There's nothing quite as fast as the old school method of yanking the cord.

That's actually not fair. There's a good chance the supplier mixed in some bad cables with good ones. The percentage of bad cables could be small (10% or less). In which case, it may not come out even with the most rigorous of testing, unless every unit shipped out was tested.

Here, nobody'd ever do such a thing because the backlash (fines, public perception, etc.) would put the entire company out of business. In China, even such a small increase in profit is worth it because they can pocket the difference and start up a whole new company afterwards.

The lack of corporate accountability is the real issue here, not the lack of testing.

It is a complete straw man. GP is talking about liability, whereas TFA is talking about the illegality of circumventing electronic protections.

These are two completely different things. If GP is advocating for the anti-circumvention measures of the DMCA, GP would be advocating for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Not cool.

Lying about certs is pretty bad, since it can be verified. But if you talk and act like you know what you're doing, there are plenty of people out there who'd be willing to hire you with or without certs. A lot of managers are pretty superficial, and good presentation is more than sufficient.

The thing is, usually, the job you get hired into won't be that demanding. A manager who can't tell know who's bullshitting and who isn't probably won't have terribly challenging work, no matter what the job descriptions say (because said manager probably pulled a bunch of buzzwords out of his ass for it anyway).

It's not a career, but it's enough to get by. And experience has taught me most of the world really just wants to "get by." It's a sad but not unreasonable fact of life.

Something about the necessary pressure perhaps?

It's like making diamonds. You need both the carbon, the heat, and the pressure. Geothermal vents only have two of the three (though they may spit out diamonds).

I'm just speculating. But I would imagine that if they thought geothermal was sufficient, they would have considered it. Of course, who knows, maybe it's the "science" journalist who's sensationalizing everything.

FTFY.

Physical resources are scarce. Virtual resources are infinite. People selling virtual goods have all been obsoleted since personal computers became ubiquitous. You see it everywhere, from software to entertainment to information. It's a matter of waiting for society to catch up.

There is still value in some of these things, just not directly via sales.

The solution: NoScript.

What are you doing surfing the web without it anyway?

In a plot twist, they are both one and the same.

Sorry, both "HE" and "SHE" are not gender-neutral. The proper replacement term is "singular THEY":

Without a pun, pundits would just be dits.

The way I see it, China's just banned a whole class of lame jokes, presumably for mental health reasons. Maybe this'll force people to start using proper double entendres instead. I for one am looking forward to a whole new generation of insults.

Only because they wish to maintain this idea of superiority and separation over all other animals.

Until they start cutting out their own pieces of flesh to feed to random carnivores, anyone who thinks this way is merely a hypocrite. The farthest anyone's willing to go is vegetarianism, and those are the people who respect the lives of other animals and consider their existence equal to their own.

For everyone else who's not willing to hand out pieces of themselves, there's only self-interest.

As far as I'm concerned, if it's not human, it's far game food-wise. I should add that handling (and eating) wild primates might be a bad idea because the diseases they carry can and do jump to humans.

The only people with these issues are the ones who draw a hard line between their pet poodle and a pig on the farm. Not to mention people have pet pigs too... As for those people, they probably should become vegetarians instead of trying to resolve this cognitive dissonance. The way I see it, either you eat meat or you don't; there's no point in justifying it because any attempt would just be intellectual dishonesty.

It's a cookbook!

For that, we'd need a whole new source of energy. Doable, but unlikely without some major breakthroughs. So far, we've been using primarily stored solar power (mainly in the form of hydrocarbons) to fuel our advancements, with a sprinkling of supernova remnants (nuclear fission). To put it into perspective, in 100-200 years, we're pretty much expending about 1-2 billion years of accumulated solar energy. Forget progress, in order to sustain civilization at this level in 300 years, we'd need an easy form of energy that rivals what we have now. And right now, nothing comes close.

And this is ignoring the societal-environmental backlash that's coming upon us fast. That we might create some kind of technology that can increase our energy production is assuming that society remains stable enough through the next 300 years to allow this. There are a lot of factors at play, and my bet is that we're not going to see the kind of growth that we saw the past 200 years in the next 200 years. We'll be very lucky if we don't regress as a whole (for certain, the wealthy will progress but the bigger question is whether the middle class and the poor will follow or if they will suffer to allow the wealthy to progress).

Quite frankly, this is a hurdle every alien civilization will face. The farther you want to travel, the more energy required. And considering we haven't been invaded by aliens yet, I would imagine this to be a more difficult challenge for everyone than you'd expect.

1-877-kars-4-kids.