Precision is basically the number of significant values that taking a measurement yields. Accuracy is how close to the true value the measurement is. The clocks are both precise and accurate, to the degree that things that we don't normally need to consider (velocity that the clock is moving, the strength of gravity acting on the clock, etc) can be measured. The "problem" is that time flows at different speeds under different conditions, and the clocks can't remain synchronized with each other because reality doesn't actually remain in synchronicity.

Also, time isn't a human construct any more than the other dimensions are. Measurement of time is a human construct, but it's also designed to reflect reality.

What's the point of a "flag as inappropriate" icon? Isn't that what moderation is supposed to be for?

Pure homosexuals are also a minority. There may be some evolutionary benefit to "sacrificing" a small portion of the breeding population, allowing them to act as foster parents to the children of deceased heterosexual relatives. That takes the strain off of other couples that are raising their own children. I'd also argue that a sexual couple is a more basic social grouping than a family is, acting as a core that a family can grow around. Genes want to propagate, and they can get very creative in their methods. They often find counter-intuitive optimizations. Even if an individuals genes aren't spread directly through procreation, they can have a supportive influence on closely-related genes.

Ummm...you've basically restated a point related to the one that I was trying to make. So, I guess the answer to your (presumably rhetorical) question is: "I did".

The line is a statement of intent, not a claim that everyone has done something wrong. It says that the Cardinal would design an interpretation that fits his desire (that is, to find fault). It doesn't mean that those 6 lines would necessarily contain something for which the writer deserves to be hanged. And that's the problem; if a cop (for example) is determined to find something wrong, they can hassle you and generally cause trouble in your life, even if you haven't done anything. You may come out on the top in the end.

Then you made a choice (and I might argue a stupid one), and you get to deal with the consequences. Them's the breaks. It's not like different people's and business' issues with Glass hasn't been reported on and publicized since they first came out. Whether or not a Blood-red shirt is my only shirt, I'm not going to go into Crips gang territory while wearing it.

Depends. Is your computer inextricably connected to your single pair of glasses, and if so, are there places where there are specific rules or social conventions that make your life more difficult while you're wearing them? Do you value them more than you value your freedom of movement?

Comparing that Glass user's situation to yours with your computer (a completely unrelated device) isn't reasonable, because they aren't similar.

I'm not the AC, but I think you're still confusing two things. Copyright infringement is illegal, but I'd argue that there are cases where it's not wrong/immoral. Legality and morality have some intersection, but the one isn't equivalent to the other.

I'm not going to defend recording a movie in the theater, of course. There was real effort, time, money, etc put into creating a new contribution to our society, and we need to reward the creators so that more movies/music/inventions/whatever get made. I'd argue that anything beyond a sufficient incentive to encourage the creation of new things isn't necessary, though. Copyright terms currently exist to maximize profit for the creators, when they should be optimized to maximize the benefits to society by encouraging a thriving public domain.

I have 3.5", 4.7", and 5" phones. The UI on the smallest is too small to be useful. The screen on the 5" one is large enough that I can use the phone one-handed maybe 80% of the time. The 4.7" phone is just barely small enough to hold and use one-handed, while still having a nice screen size. The 5" is a step down in usability unless I use it 2-handed, which I don't like doing. For my 7" and 10" tablets, I prefer holding them in my lap, on a desk, or across a forearm, rather than just in my hands like a phone. Anything in between is too large for me to use 1-handed but too small to be treated like a pocket tablet (and also wouldn't fit into all of my pants).

Then again, I suppose that someone with larger hands than mine would have less of a problem with a 5.7" screen. I imagine that I'd get used to it, but that's not my preferred solution.

The whole point of the story is that the Apple SIM gets locked by AT&T to their network. The SIM is part of the hardware that you purchased with the iPad. Therefore, the hardware that belongs to you (the SIM) gets locked. Implying that it doesn't matter because the rest of the device remains free to use elsewhere is missing the point.

If AT&T wants to lock a SIM to their service, then they should provide the customer a SIM, rather than disabling functionality in the SIM that the customer already has. Putting it in the contract gives them a right to do it, but it doesn't make it a less-scummy business practice.

They're also not MIPI interfaces, when they're over 800x480.

If you can get a 7" MIPI DSI screen with capacitive multi-touch for $5 on Ebay, people will get upset with the RPi foundation. The prototype that I've seen mentioned is supposed to be around $70, and as you've said, the drivers for CSI and DSI devices are in some part of the binary blob of system firmware. A matching screen seems to be $50-$60 on Ebay, though. So $70 might be overpriced, but at least it wouldn't be 10x overpriced.

The previously-released camera module used the ribbon-cable CSI interface, so the new screen module will probably use the DSI interface. According to the specifications, it allows "up to" an 800x480 screen to be connected, so they may be releasing a WVGA screen.

There's a ribbon cable connector on the Pi that's called the "DSI" (Display Serial Interface). Presumably, any device that has a DSI connection could use the screen, assuming there's some kind of driver available for it.

I'm paying some god-awful amount of money for satellite every month (my wife handles the exact amount, but it comes out of my paycheck). It includes a DVR. Fairly often, I forget to record something that I could've recorded and watched legally. Streaming on Netflix? No. Hulu? No. The network's site? No. The satellite's On Demand service? No. Hmmm, sounds like it's torrent time, if I want to watch whatever it was. Of course, most of the time it's not worth the effort. I'll wait a few months for a rerun, or a few years for it to show up on Netflix, or something.