The more prescient (or paranoid) among us have been nursing alternative "real-name" identities on-line for a while now. I started one of mine about 4 years ago; he uses Google+ and posts the odd comment to online forums (not this one). I had another one about a decade ago, but I lost the password to it's keystone account. I think the key is going to be having enough dummy accounts, that I can have them be in each others' circles. But I really don't know if it will be worth it to go to that much trouble.

"minimize liability" = "If I have to hit a human, make sure I kill him instead of maim him."

I think porn is the obvious solution here. Just get the major porn sites to require IPv6, and the problem will solve itself.

This is a fair point. The traditional meaning of "may" involves some permission being granted by one party to one party ("May I?" = "Will you allow me to?"). Since they obviously aren't telling you that you give them permission, the only possible meaning would be that they are giving you permission to make a recording. Never thought of it like that before, but that's literally what they're saying.

That is so wrong on so many levels.

Looks like they added some stealth technology to that "L"

Apple did the same thing with their upgrade to iOS. If you had iOS6 and an older Mac, you could connect through iTunes and everything worked fine. Then they "upgraded" to iOS7, and without warning you had to have a more recent version of iTunes, which in turn requires Mac OS 10.6.8 or newer. So don't think this is some Microsoft conspiracy. It's just typical thoughtless programmers not giving a shit about reverse compatibility.

It's surprising that people are raising a fuss about this, when they didn't say peep about the iPhone thing. Hell, on the Apple Discussions board if you try to bring up something like this, you are ridiculed for having a computer more than three years old.

I think you misunderstand what things can link you to a terrorist. If you are the dry cleaner for a terrorist's dog walker, then you have a link to a terrorist. You are being watched. What I find so amazing is that even with such feeble all-encompassing definitions, they couldn't find a way to "link" these other 280k people.

The hell they don't. The problem is, when I'm done opening it, it can't close. Bwahahaha. *goes to look for hammer*

Wait... is that a metric fucking disaster or imperial?

There are terms and conditions for purchasing a ticket. Unless one of those terms was "We can kick you off the plane for sending a tweet" then they are in violation of contract and should be taken to small claims court. Of course it's more of a PITA than it's worth, but it would be fun to see SWA's lawyers have to defend such absurd behavior.

I should hope so. Otherwise how do they reach the pedals?!

You are absolutely right about the stigma thing. My wife used to swear up and down that she would never get a minivan. She toughed it out with her CR-V as long as she could. When the in-laws (or other visitors) came over, I would dutifully crawl in the back, while everybody else piled in. But once we had our second kid, it became increasingly impossible to safely get the whole family where we were going. Then when the older one entered grade school, there was the need to shuttle friends about, too.

So we've had a Honda Odyssey for over a year now. The mileage isn't bad. The thing handles better than my Accord. It has more luggage room and is more configurable than the Pilot would have been. My only complaint so far is that the windshield is so large that it distorts my field of vision giving me a slight headache on long trips. But my wife says it's just my imagination. She has embraced being a minivan mom. She'll probably be one until the kids are grown.

I liken a minivan to any other tool. Once you get used to using the right tool for the job, you wonder why you ever did it any other way.

Regarding the push-button fold flat seats, that is already an option for the back seat of one brand. Don't remember which, though.

Here are the rules at my house: Be safe. Be nice. Four words, and still my seven-year-old finds a way to get all lawyery.

That's actually a pretty good point. Policies are set out to protect the company, while appearing to protect the employees. If an employee signs something saying they know harassment is not allowed on premises, it makes it a lot easier to fire them. If you don't have such a policy, it makes it a lot easier for the harassee to go after the company as well as the harasser.

Besides it isn't always so clear cut, which illegal activities will get you fired. How many companies will fire you for getting a speeding ticket? What if you get a DUI? How many companies will fire you if you smoke a joint (while not at work)? What about bouncing a check? Hell, some school districts have policies forbidding teachers from being seen drinking in public.

I don't think a company policy is meant to cover everything, just everything they are worried about getting sued over. I wonder if anybody has ever used the excuse "Well it wasn't in the policy, so you can't fire me for torturing my puppy to death," or some other heinous act.