Dammit! That should have read "had NO anti-tank capabilities".

Many early tanks (up through WW2) had anti-tank capabilities (indeed, the first tanks had no reason to have anti-tank capabilities - there were no other tanks to fight against). The main distinguishing features of a tank are its armor (which need not necessarily be very heavy - just enough to deflect small arms fire), its tracks, and the fact that it has some sort of weapon mounted on a turret.

The Panzer I was classified as a light tank but was armed only with MG13 machine guns. The British Vickers Light Tank Mk VI likewise only had .50cal and .303cal machine guns.

Rhino runs an interpreter that first compiles JavaScript into its own pseudo-bytecode, and then interprets the pseudo-bytecode. I believe what Oracle is proposing is to compile JavaScript directly into Java bytecode, using the new features of the JVM to handle the dynamic aspects that weren't possible with previous versions of the JVM.

document structure != layout

The header and footer are part of the structure of the document.

The fact that they appear at the top and bottom of the screen is part of the layout.

Only if they're targeting you by your DNS name and not your IP address.

Me too! I even still have Pidgin set up to log into it (along with every other account I have), though my ICQ contacts are so old I pretty much never talk to any of them.

Gadahi/Kadaffy/Qaddafi/whatever did say he declared a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Libyan tanks continued to roll into Benghazi to "disarm to protesters".

If the domain changes hands, that's going to break a lot of XML files containing xsi:schemaLocation attributes and DTD references pointing to documents within http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/j2ee/ .

You should just put a big banner across the top of the screen that reads: "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU." The government in 1984 gave full disclosure as well.

That said, they are your children, and by extension it's probably your computer as well (or at the very least, your Internet connection), so you're well within your rights to monitor how it is used. It isn't really even necessary to actually do any monitoring. As long as they believe they're being monitored, the effect should be the same.

If any of you had bothered to read TFA, you'd notice that sharing your address and phone number is entirely optional for the user on a per-app basis. They just split the "Request for Permission" dialog into two options instead of one: 1. Access my basic information (the only option up until now) and 2. Access my contact information. Why anyone would actually choose the second option is beyond me (maybe they anticipate someone developing some sort of app that sends notifications via text messages), but it's not as if they're forcing you to share the information, or even making it likely that you'd accidentally share it.

Huh... are you against eating mutton?