She was ridiculous. Adam's painful situation was just an excuse for her to publish her op/ed to promote her platform. He wrote some things to vent, and he was in the middle of a very very painful and emotional time. He should be excused if he says some things like that.

But since she is not in the middle of a similar personal crisis, there is little to no excuse for her publicly calling him out on those comments. A graceful, caring person would have thought "I disagree with his overall position and I understand that he's hurting. I shouldn't make a deal about this."

But instead, she has no qualms rushing to the presses to alert the world to what a hateful person she can make him out to be. Her whole article wasn't about the morality of euthanasia, it was about what a terrible person Scott Adams must be. Instead of interpreting his comments the sensible way: ("He wants everybody who disagrees with him to understand the pain of that type of situation"), she makes him out to be a Hitler-esque angry guy who literally wants to kill everyone who disagrees with him.

The part that absolutely floored me was this:

She called him?!?! She invaded his personal space in his darkest moments of grief to get all political on his ass? What a bitch. I'm sure she didn't do much to change his mind.

A lot of people are saying Redbox is a better replacement, but good luck with that if you want something that didn't just come out recently. And I love Netflix, but it takes a couple of days from the moment you decide what you want to watch before you can get the disc in the mail (assuming the previous rental hasn't already been lost in your house for weeks already), and by that time you might want to watch something else. If Netflix's streaming library can catch up to Blockbuster's in-store inventory, then that could be good.

I wish I could have those issues... I tried several times to install the update and every time it would install, reboot, start setting things up, then freeze. On rebooting, it would say it was restoring the previous version.

The error code it gives apparently has something to do with either a driver problem or an issue with a startup program (but I tried disabling all startup programs). Windows Update says I'm all up to date on everything, so there's nothing I can really do, unless there's some driver update in the next few weeks, or if MS releases an updated updater (not likely).

Also, this doesn't have much to do with the gripes I listed above, but since Windows Update has been the place to go for service packs and updates to Windows, why don't they just make the 8.1 update available there, instead of in the stupid Windows App store? Most of the time when I've gone to the app store, I can't find anything about the 8.1 update, so instead I have to go to the MS website, where I can click a link to the update in the app store. I get that OS X does their updates through the OS X app store, and MS is trying to gradually turn Windows into a touch-based iOS/Windows Phone-style interface, but it seems like the app store is a stupid place for an update to the entire OS, since other OS-level updates happen through Windows Update.

I'm sure it won't matter, since your carrier will pass on whatever call information and data used no matter what OS you're running on the phone. Also, any online services (Facebook, Google, etc.) are doing the same.

I love how on Slide 9, he points out the attention to detail... except that in the largest text in the screenshot there's a glaring typo.

Not so much a gripe about Ubuntu Phone (since it's not a released product) as it is about TFA,

Seriously? Do you not realize that people on either side do indeed support government "bullying of political speech so long as it isn't their speech?" As much as people like Glenn Beck like to say "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to my death your right to say it," the truth is, those same people would (and do) hang their opposition by their words at the first opportunity. If they had the government on their side, they would be happy to do it more.

I always think it's funny when people on either side of the aisle pretend that their own side is the moral side, and would always stand up for values regardless of the situation. There are people on all sides who would do that. And then there are plenty on both sides who do the opposite.

You didn't read the last half of that sentence... It's not saying virtually all advocates agree that electric cars are better. It's saying that they all agree that the powerplant emissions should be included. In other words, the advocates all agree that electric cars need to be measured by the more rigid standard, which the skeptics already agree with.

That's exactly what I came here to post. Anti-Obama folks were really eager before January 16 to talk about how Obama was about to bypass Congress and implement gun control through executive order, and they never corrected themselves after the fact.

Most of the 23 items are about making existing background checks more effective by encouraging (not ordering) government entities to share information better. Many are clarifying what rights and authority different agencies or individuals (such as doctors) already have.

But who needs rational discussion at a time like this?

MHL is HDMI + power, so it is in fact an HDMI connector which support MHL on top of HDMI.

I'm all for net neutrality, and I think the federal government has to be involved, but I don't think that this bill can really do much about it. Based on the information in the summary, ISPs can use caps for "traffic shaping" but not for profiteering, which sounds good, but how is the government supposed to know what the caps are actually being used for? The ISPs can most likely cook the data in whichever way they need to in order to make the case for traffic shaping. In the meantime the government is still trying to put effort (and more importantly, money) into trying to monitor and enforce the ban on profiteering-based caps.

I don't really think that caps are really something to fight against via legislation... not in the name of net neutrality anyway. I think caps are something that really have to be fought through customer demand. On the other hand, the actual issues that net neutrality is supposed to address are more about how data from certain applications, devices, or content sources gets lower priority than data from the applications, devices of content sources that are "friends" with the ISP.

