How very true. Anyone who doesn't believe it's true, is obviously not married. =)

Certainly some sedans, but not all. Our family sedan (driven primarily by my wife) is quite stable at 100mph and much faster (SRT8 Charger). I would beg to differ with the opinion there's no issue with an unsafe-at-100mph turd bucket traveling 80mph. Well, I would agree IF there were never a reason to do anything but float down the freeway. But, that isn't always the case now is it? Things happen, that an aware and attentive driver must respond and react to. Would you rather be piloting a vehicle capable of safely and predictably executing an evasive maneuver, or one that ... can't, and becomes part of the wreck?

Cars that feel sketchy at a mere 100mph / 160kph have NO BUSINESS on today's freeways - in the USA or anywhere else in the modern world. People who feel uncomfortable or uncertain driving at those speeds also have no business on the freeway. 100mph/160kph is NOT THAT FAST, especially when in many areas of the country the average traffic flows between 70 and 80 mph.

There is a significant amount of kinetic energy a driver responsible for controlling - a vehicle that reaches its limitations at 80mph in my mind is still unsafe at 70, and still unsafe at 60. A sketchy driver is unsafe at any speed, and this is really the biggest problem and a whole other argument (too many people have driving privileges when they shouldn't).

I've been as high as 175mph in my American-built sports car on regular DOT street tires, and have absolutely no problem confidently placing the car exactly where I want it on the road. I'd crush any car that floats at a mere 100 mph.

I bought a brand new Pontiac G8 GT a couple years back. Not only did I leave the dealer lot without activating OnStar (much to the dismay of the salesman), I removed the module from the car as soon as I got home. Very easy to do, simply unplugged the antenna and electrical harnesses, and unclipped it from the rear deck. No tools needed, no side effects, and the only "feature" I lost was bluetooth integration (which I don't use) and obviously the OnStar "features" which I didn't want. When I traded the car in, I popped the module back in the car. No harm, no foul. I suspect not all GM vehicles make it this easy - especially from an accessibility standpoint. IMHO it would be welcomed, though. I have heard some vehicles pass the CAN bus THROUGH the module, rather than adding it as another module ON the bus. In this case, you'd have to jumper the harness, but still easy enough for any /.'er to accomplish I imagine.

I took that as "I'm trying to cover my butt, and my lawyers told me I can't win this one. Further, I understand it could be even more damaging to admit any guilt." Admittedly a bit of reading between the lines, but human nature isn't to come out and say "I goofed up, so I paid the guy." Look at how other entities handle cases that settle out of court. NOBODY ever offers an admission of guilt after the fact, and anything in print firmly states just that. A suit could probably offer a better explanation of the "why" on that one, perhaps it opens the door for future legal problems.

IANAL, but as others have mentioned, he's attempting to profit from a work he didn't create. That does not seem like it could ever fall under fair use. Just because one can make a 5 second tweak to an image in Photoshop, using the original work someone else created, doesn't make it a new piece of work. He should have contacted the photo copyright holder up front just like he did with the music copyright holders. There is a direct correlation between the modification of works, but for whatever reason he feels the images are free, but the music is not? Perhaps that is only because we have the MAFIAA/RIAA to "thank" by putting the punishments for such actions prominently in our minds with all their deplorable legal shotgun tactics.

Reading the article, he more or less lays out why he settled - he figured out he was indeed in the wrong. The Doors album cover recreated with Rubix cubes on a street is (to me) plainly a new work, while based on an existing work. Simply reducing the resolution of a work and using it for the same purpose (a commercial album cover), is (to me) obviously not a new work. The other examples given could be argued separately, and no info is given on whether rights or permission were sought in each case, etc.

Looking at my own life as a parent, I have yet to feel like I'm coping. Rather, I find myself looking forward to the next opportunity to spend with my family. Judging by their reactions when I walk through that door, they apparently suffer the same coping strategy as I do.

The "negative" moments are no more troubling than those elsewhere in life. Heck, a lot of those negatives are a great source of amusement for my wife and I, and they make for some absolutely adorable photos. Work issues have been much more of a chore than child rearing, and I feel my job is quite productive, in a nice laid back atmosphere. The net balance is FAR greater in the positive, than the negative for both work and family life. Maybe I'm coping... But damn if I don't have fun doing it.

The kids sleep fine, so I sleep as much as I want. I have plenty of free time, I just choose to spend it with friends AND family. Our children are active participants in our daily lives, not burdensome tethers. That may be the key for folks who think like you though, and again refers back to my original comment - if you're not ready, you're not ready. For those "adult" things you don't take your kids to (loud concerts, romantic evenings, etc) the kids LOVE spending the night/weekend with the grandparents.

Put simply, if you feel you screwed up your life and regret your choices, it doesn't mean everyone else did.

All I can say, is "they're doing it wrong." If a child doesn't increase your happiness, you either had the child at the wrong point in your life, you weren't prepared for the supposed negative aspects, you have spousal issues, etc. Sure, there's a lot of things that can drag a parent down that aren't the direct effect of the child him/herself. I've read the studies, they say parents THINK they're happier when in fact they're not? Sounds like the incoherent ramblings of someone with some pretty hefty baggage from their own youth.

Take one look at any proud parent beaming when their child marks another achievement. Take one look at any parent boasting about how their child is so smart because they accomplished some task at an early age. Take one look at any parent when they arrive home from work, and walk through the door to be greeting with tiny feet and open arms. Take a look at all the videos parents post on YouTube!

If anyone could think those parents aren't happy, I can't imagine what those folks think would improve a parent's happiness.

I certainly hope you're being facetious. Adding a toll system adds unnecessary infrastructure and maintenance costs, adds travel delay, burns more fuel for no good reason, and a ton of other problems. The public gets poorer, a ton of money gets burned up into thin air, and the few extra dollars off the top go everywhere but the original intent. See it all the time, down here we call it "the Harris County Toll Road Authority."