"The user can set a time for how long the drop will exist, decide who can view the content, set permissions for who can alter the content and share content in a variety of ways" But the default for access is world-readable forever. Setting permissions more restrictively requires navigating three intermediate pages and viewing an on-line video ad.

Duh! Even more true, then.

When studying EE way back when, we generally worked with +/-10% in our circuit equations but a chemical engineering student friend of mine pointed out that chemistry was somewhat less precise than electronics and they used +/-30%. Thus 2.3 + 2.3 = 4.6 which rounds to 5 so 2+2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2. ;-)

The word for people who text while driving is "dead." ("Stupid" comes close but fails to capture the true insanity of such an attempt at multitasking two visually-intensive tasks.)

I've had the same experience.

Apple suckered 114,067 people into buying iPads?!

I've also heard (I can't remember where), "If the code and the comments disagree, they are both wrong."

It'd be nice if the camera optics were in a removable little bit that you could leave in your car or with the guard. I imagine something about the size of a 2x2 Lego brick that snaps in and out easily.

I was excited recently (OK, I'm a language geek) to learn that there's a "real" word for patent trolling: champerty (http://wordsmith.org/words/champerty.html)

Will they hire Al Gore to help (re)invent the internet?

No, that's not what I'm saying. The conversation should go:

Management: So is the project done?

Developer: No.

Don't agree, don't release it, don't support it until you believe you're done. You should be documenting as you go and can continue to document to fill time while testing is going on. But you don't have to say you're done until *you* believe you're done. Hedge, hem, haw, delay, and stall. Lie if that's what you want to call it but you're not done until you've documented so don't say you are. If you insist, the conversation above can continue:

Management: When can I have it?

Developer: What I've got now is suitable for an alpha test if you have a friendly customer. I could give you something better in N days.

If there is no documentation, the answer to the question, "Is it ready?" is "No." It's likely that the PHB doesn't know enough about what you're doing to disagree with you and grab your raw code from the repository and use it. If you establish a precedent for being done quickly (without documentation) then you get caught in a vicious cycle of it being expected that you'll be done quickly. It's best when the system supports proper documentation, etc. but if not, sandbag your estimates to give yourself time to do the job right, or at least half right. Over time, your productivity will catch up when you can figure out last month's or last year's code more quickly for a new feature because you took time then to document what you were doing.