Thanks for writing this. I think the genesis of the movement toward computers in the classroom was old people who recognized their own unfamiliarity with computers and the resulting fear and ineptitude of and with anything computer related. The obvious answer, to them, was to make computers more prolific in the classroom, to build that familiarity. They failed to understand the computer's extremely long list of uses. It's not *just* a tool, it's *the* tool of the 21st century. They didn't need to encourage computers in the classroom because kids were going to get their own computers, for their own entertainment purposes. Getting over a fear of computers is a feat necessary for older generations, not newer. The real fear for newer generations lies in the classroom subject matter, the same way it always has.

What's wrong with ScriptNo? Works fine for me.

Never experienced the two-player bug, but that does not mean the single player game was designed poorly. I beat the game on single player, and while extremely tough it was certainly not poorly designed or fundamentally broken.

"The new iPad" is not the name... it's just the iPad. They are backtracking on their decision to add a number suffix to the iPad in the first place. The iPhone and the iPad are exceptions to Apple's loosely-applied rule of avoiding version numbers on hardware. For instance, every new version of the iMac is simply called the new iMac. So now I'm guessing the next iPhone will not be "iPhone 5", but rather, "iPhone".

You forgot to mention that Valve will have its box for sale, and its form factor and default software will be tailor made for TV use. The UI will probably be centered around a game pad. So not only do you have the specs, you have a marketable product.

And to reinforce what you already said: To the non-technical, buying a gaming PC is tricky. Countless people have no doubt been burned whey they bought a $300 PC hoping it would play the latest games, only to be disappointed when their on-board video card turned everything into a slide show. Or maybe they listened to the salesman at Best Buy who convinced them that to really play games smoothly they were going to have to drop at least $1,500. So you could deal with all that mess, or you could spend $300 on an XBox and KNOW you're good to go. Valve knows that if buying a gaming PC were as easy as buying an XBox that they could potentially see a lot more customers.

With prolific obstacles come a proliferation of solutions. The availability of breathalyzer hacks will skyrocket.

...so it's easier to make it a difficult experience for the grab and go customer who just want to buy four of the laptop with a $5 markup and leave none for customers who might potentially want to buy other items to go with it.

That seems to be a common thread among failing businesses: They all have well-reasoned excuses to intentionally inconvenience their customers.

Mythbusters actually did an episode where they covered a car (much bigger than a golf ball, of course) in golfball-like dimples. Much to their surprise, it increased the gas mileage. Do you know how to explain that? You seem to know what you are talking about.

As much as I like Torchlight, it's not as good as D1 or D2, same team or not. The atmosphere, the weapons and spells, the music... none of it is quite as good. Still very good though.

I'm not understanding this post. Any time a movie is shown in 3D, there are 2D showings of the same movie right along side it.

On the other hand, religion has always been a big part of politics. This supposed "war on science" makes me laugh, partly because religion has probably never been *less* involved with politics than it is now, and partly because evangelicals commonly refer to the "war on Christianity". The world's out to get all of us! LOL.

It's like asking, "do you really need a computer?" Of course you don't. But its kind of an incomplete question. "Do you really need a smart phone to avoid becoming a homeless person?" No. "Do you really need a smart phone to fully understand how business and technology are evolving?" Maybe. But the degree to which is it useful depends on the user. Some people do a lot of real work on a smart phone. Others just kill time with it. Or both!

If you were a bit earlier to the party you could have paid $25 for unlimited text/data with 300 talk minutes from Virgin Mobile, with *no contract*. I used to think we had a great deal on our T-Mobile dumb phones at $50/mo for two lines ($60-$70 after the fees) with no texting or data. Now we spend $55 total for two smart phones, although we did have to invest $300 for the two phones (which are cheaper now, or can be purchased used). The price is up to $35 if you aren't grandfathered, but it's still a great deal.

You are right about not needing the features, but every time I send a guilt-free text, look up my next destination on a map, or catch a timely email I'm glad I didn't wait for, I definitely feel some appreciation for the thing.

(We're talking tech jobs right?) Wages fall, but so does the cost of the goods being manufactured; and if demand shrinks (for any reason, be that popularity or affordability), prices shrink along with it.

I really don't know what to think beyond that. I don't know enough about economics; I just wanted to point out that falling domestic demand isn't the whole story.

But with a wage rate plummeting like a stone, demand for goods is not far behind.

Domestic demand for goods, yes. International demand for goods, no. Those foreigners making more money are spending more too.