This is a personal decision, not one he's trying to push on others. Just as those who so choose have the option of living as long as their body holds out, so too should people have the option of not prolonging their life as long as possible.

I have inoperable cancer, and its effects on me are such that at some point I will no longer be able to manage the symptoms to the point that life will not be worth living. I don't want to spend months or years in a narcotic fog to dull the pain enough so I can just keep breathing. Short of spontaneous remission, I will at some point choose to end my own life rather than suffer needlessly. My family is aware of this decision, and I will inform them at the point it is necessary so there are no surprises. I would do the same were my mind degrading to the point it would be clear my existence contributed nothing more than consuming oxygen and taking up space. I've talked to many others who feel exactly the same way. I'm not trying to kill other people based on some arbitrary criteria, but I sure as hell won't accept being kept alive because "all life is sacred." It's not.

I doubt the GP is drawing those conclusions from the distress of relatives, but rather from direct interaction with dementia patients.

You've never lived with someone who has advanced dementia, have you? I suppose you could be on the autism spectrum and be unable to understand body language that is obvious to everyone else. When you learn how mental trauma translates into actions, you can come to pretty obvious conclusions about the mental state of someone by those same actions, even if they are unable to articulate what's going on in their head.

When someone regularly descends into fits of sobbing when certain things happen, it's pretty easy to come to the conclusion that, hey, there's something disturbing this person. You don't need to be in their head to figure out things with other obvious signs.

Extortion isn't acceptable in a free market any more than it is in a decently regulated one.

Giving discounts to people who are going to prevent someone from extorting money from them isn't shitty behaviour.

They have no answer because there is no answer when people are relatively free.

I doubt he's going to get much out of the "social development" of middle and high school now that he's in his 20s. He's either got it by now, or he doesn't.

Because TCP is a separate driver, and tracks the TCP connections on its own. And in ISO-speak, TCP is in the Session layer, not the Network layer.

There are ways to do it without parading your "charitable attitude" in front of the world. "Don't let your right hand know what your left hand is doing," but in Bono's case, his right hand knows, and so do all of ours, whether we want to or not.

So you'll just accuse me of being "jealous." If having his resources goes hand-n-hand with being such an arrogant ass, I have no reason to envy him.

With the vast uptake of mobile devices, this is coming much sooner than most people realize. I have a 64 GB micro-SD card in my Galaxy, but I still find myself sending photos and whatnot to my Google Drive account on a regular basis just to make room for more (I take lots of pics with my phone - mainly work related, when I need quick snapshots of off-the-truck damaged merchandise or improperly shipped hazmats to send to corporate and to my LP supervisor).

My wife has it a bit easier - her Nikon camera sends her photos automatically back to her computer over cell service (or wifi if wifi is available). She's been pestering me to setup a Google Drive account for her so she can do the same with her LG Optimus - she only has a 16 GB micro SD card.

You need remedial reading comprehension. It was a grocery store selling loss leaders as a part of sales for actual family grocery shoppers, not "We're selling loss leaders so this greedy-assed restaurant owner can come clean out all of the sale items for her restaurant." Which is what they said to begin with.

I'd have banned her and her family after the first time she tried sending one of her kids in, let alone more than one of them.

Hell, I work for a major corporation that sells things, and we have policies in place banning exactly this kind of thing from "customers". Extreme couponers are also another one who are banned by policy.

And in mobile, Nvidia has the fastest graphics operations. Just look at the Shield.

Much of what they do would never have been possible to implement in software, because it would take a billion years to complete the operations. Therefore, nobody wrote software to do what Nvidia does in hardware.

Yes, if Qualcomm negotiated for past use, Samsung would be protected from suit.

They can get the information only if they know that it contains evidence. Merely suspecting it of containing evidence is not enough to compel disclosure.

None of those are rules.