As I tried to ask during the first interview who are these people? What have you got to lose in naming them right now? Do they have power in the United States? What's holding you back?!

They can cause you no more chaos or inconvenience and yet you refuse to name them -- WHY? This could only be further evidence in your accusations! Do I have to buy your book to find out or something?

I haven't seen Into Darkness but a lot of this review covered what was painfully realized in the first movie: no longer is Trek about philosophy, ethics, tolerance, gray areas and real world problems. It's mostly absolute good versus absolute evil. I think the driving force behind the bad guy in the first movie was largely a misunderstanding ... which is incredibly boring. His motivation was confusingly laughable.

Unsurprisingly I'm pretty sure I heard JJ Abrams tell Jon Stewart that "he never liked Star Trek" on The Daily Show. Well, now he's had a chance to kill it by turning it 100% into a modern day blockbuster action flick and shirking any attempt to tackle an interesting philosophical or ethical dilemma as the main plot. As the modern reemergence of comic book and super hero movies have shown, those films are a dime a dozen that anyone can do. Tackling something deeper while still holding our attention is the hard part. The Watchmen was a good candidate for it but fell short. I'm sure JJ Abrams would rather cover up the complicated parts that question good versus evil with another lens flare.

The problem is they have tons of cash. When you become that rich you end up bypassing the crap that the little people have to deal with as you can always pay someone else to deal with that for you.

He does not have to worry about ever being refused health insurance or the exorbitant cost of it as he has no sense of perspective when it comes to money any more.

It only costs a few extra quid per month to get a Bupa (private company) top up to smooth out all the areas where the NHS is a bit rough. The end result is that we still end up paying less than you do in the US since the Bupa cover does not have to worry about the really expensive stuff as the NHS covers that.

With a Bupa policy I can leave work now and go and talk to the private clinic just down the road with no appointment. Even without a Bupa policy I can still go and talk to them and then just pay cash for their time (I have done this to get some jabs for going to South America on short notice).

Then why didn't you: http://www.bmihealthcare.co.uk/hospital/description?p_hosp_id=294&p_hospital_page_id=163&in_page=Emergency%20care%20centre

It took me about 30 seconds to find that link via Google. I bet they have other clinics all over the country.

I know A&E is awful on a Friday night through experience, but that was when I was a poor student dropout and I broke my hand (cleanly snapped third and forth metacarpals). If I had been in the US at that time I probably wouldn't have had any cover either as my family are not that well off so god knows what would happened.

As it was though I was in surgery within 16 hours and then discharged within 36 at no cost apart from the taxes I had paid as a checkout boy in a supermarket (the only job I had ever done at that age). Now I happily pay my taxes as I am grateful to be able to type this using both hands and go climbing as a hobby thanks to my 100% recovery because the NHS pinned my hand back together.

In the US I very much doubt I would have been able to get my hand reconstructed the same way without paying a fortune, instead they would have just patched me up so it did not get any worse but left me with limited movement.

we?

Do you really expect anyone to believe you work in the "financial trading industry" and hang out on slashdot?

It is worth remembering that the only treatments for Pancreatic Cancer are: Surgery, Radiation Therapy or Chemotherapy. Ok, he probably should have gone down the surgery route sooner than he did (he waited nine months) but the other two options both suck.

Many people choose to die of cancer rather that go through the shit of Chemo or Radiation Therapy as they both utterly ruin your quality of life for the time you have left for a very low probability of success anyway. By choosing to avoid these two treatments you can actually make the most of the time you have left and remain relatively active.

Most medical research nowadays is done by drug companies. They are not interested in "cures" they are interested in finding a drug to manage a particular condition, that way they get to make tons of money from all the repeat prescriptions of their creation. If they came up with a cure for that condition they only get the money from a single prescription.

If they created a single pill that would cure and vaccinate you against all the worlds diseases they would all go bankrupt within a decade, even if they could sell the pill for $1 million.

So who knows what is possible when the corporations who fund (and hence choose the direction of) most medical research are not interested in looking? Instead they come up with crap like Viagra as that is where the money is.

In next weeks slashdot I expect to see something about Moxie Marlinspike being asked to deliver a nice shiny yacht to Saudi Arabia and it going horribly wrong when he gets arrested for piracy :)

False. Unsurprisingly, nowhere in the paper was this dubious claim even approached. Instead you can find this even in the summary:

Emphasis mine. And then further into the actual paper:

There would likely be no bladderwort had there been no junk DNA in its ancestral line and other findings point to such noncoded DNA as necessary for evolution.

I believe a more prudent falsifiable hypothesis would run along the lines of (and I'm sorry, I'm only a software developer): Due to relaxed external selective pressures the bladderwort's RNA polymerase has become adept at writing coding errors to the 3% noncoded DNA during replication and this actually still serves a vital function -- especially if the bladderwort is to survive in a much larger window than a few generations.

If you live in the United States, you likely already engage in accidental entomophagy. Allow me to introduce you to the USDA's guide to what are the acceptable levels of insects in your food. Go head and CTRL+F on that page for 'insects.'

Having particularly good eyesight, I don't think I've ever eaten a blackberry that didn't have thrips or aphids on it. Guess what? They're delicious on blackberries!

Of course, getting my Wilderness Survival merit badge on my way to Eagle Scout gave me the opportunity to forage for edible insects and I would actually recommend the fly larvae that attach to grassland stalks and form 'bulbs' around them. Taste like walnuts! Too bad it takes forever to harvest them or I'd make a product out of that for the granola-brains community.

Only if you happen to be an immoral twat trying to justify their argument.

The truth is that thing like paying sales taxes on mail order goods involve you going out of your way to pay more tax. Setting up a dodgy offshore arrangement involves going out of your way to pay less tax. There is a massive difference between these two things in that in one case you are just taking the path of least resistance, in the other you are investing a shitload of extra effort in order to hide money from the taxman. The effort involved is key.

Also, there is the minor difference in terms of reward. By not paying the odd bit of sales tax you can probably save a few thousand or tens of thousands of dollars at most. By hiding money offshore you can save millions if you have it.

This. I've seen yew quoted as 10%, but I think that's a maximum in ideal conditions. Typical solar PV is around 15%, with more specialised (read expensive) panels better than 40%.

Is that fair though? Just because you can find another government that you can pay to take that shit off your hands does not mean the people in the country actually want the damn stuff.

Also, what happens if the country in question falls apart and someone decides they want to give it back to you later in the form of a dirty bomb? Even though you shipped that crap abroad you still have to keep an eye on the stuff to stop it falling into the wrong hands.

Apt is fine for the OS, they even said so. What they want to come up with is something completely different I think. This is not a replacement for apt, it is to complement apt. It actually sounds like this is really designed as a competitor to the APK file you use under android for distributing applications.

However great apt is, it is utterly useless from the point of selling commercial software as there is the possibility of software not installing due to dependency issues. This is not an option with commercial software as the (stupid) end use will blame the software he just bought for not installing, not the fact that his machine is not able to download a dependency package because it is not available upstream. As many have pointed out this wastes disk space, but who cares as it is cheap now.

It sounds like their grand idea is to come up with an additional application wrapper format that will always install everything for a particular application in a single directory also making uninstalling much easier.