experience required. HR won't even show you the resume of a young guy if you list a requirement like that.

This is insightful, although the government conspiracy is a out there.

The market is totally dependent on the risk of failure. It is completely built into the system. Every interest rate out there is predicated on the risk of failure, aka non-payment. Why do people with poor credit ratings have to pay high interest rates? Because the lender is taking a big amount of risk in lending. Loans with low default risk bear low interest rates. The safest investment is government T-Bills but they are a bad investment because they bear very little interest. More risk == More reward.

The bank's owners (shareholders, aka investors, aka lenders themselves) took a risk by investing in their particular bank. They took this risk expecting to earn a reward in the form of a dividend or higher share price. It is their fault that the bank failed by allowing their board of directors to allow such bone-headed financial positions. It is the shareholders who should suffer the fallout of the banks failure by losing their investments. Completely. That's the risk they took. Anything else ruins the market dynamic. Who reaps the benefit of a bailout? The shareholders do. Do consumers? Does my mortgage interest rate decrease? It should... its not as risky for the bank to loan me the money anymore since they are being propped up by taxpayers.

The better solution IMHO, would have been to bail out troubled mortgages. You're in foreclosure and you life is about to be ruined, here's $200K from the federal government. Loan forgiven. 700 billion could have saved every home in america from foreclosure AND it would have saved the banks from failing. The downside is the guys who paid their mortgages on time, every month, wouldn't see the benefit that deadbeats see.... that is unpopular politically and couldn't fly. Instead, mortgage help was the first thing struck from the original bailout proposal. How insane is that? Ostensibly, the package was to help the state of the economy but the only people being helped are the banks. Real working class people don't get any help. Ain't that the way of the world???