"human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals," shouldn't be included when computing "science literacy."

Very roughly, IMHO, believing in someting based on available provable facts, data and information stands closer to science, and believing in something even without (or despite of) them stands closer to religion [*]. However, without definitive proof for the quoted statement, if only yes-no can be chosen one might answer 'no' even when not being a religious fanatic. Thus, I'd say not asking the question is a good compromise (vs. starting yet another religion-science debate).

That said, the above question could've been left to be part of the test, if formulated more correctly [i.e. scientifically, yes], e.g. including something like 'based on currently available scientific data and information, human beings, as we know them today, likely developed/originated from earlier species of animals' - or something similar, you hopefully you get my point.

"the modern Web does not incentivize quality"

No, people do. And it shows. Enough said.

If it's J.J. Abrams, then the central theme will be around time travel. Maybe Luke will become evil and travel back in time to kill himself. There you have it :P

"a novel 3:2 aspect ratio"

Yeah, it's so invigorating to see what novelties this new age of innovation in computing produces.

Next they will present the novel larger version of it, that you can put on your desk for viewing stuff.

"'problem' was on the list as well"

Well, as everyone knows, there are no problems, only challenges :))

Or a rather huge rock of salt. If lots of people are interested in a subject, create pages that link to pages dealing with it, tweet about it, post about it, etc, that will - or should, at least - create a change in ranking, regardless of it being about politicians, or snakes (oh, sorry, they just might be the same :P). Calling the changes in rankings that reflect people's interest - or lack of it - about a certain subject 'influencing' sounds to me very largely misinterpreted. Anyway, if some people can really be influenced by the rankings of a search engine, that's more a testament of those people's intellect or ignorance, than anything else. Plus, the numbers in the mentioned study, and how they were obtained, can't convince me of any 'science' behind them, let alone make me even consider their significance - if any. Especially this one: 'Biased search rankings also changed the extent to which participants indicated they trust the candidates' - which, to me at least, simply sounds crazy stupid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It's even worse than that. Helium will escape the atmosphere in to space.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Windows Vista still receives security patches, which was released in 2007. Most computers of that age will install W7 fine, though you might want to bump the RAM if you want it to be enjoyable. XP was supported with patches for over a decade. Apple locks you into expensiev hardware and wants you to buy new every few years,

>Steam has a bit of a bargain bin but I suspect that a Playstation bargain bin at Walmart will do far better than the same bargain bin for PC games.

The Steam quarterly sales are huge, also the weekly Humble Bundle. I'm over 100 titles now, simply because a very large number of them cost me almost nothing. Also you can play games on decent settings for around $600 and have a computer you can do other things with too. $1200 is a damn fast computer.

>You think your ISP is going to give you static IPs for free just because they have an IPv6 pool to dive into?

Probably actually. It's way easier to manage that way. It also solves tons of problems. Assign a /64 /60 or /something small to a customer and if 'they' fuck it up it doesn't effect all the other users. They probably won't be static in the way you think they are, but tied to the MAC of the CPE.

I know sleep loss and/or sleeping for unregular length and time can lead to all kinds of problems, but since I can't even remember when I've slept more than 6 hours at a time, and I have to pull all-nighters from time to time, and I'm still alive and kicking, I have to say I believe that eating habits (type and quantity) and regular exercising can help a lot in balancing the scale. Of course, people having circulatory, blood pressure or heart problems might have a different story to tell.

They can demand all they want. What I demand is, that if a show is supposed to present scientific results about what we know about the universe at this point, then it should not feed religious issues into the topic. Make a different show, name it differently, and talk about religious issues all you want. But demanding all scientific publications (tv or not) also include all kinds of religious and creativist ideas as well is plainly idiotic. If you feel offended by that view, then at least you know how other people feel when you demand them to be fed religious issues everywhere they turn. And that comes from a person (yes, me) who has been regularly going to church since early childhood. Religion has its place, and I don't believe Cosmos is that. Neither is our children's biology class for that matter.

>Can anyone who believes that it really isn't getting hotter explain why, if its not getting hotter all the world's glaciers and ice shields are simultaneously melting faster than at any time in geological history?

Carbon black. If you maintained the same level of CO2 in the atmosphere and increased the soot you would see a slight amount of atmospheric cooling but a much larger warm up in bright surfaces such as ice and snow. That is from the IPCC themselves. Somewhere close to half of black carbon sources are from fossil fuel sources. That said, the other half are from burning biomass and bio-fuels, which are considered carbon neutral sources, therefore the reduction of fossil sources and an increase of bio sources can still leave us in a situation that melts all the glacers.

Do I agree? I've been using AStudio since the first preview came out after I/O, and after using it for 5 minutes it became clear to me that I'll never go back to frustrate myself with eclipse, ever. I don't mean to offend to good people who develop eclipse, but the damn thing gave me so many headaches over the time I had to use it, that dropping it felt like recovering from a long illness, honestly. Of course, there are lots of people who like it, obviously I'm not one of them. Regarding AStudio, if you didn't try it up to now, I think it's time, since it really matured from its first preview release, and while there can be some big changes between updates causing some minor trouble, it's already pretty good, and I think it's pretty clear it'll be the best IDE for android development.

It'll take you some time to switch from eclipse though, getting used to doing things a bit differently, so don't plan to do it overnight. First I kept using eclipse for existing projects, and using AS for new ones, then at some point I moved everything to AS and never looked back.