It just seems like a hard sell to pay that kind of price for functionality that is already free on devices that a large population has on their person during all waking hours.

Let's see...pay $150 for something to blink an LED to alert a potential sighting for a single orbiting object vs. paying $0 for your smartphone to blink an LED to alert a potential sighting for virtually all significant objects in orbit.

This is the most blatant slashvertisment yet.

I believe he's referring to Netflix's physical DVD selection, which offers many newer releases that their streaming library does not. Bennett's argument is that if Netflix has obtained the necessary rights to mail a physical copy of a newly released DVD, why can't they do the same thing virtually - stream it (similar to their streaming library) except with a fixed maximum of simultaneous viewings and a reservation system (similar to their DVD mailings). A hybrid approach to bring even the latest titles to consumers without having to involve physical media.

This is all true. However, the idea is that if the monopolies are dissolved and competition allowed to flourish, the prevailing service offers would trend away from usage caps instead of towards them. The pressure on service providers would be to keep their network capacity as high as possible and offer the best deals to stay competitive. If there is no monopoly, no anti-competitive collusion, and even still we find usage caps are just an economic necessity in order for providers to keep the lights on, I'd have an easier time accepting them. If the only reason caps are implemented is because service providers know there's no competitor for customers to abandon them for, well... that just pisses me off.

To the contrary, this submission on Reddit likely wouldn't have gained any traction. Here, it's front page news!

Even looking past the ROT13 eye-roller of an April Fool, this article is complete garbage. It's poorly written and poorly executed, in that April Fools news story pranks should be just plausible enough to make the average reader at least wonder if it's true. This reads as if it was written by a 5th grader.

Even the concept would have been workable with a little more subtlety and finesse. Just terrible...

http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/09/18/1457243/dice-buys-geeknets-media-business-including-slashdot-in-20m-deal

"Facebook has confirmed that it limited the Prakash's activity". -- What is "the Prakash"?

"Prakash disagrees with when Facebook says". -- That phrasing doesn't feel right to me either.

The reason (sub)urban communities have leash laws that include cats is because some people don't want your cat on their property. I don't think anyone is questioning an owners right to allow their cat to roam free around their own property. However, it's the owner's responsibility to keep them off mine. If you live in a 100' x 100' suburban lot and that's not enough roaming room for your cat to be happy, how is that my fault? It's somewhat about safety, but more about courtesy. Dogs would get antsy after 3 days inside too. People let them run around in their fenced yards and walk them on leashes. I'm not trying to be an insensitive clod, really -- I just don't think it's that unreasonable for a property owner to want their property free of other people's pets.

If the phone is seen or heard anytime during school hours, it's taken away, and the parent can come claim it. Parents will get sick of having to do that pretty quick, and the students will learn what happens if they use them during school. In our school district, each school can make the specific rules regarding cell phones, and this is generally how they handle the issue. The best part is, the policy is free to implement and only affects a small minority of phones (the offenders) in an emergency situation.

Maybe India will release a video soon:

Interestingly enough, the next paragraph is a huge WTF:

Why would the moon being in front of the sun make these "invisible rays" more dangerous than being in direct sunlight?

I'm not defending GH3's superiority, just saying... there are bonus songs. I know you mentioned Aspyr, who did the PC/Mac port -- were there no bonus songs on the those versions?