I wonder if you know something I don't.

You should dig up a 2011 Associated Press article about tritium leaks at nuclear plants across the country.
Or maybe read about the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant which was so plagued by problems that it was finally shut down.

Heck, a quick google search for 'NRC regulatory capture' will kick back plenty of examples that you can use to reevaluate your position.

Well, now I'm pretty sure you don't know what you're talking about.
The safety record is public, go look at it.
The NRC has a shit list of the worst plants that it publishes biannually.

Hell, there have been 2 nuclear plants that SCRAMed recently.
One on Christmas and the other last week, during the big north east blizzard.

I wonder what your criteria is for "unsound"
Do we have to have another 3-Mile Island accident?

This isn't a retroactive tax.
There's no ex post facto involved.

You see, the trick is that technically, all the money held overseas is deferred income.
The IRS said "you don't have to pay your taxes until you bring the money back to US shores."
The corporations said "Cool, we'll bring it back. No really, we will. But how about we pay you less when we bring it back?"

As a result, the incentives for repatriating foreign profits are completely upside down and backwards.
It makes far more sense to dodge US corporate taxes and invest the money overseas.

Inflation does no such thing!! It is ridiculous to even suggest that the most convenient hypothesis thus imaginable, twisted and dressed to match an anthropomorphic observation, from an anthropomorphic vantage point, that is only part of a model within the current accepted paradigm has any authority over long past events, if they even occurred, or any authority whatsoever over the Universe, other than to help deny other ideas and hypothesis from surfacing for mere consideration that do not fit within the accepted current paradigm. Many often make this mistake of getting carried away with the difference between objective reality and the very human attempts to shoehorn it into our larger ideas or understanding, that we're pretty sure are correct, but for all of the arrogance of science, it could in fact just be a very well orchestrated gag.

It sounds like your problem is with the quality of the new equilibrium, not with the principle.

The best kind of correct is technically correct!

salty things, but only if you subscribe to objectifying women

We need to adapt this energy generation to sweater puppets. This will end the nuclear debates once and for all.

I won't put it past /. submitters or editors, but why can't the very intelligent, accuracy-blessed computer coders out there, at least, understand this? If you're not doing any science, then it can't be "computer science."

All the mice I've taken apart have one of several setups:
1. click pressure is controlled by a 'spring' inside a microswitch
2. click pressure is controlled by a tactile switch that is soldered to the PCB
3. click pressure is controlled by a spring that supports the scroll wheel axis or the full assembly

As best as I can tell, your G700s' scroll wheel has... 2 and 3.
You can see it here at 6 minutes into the video.
The tactile switch is the gold disk on the left of the screen, with two springs on each side of it.

You could try replacing those springs with weaker ones.
And/or you could desolder the tactile switch and replace it with one that requires less force to operate.

If it's hardware, there's no reason you should be permanently stuck with some focus group's middle of the road choice.
/tactile switches cost pocket change
//microswitches are expensive when ordered as single pieces, so find a place that already has a thousand of them.

Chinese New Year
Chinese Zodiac
Chinese Opera
Chinese Laundry
Chinese Restaurants
Chinese Checkers
Chinese Doll
Chinese Puzzle Box
Chinese Room
Chinese Medicine
Chinese Handcuffs
Chinese Security Audits

How about a network stack and wifi or 3/4G in a cartridge (and access to endless games from da klowd)? Silly, when you can now probably fit a few supercomputers with all the trimmings in a cartridge that size.

Nothing I can find above this thread started by AC is even relevant to the story.

To their credit, Scalise's press guy did fess up that it was true, and explained what he was doing there, IIRC, running workshops on being more tolerant (I could be completely wrong, and the press guy could be lying, but no one is talking about this).

Also, its amazing how much of Republican movement is complete negative, unhelpful garbage, putting sticks in the spokes of Democratic movement just because the Dems thought up something good and tried to get it done. Elected Democrats seem to focus on trying to do something, while elected Republicans seem to be obsessed trying to prevent them. The Dems are weak because they get tripped up over the Republicans BS. And when something like this comes up, Dems serving Republicans their own medicine, the Republicans go ape shit. US politics is like slapstick comedy. The absurdity of it all is no more clear once its recognized that the vast majority of those voting Republican are voting against their own political and economic interests. If you make less than $250K/yr, why are you hurting yourself, your family, and your chances of ever reaching that income by voting against your own personal economic interests? Not that all Republicans are dumb, far from it, but without these morons voting agaisnt their interest, there would be no Republican Party.

My cousin explained it well (if I can remember this right). Say there is only $100 and 100 people. Democrats want to give 5 guys $5, and distribute the remaing $75 to the other 90. The Republicans want to give 1 guy $99, and distribute the remaing dollar to the other 99.

I'm anxious to see what the new Republican Congress actually positively accomplishes, new stuff, as opposed to how much time they spend tearing down what was accomplished by the anemic previously Democratic Congress.

I've been unpartisan, independent my entire adult life. I see nothing compelling from either party to lead me to take sides. One side is a bully, the other side is bullied. Both sides, for these reasons, offend me.

More importantly, as opposed to the unarmed, gun owners are far more likely to shoot someone, intentionally, unintentionally, justly, unjustly, or otherwise. For some reason, it seems that individual gun owners always disagree with this obvious fact, because "they know" their weapon better than anyone else. I'll shut up when they stop shooting people.

But at what expense? I'm serious and not just torking you around.

I think you're missing the point of /.ers coming up with possible solutions. These aren't criminal minds sharing how to do crime. They're compulsive puzzle solvers, and there is no puzzle greater than, no solution more elusive than defeating the well-run FBI investigation. Perhaps they really want to help the FBI be even more effective and irresistable. This pursuit is no different than penetration testing, nor the ability of the logical and clever to come up with solutions for problems in fields which they have absolutely no experience or insight. Let them look for that whistle in their box of cereal, and lets not attempt to disway from nor even verbally punish for hypothetical crime. On second thought, naw, I changed my mind. Stop thinking about that right now!