This definitely happens in Netflix originals, although I'd say it's no more than shows on other networks.

I used the term "the left" above as well.

It's funny, I pretty much never use that term because I feel the way you do. This is perhaps literally the first time I've done it on any Internet forum or chat. I just felt that it was worth reducing the complexity of explaining who it is I really am talking about.

You really could have a field day with the rest of the Internet, if this bothers you here so much.

I'm almost positive I qualified that with "many of", not "all of".

In fact that is precisely an option you have, one you acknowledged in your original post.

It seems you are the one who is spinning things. You aren't in the group I was mentioning, and you have a straightforward option you just don't want to take, yet you expect pity?

This is a legitimate complaint, one you should have led with. Yet your original complaint was that you had to deal with the horror of removing an update, and that its look-and-feel are somewhat different.

The complaint is because it's different. "You'll pry Windows 7 from my cold, dead hands!"

Many of these folks are the same ones from the 90s that couldn't stand using a GUI at all. They would never use Windows, what, with all its pretty effects that were completely unnecessary. Just get all that out of the way and let me use my damn command prompt!

Except now Microsoft decided they were right, and try to get rid of those effects to focus on typography which is the only element in the command-line UI, and those same people go all bat-ape.

Sure, perhaps this is your yardstick, and if it is that's perfectly fine.

But tell me, how do you go about figuring out what the manufacturing costs actually are? Unless you are willing to allow Tim Cook to tell you that all gross revenues are "manufacturing costs"...

I don't know about more recent implementations, but I remember that Samsung originally only allowed you to run some of their stock apps in multiple windows. When I was at the Verizon store, I almost bought a Note 2 for its multi-windowing capability until I noticed in some fine print near the display that it only worked with some stock apps... so I ditched that idea and went with a device better suited for phone use.

One way to test that is to simulate time. A simulation wouldn't need to wait 15 actual seconds, it could speed up time such that transmissions run immediately after the last, until the test has surpassed the expected lifetime of the mission.

If this were able to be done once every millisecond instead of once every 15 seconds, they would have run across the bug within 14 minutes.

Don't worry, subby was doing the same thing.

To be fair, I don't know that any of the problems are with the Metro (now called Modern) design language itself. Most UI complaints in Windows 8.1 fall into two categories:

1) usability problems such as auto-hiding UI elements, removing buttons in favor of gestures, moving right-click menus to the screen edge, and so on
2) dislike for the flat, clean, chrome-minimized theme

Metro/Modern only deals with #2, and for the most part that is user preference. Meaning, if #1 were fixed, then Metro can work right for many users, and might even be loved by many (such as myself). This is where I think Windows 10 is improving things in general, getting us back to almost Windows 7 levels of usability without completely sacrificing the clean, chromeless look of Windows 8.

Watch the videos I linked above, or at least the first one or two. Sure, third parties can and do win in a first-past-the-post system, but it gets more and more rare until it becomes practically impossible for them to have any chance of success.

When was the last time a third party had any real chance of winning the Presidency of the U.S.? Theodore Roosevelt took second place in the 1912 election running as the Progressive Party candidate. He was previously a very popular President of two terms, who decided not to run for a third immediately. Instead he tried to run for a third term later only to miss the Republican Party nomination. He formed his own party, and despite his popularity among Republicans, all he could do was spoil the election... he split the Republican vote, and Democrats walked away the victors with a relatively low plurality.

"small price of land" = "small piece of land"

I just love how /. mobile provides neither preview nor edit...

I wasn't thinking multiple governments that are sovereign over a small price of land, but rather multiple layers of government consisting of local representation and proper checks and balances.

The U.S. federal/state/local and executive/legislative/judicial partitioning is actually a pretty decent form of what I'm talking about (except that the state governments have de jure capability to place Constitutional restrictions over the federal government, but de facto the federal government always has the final say).

The main reason I'm neither Democrat nor Libertarian: I don't believe in either a big government or a small government.

I believe in multiple small governments, who together provide the necessary defense from external forces but which do not have the ability to concentrate (and thus corrupt) power absolutely.

The only thing obvious is that a third party has no chance of winning.

The most impact a third party has is to spoil the election for the closest of the two main parties.

I'd be ok if this were required learning material: http://www.cgpgrey.com/politic...

I highly doubt that. If they really are poor, meaning they only have enough money to provide the basic necessities, I doubt that energy efficient windows and HVAC units and such are higher priority than basic food, clothing, and shelter.

Sure, these things pay for themselves eventually, but the upfront cost is quite a bit of money that can better be used to eat this week.

A used gas guzzler might cost all of $1K, or less.

Not much for a rich person, but unattainable for a poor person.