Except that I find more websites work when I enable the KWebKitPart plugin in Konqueror than when I use KHTML for the renderer. So, while they may have had similar origins, WebKit seems to be getting more love.

Ah. The old, "He may be a liar, but he's my liar" argument.

How about giving yourself some credibility and calling out liars on both sides of the aisle?

FOSS did not compete with the government. Bitcoin does. Trivialising this difference renders your analogy moot.

Or his whip. If you're into that kind of thing.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Wow. Really?

If your doctor tells you that you need antibiotics, you weight the risk and cost vs the reward to determine your course of action. In this case, the risk to you is low, the cost is similarly low, the reward is that your infection likely goes away faster (in extreme cases, saving your life, but not in general).

If the AGW politicians tell you that you need to sacrifice your entire standard of living in order to curtail a problem that they still don't understand (and, let's face it, they don't understand it because they still can't predict it, even on a decade-by-decade basis, nevermind year-over-year), the risk is high (no understanding of likely outcomes), the cost is even higher (likely resulting in many human deaths), and the rewards are vague.

Those aren't even kind of similar. For an analogy to work, there must be a reasonable amount of similarity, and your analogy has almost none.

I'm all in favour of technology improving our cheap-energy viability. But the problem is that the only realistic cheap-energy that is currently technically viable is nuclear. And that has the same group of environmentalists opposed to it as are trying to decry AGW. They're shooting their cause in the foot.

Other than oil executives, most of the rest of us don't care where our energy comes from. But we know we need it. And most of us don't want to double (or more) our energy costs. We have a viable alternative. Use it. That will kill more opposition to AGW changes than any "scientific" argument you can come up with. Make our lives easier for less cost, and it will be adopted overnight (relatively speaking). Use your scientists to proclaim the actual safety of the nuclear industry. You'll do far more to remove carbon emissions than anything else currently being tried.

It's the old adage - catching more flies with honey than vinegar. Don't accuse us, attract us with what we want. Cheap, reliable energy. Remember Aesop's fable about the North Wind vs the Sun. The man wears a coat to keep warm - blowing a cold wind only makes him hold it harder, but give him warmth and he sheds his coat willingly. Give us what we want, cheap, reliable energy, and you get what you want, fewer carbon emissions.

I'd recommend making your own. All reviews of AC's popcorn are negative. Complaints about oversalting with arsenic and strychnine, largely, though one customer complained about insufficient amounts of butter.

All corn is GM corn. The stuff we call "corn" did not evolve naturally, but by extreme pressure by human farmers. The stuff we eat cannot grow without human intervention and is anything but natural. Just because we didn't modify its genetics through a test tube doesn't make it non-modified genetically.

When Princess Diana was killed in an auto crash, the media fawned over her. I remember asking my coworkers if Mother Theresa would get as much publicity if she died. It couldn't have been too long after that, since the two only died, what, 6 days apart? I didn't find the prediction of death freaky, I found the prediction of apathy from the media disappointingly predicted.

Given that he can't be re-elected no matter how well or poorly he performs ... no, no one you can hold accountable.

And my other link got squashed. Another time chip-and-pin was discussed here.

Why do you think chip and pin would be an update to security practices? We've had that discussion before. Multiple times. It's more security theatre, and I doubt that this attack would have been much more difficult to co-ordinate with chip/pin cards.

Have you seen some of the real stop signs out there? I'd say many of them were arbitrarily placed by untrained, though authorized, personnel. Seriously, most of them could be replaced with yield signs, which is what they effectively are since few people do more than roll through them, and allow our traffic enforcement to focus on issues that might actually make a difference.

Until this got leaked out into the public sphere, they were gagged by the same surveillance orders. They couldn't say anything without admitting they were served with secret subpoenas. Now that this is public knowledge, they can refer to those that were leaked and say this is bad for business/citizens without breaking the law on any further subpoenas.

So, maybe they didn't care. Or maybe they did and just couldn't say anything about it due to the same evil law. From this vantage point, we still can't tell for sure.

I don't get it. Why do they need to change around the cause? Is it to make it more plausible or something?

You're talking about a superhero. There's nothing you can do to make that plausible. However, there is a lot you can do to screw with your most loyal fanbase, the fanboys who know the story better than you do. So, really. Just don't.

What you're still missing is that if you do not have fear of someone wielding a knife at you menacingly, either you're Jean-Claude Van Damme, or you're irrationally not in fear.

I know my reflexes are not fast enough to avoid a knife. To me, there's not a significant difference here.

Yes, if the person is 30 feet or more away, a gun is far more menacing. But inside that threat range, there's not a significant difference. Which is why police officers are trained to treat a knife-wielding person within 21 feet (or maybe a bigger circle) as if they were immediately beside them. And why "paranoid" people will carry a gun so that if they're threatened from that larger distance they stand a reasonable chance of survival.