The classic version is to be shut down. That is one issue.
The original issue, though, is the new interface has forgotten all our efficiency at filtering comments and getting compact, long threads, and when contacted on this the new owners seem to depend on an existing system that won't, and can't, evolve this way.

As for me, if I lose the capability to filter my way, the very essence of /. disappears.
It's not even that I'll decide to come back or not: there will be no place to come back...

I fully understand the aim for the new owners: getting more readers for the ads to pay more, via a nicer, cleaner interface. They will get this. But there will be no more posters.
At this moment they are betting that a viable part of us will continue posting. I won't belong to this part, simply because it doesn't bring anything more to me. They may win the bet anyhow. They will just step out of my world, and to me it's a dire loss.

mod parent up.
How shall we handle many automated drones above a highway in a way that guarantees I won't get one into my windscreen?
This not to talk about responsibility share in the event of such an accident, nor about the related laws that remain to be crafted...

Why restricting OwnCloud to an Amazon hosting?
Any shared hosting, preferably via an association that you can become part of (and control, and check its costs), will run OwnCloud perfectly well!
Here in Europe I'm running OwnCloud on All2All in Belgium; I'm pretty sure there are many such services in the US
(all2all.org)

Android locks me with Google. It baffles me there are people *here on /.* that can't see it.
Seriously -to me this is a sign /. is evolving, but not to the better...

On the very earliest Apollo missions, experiments were done with a rather basic rope linking the reentry capsule and the LEM, or the supporting module section, I don't remember. The whole was spun *manually* and with analog devices of course.

It should be simple to plan such a move even with small interplanetary devices, rather than starting with ambitious internal spinwheels.

The only issue in such a case is maintaining a location where an Earth-facing antenna wouldn't move, but rotating around the Earth direction allows such points...

Just some weeks ago I was ready to pay a premium to get a Jolla phone (with Sailfish); I went up to registering into Sailfish newsgroups etc.
Honestly, and it's sad to say: the OS looks cool but there are just no applications at all. Not even a decent email, not even an ad-filter.

I sincerely hope Jolla succeeds, but I cannot invest now hoping next year the phone will work.
In contrast the enormous size of Samsung (an issue of its own) may at least bring a machine that works upon switchon...
But I'll definitely keep an eye on both :-)

What for?
For not being locked in a single App market. Like Apple's. Like Google's.
In a word : to avoid monopolies.
That's very stubborn, I know. But I suffered a lot from this, in many areas, so now I can see them very well...

Well, for me seeing an operational open-source OS on a phone would indeed *trigger* my first buying of a Samsung phone.
I own an Openmoko, have carefully reviewed the Jolla phone recently (alas: not operational, IMHO) and believe Samsung indeed is capable to succeed here.

Fairphone, http://www.fairphone.com/
And, the specs go much beyond just avoiding 'conflict metals'. For instance, the battery is replaceable, and there are two SIM slots that make the phone much more interesting to reuse in developing countries when you'll be tired of it.
And, they considered a lot of 20000, then sold them all, then extended to 25000, then sold them all again.
So, things are going well for them.
(I'm patiently waiting for them to become compatible with the open-source Sailfish OS, and then will be ready to pay twice the current cost.)

This means you consider that because you don't see black light, it doesn't damage your eyes.
I for one clearly fear it does, but without you being aware of it --that is : in a much more critical way. A bit like IR light, for instance.

I think the risk here, like already in recent german models, is the smaller optics that the laser will allow.

It seems that to designers, it's cool and dandy to sport very small headlights with a lot of power anyhow.

Now, if you consider what happens in your eye at the other extremity of the beam, this basically means the same power than before, save now it's concentrated within much fewer "pixels".

In other words, save new regulations, you burn your eye much faster.

But yeah, to the buyer it's cool and dandy, isn't it.

Last time I checked, TiddlyWiki was the best out of three "single-file-based" I found. The other two were Lively, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lively_Kernel#Lively_Wiki and Stick Wiki (from "you'll have it on an USB stick"), http://stickwiki.sourceforge.net/
I think only Tiddly has an efficient search function, for instance.
Then if you want "serious notetaking that scales up", I fear you'll have to abandon the single-filers.
But then there are many other wikis still -search in the related "lists" on Wikipedia for instance, only avoiding the ones that didn't evolve recently...

The first Apple webcam did feature a mechanical obturator, that closed the diaphragm in a very visible way (also shutting off the LED).
That was at the time cams were external and big (even though Apple's was twice smaller than the rest).

Now, Apple's way of doing is close to the tablets way: the cam just should not even be visible, and not bother me.
And I agree with that.

I'm not paranoid about the cam light being shut; I even sincerly think anyone spending time about this is wasting a time that would better be used to think about open source and linux alternatives to Apple.

Tell me about Mint vs Ubuntu, not about minuscule cam-LED features, I'll follow you more carefully...

Well, I did try it when they were launched, 10+ years ago here in Europe.
The difference was, my ordinary VW car ran longer with higher octane, and in my actual test, over months, on the same average daily commutes, things was about equilibrate: go refill less often but paying a bit more each time -at the time of my test that was indeed equivalent.

I kept on with lower octane (refilling slightly more often) because I feared high-octane prices would raise faster. But I'm not even sure this happened, indeed.

Maybe I need another test...