What this guy said. TFA isn't an attempt to make Linux difficult, it's a difficult crash course on *learning* linux. It should be easy to use, but learning in a difficult way still has a lot of value for people who need to deal with things in a more in-depth way.

You don't download it on the client machine. You download and install it on the host machine. When you run it on the host, it runs a web server, which you then access from the client machine via the web browser.

So, assuming you already have it up and running on your server, all you need on your friends' computers is the web browser.

I doubt the planes themselves have changed that much... When you were a kid, everything around you was bigger, and flying was more novel and planes seemed more *shiny*. Also, people probably didn't travel with laptops when you were a kid (depending on how long ago that was). Now that you're older/taller/fatter, you're more uncomfortable just about anywhere, especially in a tight space, and especially when you have to stay in one spot for hours at a time. Restrooms on planes depend a lot on the type of plane. Small planes have tiny restrooms that are extremely uncomfortable for sitting, standing, or anything else you might do in a bathroom. A 747 or 777, has much more comfortable bathrooms.

I remember being super-excited to fly as a kid, but my parents didn't seem to think it was nearly as amazing... they seemed to dread it. Now that I'm in my 30's and I fly 2-5 times per year (usually one trans-oceanic trip per year) there are a lot of parts I dread, but I still get a little bit excited about getting to the airport, seeing the planes, boarding (even if I do feel like a part of the herd in the process), and taking off/landing. There's something about a giant aluminum tube with wings lifting off the ground that still gives me a little thrill. Hopefully the 787 can take some of the edge off of the more uncomfortable parts of air travel.

You realize that a 1GHz ARM CPU in your phone isn't nearly as "fast" as a 1GHz x86 CPU, and that a dual core processor also doesn't actually mean it's twice as fast, right?

Really, it doesn't matter if the emails are released or not. If they are not released, then there will be a whole "What are they trying to hide?!?!" campaign. If they are released, then no matter what is in the emails, the conservative pundits will find some sentence fragment to post on their blogs, which will then get posted to facebook and tweeted and retweeted, and it will be played on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and on Beck and on Hannity, and all of their followers will say "See? We told you something fishy was going on, and this is ABSOLUTE proof!!", even though the actual context of the email would reveal that it proves nothing of the sort.

Here's my go to example of this kind of thing. Here, Glenn Beck (with the help of Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz) describes a patent held by Fannie Mae that covers a tamper proof outlet cover. The idea is that companies can use these to keep employees from plugging high-power devices into outlets that are on the same circuits as PCs, so that breakers won't trip and unsaved work won't be lost. But what Beck explains is that this will make it so that the government can lock the outlets in your house so that you won't use too much electricity. Beck's explanation doesn't even make sense for so many practical and logistical reasons, but apparently his fans didn't think to question that.

Beck and Chaffetz both claim that the patent itself says that it's for home use, not for commercial or office use, which is exactly opposite of what the text of the patent describes. Not only is the patent text freely available online -- like all patents -- Beck clearly had access to it because he has the diagram from the patent printed out on a large paper, for use as a visual aid. The description in the patent text repeatedly describes the use of the invention in an office environment. The only mention of home use is a comparison to the baby-proofing outlet covers, but the text is clear that the invention is for office use, not in homes. Beck points at the diagram and shows how "they" come into your home and lock the outlet cover in place, so you can't remove it. Completely ignoring that A) it's not for homes, it's for offices; B) "They" is not government agencies, it's the facilities managers who work for the companies that would use this, and C) "You", are the employee that's not supposed to plug stuff in, not the homeowner who just wants to use his own electricity at home.

They also quote a letter that Jason Chaffetz received from Fannie Mae's legal counsel regarding the issue. The letter very plainly explains all of the questions that Beck frames in such a sinister way, even though Beck makes it sound like the lawyer who wrote it was being evasive. If someone were to actually read the letter, they would see very plainly that the patented invention was not invented for anything to do with Climate Change, and that it was designed to prevent data loss on company PCs. Beck goes to great lengths to read a couple of selected lines from the letter, while avoiding the parts that explain everything Beck was trying to question. Beck wasn't reading from cue cards or a teleprompter... He had the entire letter in his hand, with sections of it highlighted. When I see how Beck regards the information which is right in front of him, and dismisses it so he can tell a completely different, unrelated story, it makes me sick. What makes it worse is the fact that my own parents and hundreds of thousands of other people buy into his crap, and think he's saving them from tyrrany. He actually tells you at one point in this video that the patent is scary, just to make sure you know how to feel about the information he's not telling you he's making up.

I realize there are lots of examples of misinformation from pundits, but this was a very clear one I came across why channel surfing one night a couple years ago, and it is somewhat related to the discussion at hand.

The people who are out to try and discredit the climate scientists will use any shred of information they can, regardless of what's right in front of them.