Everyone's entitled to their opinions.

(And I'll match my Unix credentials, including substantial work on POSIX standards, with anyone...)

Mod parent up insightful!

Win 8 provides no real reason to upgrade computers (as distinct from tablets). The compromises Microsoft did to make a single OS for both tablets and PCs result in products, particularly PCs, with serious problems. I think we'll see "Son of Win7", which may include a Win 8 skin/option.

Microsoft's big mistake this year was not continuing to sell both Win7 and Win8, pushing the latter but supporting the former for those who don't want/need the investment in hardware, in new Win8 applications or who don't care about converged laptop & tablet. Most people I know running Win7 are quite happy with it.

It's worth noting, too, that in my experience the number of "works only on Windows" applications from my company/our government customer is approaching zero. They're getting much smarter about ensuring apps run on Windows, MacOS X, iOS and Android, or more commonly provisioning applications as web apps particularly using HTML5. Flash isn't dead yet, but is rapidly being replaced as a delivery platform for anything other than video.

(Of course, I continue to be perfectly happy with my Mac -an outliner in my company-, running Windows XP under virtualization. I'll be looking for a Win7 OEM license in case my company deploys more Windows-only applications.)

Those with active moderator points agreed.

Mod parent up Insightful. I think he nailed it. (But what do I know? I'm a Mac guy...)

Deltek time and expense tracking software...

But it takes time and effort to write reviews, with more time required to write an unfavorable review (same holds true for peer review of articles, which is one reason why I declined the opportunity to review a journal article today...) A really good system would have some means to evaluate and weight well written reviews. (That's a characteristic that's probably missing from Slashdot's scoring criteria.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doc_Martin

And you visited these weapon sites in Iraq? You personally reviewed the evidence, including classified data and the associated assessments, not just from the US but also from the UK, France, etc? And your qualifications for evaluating WMD evidence are? Can you demonstrate your -contemporaneous- evaluation of this as "bullshit"?

At the time, there were clearly documented disagreements about the credibility of competing pieces of evidence; I remember the debates. I remember saying at the time that I thought we might be guilty of seeing what we wanted/expected to see. That's an error of analysis, it's not in any sense evidence of "fake information".

The idea that -Twitter- in particular could have provided a meaningful alternative is laughable. Establishing evidentiary arguments, evaluating competing sources, and providing meaningful analysis, all in 140 characters?

And the assertions about "an absent media" don't match my recollections from that time (and I was paying very close attention to the run-up.) There certainly should have been more discussion of what happens after Saddam falls, but the current trope of a delinquent media is as much about current political posturing as it is about an evaluation of what was known -at that time-.

Public Radio ran a piece today pointing out that apparently part of Saddam's focus was not on preventing/reacting to a US invasion, but rather deceiving the Iranians to prevent their continued attacks. Even from a long distance during the invasion, I remember hearing reports that any credible intelligence analyst/knowledgeable news reporter would have evaluated as potential signs of chemical warfare preparations (specifically, finding open bags for chem suites. They're sealed, once you open them the activated charcoal, etc, degrades.) Turns out the Iraqi forces were wearing chem suits for warmth, but we had no way of knowing that until after enough POW interrogations had occurred to establish the pattern.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Bergoglio
"As cardinal, Bergoglio was appointed to several administrative positions in the Roman Curia. He served on the Congregation of Clergy, Congregation of Divine Worship and Sacraments, Congregation of Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Congregation of Societies of Apostolic Life. Bergoglio became a member of the Commission on Latin American and the Family Council."

In that case, there should be a single (authoritative) registered phone number. This is something the Telcos need to work out, my sense is it needs to be implemented at the switch level.

I sent my Senator (Mark Warner (D) Virginia), who sits on the relevant committee, a constituent request asking if anything ever happened as a result of filing "Do Not Call" violations. They sent me a Privacy Act form (so they could query the registry using my personal data.)

And that was the end of it. I never heard back.

On a related note, I think the FCC should make Caller ID both required and un-forgeable. (An individual could still choose to not have his Caller ID revealed, and that would be indicated on your Caller ID display.)

iff the device you're using to copy supports reading the card at a faster speed! I've observed anecdotally, and read many reviews about the (usually poor) quality/speed of most 3rd party flash card readers. (Not an issue on my 2011 MacBook Pro, but it was a consideration using an external reader on my earlier MB Pro.)

There's no point buying a Class 10 card if your camera's write speed is no faster than Class 6. Unfortunately, though, some camera makers don't provide this information, or they make make it hard to find the write speed. Thus you may have to do some web research for your specific camera.

That being said, you'll never complain (after you have bought the card) if your card is faster than your camera.

As a side comment, I think it's better to have 2 16gb cards than a single 32gb card, purely from the perspective of "no single point of failure." My goal on vacation/shoots is to have at least one card unused at the end of the trip. (I learned the hard way what can go wrong when I ran out of cards, erased a card I thought was copied to my computer, and then discovered the backup program saw the erased card and said, "Oh, you didn't want that data after all!" No one to blame but myself for that operator headspace error.)

Windows used to provide a POSIX facade over its very much non-POSIX world, which is not the same thing as what I mentioned (where the POSIX interfaces are the default/actual system interfaces.)

And with respect to POSIX, there are specific means to determine "conformance" (the term used in the standard.) The word "Compliance" does not appear in the POSIX standards (ISO/IEC 9945.1) The Open Group now runs POSIX certifications, see http://get.posixcertified.ieee.org/docs/POSIX_Certification_Guide.html