...

The first half of your second paragraph shows why it's a big deal. In order to make any sense out of the numbers we have to know how many people have owned slide out keyboards (not just physical keyboards in general) vs the total population, and we don't.

Neither of these answers the question of the viability of the market, so they are both equally poor choices if that is what you are looking for.

I can agree with this.

They are using the entire case as a heat sink, both the GPU and CPU are mounted directly to the top of the case. The foam is a gimmick, it would probably work just as well with fins.
This will likely make upgrades difficult/impossible.

The City of London is a semi-autonomous part of London which has special rules, and a separate government. https://www.google.com/url?sa=...

That's the +40 in the GP. Ernie only had 40 shares.

You seem to think that Pathfinder Society is Pathfinder. That's like saying the RPGA is D&D. Pathfinder as a system can be run any number of ways by any number of GMs, like many other RPGs. However, it may be that you've not met a Pathfinder GM that will run the game like a sandbox, which it sounds like you prefer.

Now, given your other comments, Pathfinder has a similar feel to 3.5 and 4th so you probably wouldn't like it on those grounds.

But the data was improperly restricted to people with experience with both slideout keyboards and virtual keyboards. You can't say anything about the general phone population with this restriction in place.

I am hoping that this drug does work. If it does, then because of U.S. drug patents it will be relatively expensive for the foreseeable future. It has the potential to be the next Viagra, a drug that has to be taken frequently and is very common. Which, would be a sincere reason to celebrate for the executives of the company that brought it to market, no conspiracy/craziness required.

Yes, but gold also fluctuates with respect to the CPI.
http://www.macrotrends.net/134...

Yes, there are many sayings about both corner cases and not fixing what isn't broken. Do you honestly think we can improve on a rate of 6-9's? Do you honestly believe the routine humiliation and violations are worth it?

How effective does it need to be for you? 1%, 10%, 90%? There aren't numbers on how effective the screening is, but there are numbers on flights and bombings (and that's all bombs, not just shoe bombs of which there was one). Roughly 0.00005% (about 10 in 19 million) of all flights (where part of the flight lands in the US) are at risk of bombing annually.

The linked source agrees with me, 50g would not be enough to do serious damage, you need to have 100g to do serious damage to a car, which (for explosives as opposed to impact) is not much stronger than an airplane fuselage. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/854...

Being required to check your own bag is OK. Although some of the searches bags are subject to is questionable, but that's a slightly different topic.

Shoe screening has never been acceptable, especially because it's ineffective.

If the measures were actually successful, the TSA should be tooting it's own horn. From what I can tell all of the bombing plots in the 2000s were avoided by either misfires or security measures in place since the mid 90s. Also 50g of PETN in a shoe bomb would have been ineffective even if it had detonated.

None of the regulations you cited are actually reasonable. The vanishingly small amount of security we gained is not worth the large amount of freedom we've given up for it.

Yes, but that peanut butter isn't cheap.

Sorry for the reply to myself, but that number conflicts with the estimate for the formation of the sun given in Wikipedia (4.567 billion years, but looking at the references that estimate seems to be indirect).