Did any one else read this and think they were making stuff up? Using magnets in beer, microorganisms making hydrophobins, antifoaming agent binding to proteins, anti-gushing. Speak English! It's hard enough to compile my object-oriented code using re-entrant methods with my two pass compiler, linking into a MySql relational database without having to wade through a bunch of jargon.

This sounds reasonable. It's a lot to expect from our legislatures, especially the "let the free market work it out" types, but yeah. Reasonable regulation, making sure the thing is safe, then, if you qualify, you're in. Could apply to cabs, Uber, whoever.

And for the commenter below that indicated the "hailacab" app, yeah, I figured there was one, at least one if not more. Why, though, would anyone use Uber or Lyft if you could get a "real" cab? And is it just inertia that the cab companies don't become more responsive? "We've always used buggy whips! How would you get around without one?"

I'm at a loss to understand why the taxi companies don't come up with their own app. They could legitimately claim that their drivers are not crazy wackos that drive run-down Chevy Vegas or something. I mean, the slogan for Uber and Lyft is "normal people in their crappy cars swinging by if they can", right? I rarely take cabs, and don't think I'd ever call Uber. It seems to me taxi regulation is a good thing. We don't let just any joker with a subway train to ride down the rails picking people up when he feels like it. Don't you want to be sure that the car you get it is maintained, driver vouched for and accountable to someone, the cost calculated and constant? It's all bizarre to me.

Now you kids over there, off my lawn!

Sorry. Matt Damon. Guess we'll see how humorous it'll be. I'm more afraid of the dumbing-down they'll have to do.

Seconded. I picked it up on a lark at the library, and my wife who's not that into sci-fi liked it as well. Ridley Scott is making a movie out of it.

I can see how this would be considered frustrating. However, it seems to me that the Wikipedia idea is still a valid one. This article can now be changed, corrected, as it were. And overall, most people that come along and care about the information are going to try to correct it. If this were in a physical book, and wrong, it's wrong basically forever.

Encyclopedias are (were?) expensive, and for instance, my folks bought me a set when I was young and didn't get a new set for probably a decade or more. But I always "knew" that they were correct. However, teachers always made you have several sources, not just an encyclopedia. That cross-checking should be in place even today with Wikipedia. In fact, this could help fix a broken entry.

Of course, they need a process to stop "back-and-forth" changes of things. I think they need to have some indication that over all, an article is getting more and more correct, and thus should be harder and harder to change. I don't know, maybe they have something like this in place.

Unless the movie you wanted wasn't available on the streaming service, ONLY on a physical disc. Yes, there are movies out there like that ("Tim's Vermeer" being one that I know of). Besides, if I'm not in a huge hurry to watch something, with a disk I can get extras easily, and not worry about





buffering...

But they DID rubber stamp it. Only instead of "YES", they chose the answer they always give, which was "NO". Not clueless, just, sorry, no, we don't do that. "But, but, kittens, and puppies and dead kids." Sorry, no.

They probably get requests like this a lot. Sometimes it's a tragic circumstance like this. Sometimes it's "Oh, hey, my uncle was a jerk and killed dolphins for a living, but he really liked Superman" or "We just thought it'd be a neat idea, coz his name is Stan and all".

This, to me, doesn't look like a heartless corporation. It looks like "Can we use the Superman symbol?" "No."

And, really, it was a dumb idea in the first place. He could have liked just about anything. "But he really liked nuclear launch codes, why is the government being such a dick about this?" I can see how it's sad, but they should have come up with another idea for a memorial. Maybe donate the money that would have been wasted on a stupid statue to helping other, living children.

Not! This is a figment in AVX's collective mind. The real helicopter doesn't move at all except for CGI on a computer monitor. Not to say they couldn't build it but a bit premature to say much about it. "It could reach speeds of a billion light-years per fortnight." Hey, maybe it'll do the Kessel run in 12 parsecs.

Yeah, this too. I didn't get the whole "Gotta be a Superman outfit or nothing" deal. Seemed like a stupid idea in the first place.

I was thinking, what if the kid liked to dress up as Hello Kitty, or Worf from Star Trek, or Darth Vader? Would they be so gung-ho? Or how about if he like to dress as a girl? I'm unclear why his choice of outlet, apparently to get away from abusive parents and grand-parents matters. DC is not the bad-guy here (well, not for this).

And to the person below, I don't think anyone is suggesting we forget all about this. It's just that the kid being in a Superman costume has little to do with his memorial.

Well, you know what they say, anarchy is better than no government at all.

This was what I immediately thought of. Swerving makes no sense, and I wouldn't think a programmer would even consider it. The best course of action is always to hit the brakes as hard as you can. What is going to suddenly pop up (or fall down) right in front of you that the car wouldn't have already seen coming? What weird course are you on? The car has a radar or something to detect traffic from all sides. "Things constantly fall from the skies here, so you have to swerve on a moments notice." And is the detection system going to be good enough to tell the difference between all the options available? Is that a 2003 or a 2005 Volvo, the difference is 3.9 points of survivability. The question and premise is flawed.

If you look at the light map, there seems to be a fairly clear line almost halfway in the middle of the US. I couldn't find a natural barrier. The Mississippi is to the east, and the Rockies to the west. But it looks to me that it's pretty much the exact eastern half of the the US is bright almost everywhere, and the western half, except for the cities, is pretty dark. It's curious to me that the line is pretty straight, north to south. Is there a reason for this other than an accident of history?

Yeah, I'll second you. This is bullshit and has always been bullshit and will probably always be bullshit. You'd think the guy might have read some of this before. Is he an idiot or just a fool?