This. Cook with what's good to drink. Same goes for wine, I hear, but I don't really drink it that much.

I use Westvleteren when cooking, which should annoy any beer snobs out there. :)

I don't believe that you can make an honest assessment because you believe every single statement from Facebook to be a bold faced lie.

Do you really believe the only way Facebook can make money from this is to turn it into a Facebook device?

What users should Facebook listen to for new features? Majority rules? Who defines the majority? People birching about change always seem more prevalent than those who just roll with it.

Also, the only damage I can see Facebook potentially doing is locking the software distribution channel for the Oculus into an Apple app-store like model. If this thing caught on, there'd be a Facebook app, social apps, ad-supported apps, in-app purchases, etc. regardless. I don't know exactly how those would fit into this VR interface, but you know someone would try.

So you logically conclude (assume) that every single GG user is doing this and the concept should be abandoned? It's never just going to be a dude wearing a computer/phone/whatever this thing is?

But that's just paranoia right?

Definition of. You know... maybe it's just a dude with a wearable phone on his face. Or at least rail against every single piece of technology, so you can be consistent in your paranoia.

Yes.

Now you must also have YOUR computer in order to access anything, rather than just any Internet connected computer. It just really depends on how you work. A dropbox folder was the perfect solution for me when I was in school.

So you want more government involvement, by creating yet another solution that'll have no applicability after school?

How is Google violating my kid's privacy by providing Google Doc/Drive so he can write his Rosa Parks essay?

There's a conspiracy to generate conspiracies around every action so that in the end, no one knows what to believe.

Not triangulate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

Or some people just like it and learn how to use it. No script necessary.

I'll agree that there always room for improvement, though.

I know it's surprising to you, but some people like the new UI. Or don't hate it enough to bitch about it all the time.

Sqeaky wheels...

You've got a 3 x 4 grid to work with. The old keypad on phones naturally fits that. What layout of keys would you propose?

If they can do this, though, why don't they just overlay a QWERTY keyboard in the air and just do one or two finger hunt-and-peck recognition? Or maybe even a Swype style in the air. Add in some error correction / auto-correct and I think it'd be a whole lot better than a keypad on my fingers.

Assuming you're the #13 AC there, what you wrote doesn't even come close to what's been described.

"They should come up with a hand held controller that lets you control it. The exact interface needs to be worked out but perhaps you can control it with your phone connected to it via bluetooth. You have a pointer/arrow that you see on the glass and you can hold the phone in your pocket and control it with your thumb."

There's no controller. Your hand just becomes a keypad to enter data.

According to this article, the coverage for these will be an 18-mile radius.

http://arstechnica.com/informa...

While an air-to-air component could extend that with multiple drones, the whole system is still likely to link to a ground station within a small geographical area. That's why I don't think you'd get out of the "state owned" area, if these were ever employed in such a place.

A major point of these would be to eliminate the satellite link, so a further uplink to a satellite just seems ridiculous.