Name one phone with good software and crappy hardware that I'd consider using. There isn't one. Good software doesn't make the weak screen or camera good. Processor speed may be over rated, but adequate RAM is certainly not, especially with a low-end processor.

Eww, yuck.
Pros: cheap, has FM radio
Cons: every other single thing about it.
Verdict: no thanks. I don't care what you compare it to, it still stinks. This is like comparing dog shit to wolf shit.

Ubuntu phone, not Obama phone, but thank you for your interest Mr. Limbaugh.

...in your comment.

If you aren't interested in the nature of our universe, or the possible existence of other universes that might be able to interact with ours, that's fine, but lots of us don't feel the same way. Numerous important scientific advances have come from what initially looked like useless findings, so just because you don't know right now how this might be applied to future technologies that doesn't mean it is a dead end.

The proposed experiment does not require an other-dimensional intelligence conducting an identical experiment, jut another universe. The neutrons would leak out of our universe and then back in, untouched.

Great job correcting it then, AC. Way to bring something useful to the table.

Try harder next time, and post under your own name if you want to call someone out like that.

In the case of the current iteration of LMDE, the best American comparison would be to an Amtrak train, or a Greyhound bus - because it is soooo sloooooow to get any updates at all. When newly updated packages are released, you might get there, eventually, someday... - just like on Amtrak. I liked LMDE at first, but I recently switched back to Mint's main edition for this reason. (Of course I'm being unfair - LMDE does not smell as bad as a Greyhound, and does not have a sticky floor.)

I suppose I'll try LMDE again at home when it goes back to full rolling, but I'm thinking of moving away from Mint to something different for a change, maybe Arch. Even then I may stick with Cinnamon though, the Mint team's best product.

Well yes, that would make sense, in a perfect world. But in ours, if a patented or otherwise proprietary product helps you stay alive, you use it. You use it even if you don't know how dangerous it is in its own right, since you know for a fact that fire is dangerous.

I know a couple of fierfighters, and I guarantee they've never asked what is in their suppressants, because they have simply learned through experience to trust them. Of course this is less than ideal (to put id mildly), but it should not be surprising. Hopefully this study will spur others to help shed some light on what is in this stuff, how dangerous it is, and whether there are safer alternatives that are effectively comparable.

8.5% is significant. Of course that is not a big enough difference to make this a first-line treatment, but it could be an important option for patients for whom other treatments have failed. No one is saying this is something that everyone should use to lose a few pounds.

The summary mentions the screens activating when a driver "checks over their head to switch lanes." Are new Jaguars and Rovers able to leap up or fly or something? I don't understand how or why you might check over your head to begin with, and especially in the context of making a lane change.

Please don't equate Greenpeace assholes with everyone younger than you. Most "millenials" are not trampling your lawn or ruining Debian. Do you care to make up any more stereotypes?

...and as soon as they are inside the cage we need to blow it up. Then maybe actual, reasonable environmentalists can make some headway. Extremists are of no use to anyone, even if they claim to be on your side.

While I envy their goals, Greenpeace are nothing but a bunch of assholes whose antics are counterproductive. The court system is not the only way to go about protecting wildlife and the environment, I get that. But the inflammatory things they say and their repeated criminal actions not only make them incapable of affecting any meaningful change, but instead they galvanize those they accuse of wrongdoing and hurt the abilities of reasonable people to carry on the mission. Every time I see Greenpeace in the news I can't help but wish they'd just go away, so the rest of us might be able to talk some reason into the polluters and habitat destroyers of the world. With them present it is impossible to convince many on the wrong side of environmental issues, because Greenpeace are so needlessly combative and wrong-headed.

You obviously don't understand North Korea. Despite their terrible economy, widespread hunger, and stunning lack of technology in the hands of citizens, they still have an active standing army of over one million people, and count many, many more as available reserves. "Defense" spending is big there, so if they decide to hack, they can hack, and they will put government resources behind with little trouble because they have no fear of internal or national backlash. I doubt North Korea publishes accurate statistics, but it is a safe bet that they spend a much higher proportion of their GDP on defense (which includes hacking, propaganda, and internal oppression) than most countries. Militarily they are relatively weak on a per man basis due to most units being woefully equipped (and fed), but when they get the notion to do something (think nukes), they do it.

This may not have been North Korea, and I have no idea really, but one can't assume it wasn't them because simply because they are poor and uber-wacky.