I keep wondering how Linux could become as good as it is, with a coordinator being a person like Torvalds. How many capable developers would put up with a boss like that in their day job? Yet they do working for Torvalds in their spare time...

..., if anything, is that now, UNDER CAPITALISM, a number of people who became socialized under state-socialism were more likely to lie for personal gain than a number of people who became socialized under capitalism. And there are good reasons imaginable for that behaviour which are not suffciently honoured by the featherbrained reduction to "they cheat more".

That those less usable tablets have had "some success in Brazil, China, and Japan"? Do you hate the Brazilians, the Chinese, the Japanese?

And I might, perhaps, consider it.

Even if "no DRM" ought to be in the list, too, but I wouldn't demand that from Amazon.

Is that why more and more camera manufacturers, while sensor resolution becomes higher and higher, find anti-aliasing filters unnecessary?

Never used Google Reader in the first place. At home, I've always been using a combination of other options to read feeds, mainly a self-written feed gatherer, and at work, where I used the now equally deceased iGoogle, I've simply switched to ighome.com.

Guess the percentage of currently existing and valid borders that weren't.

And while the Crimea case may be dubious according to international law, it is utter hypocrisy to insist upon that only when it happens in a part of the former Soviet Union and, this time, serves Russia, while Western countries fell all over themselves when it came to accepting the self-proclaimed status for each and every former Yugoslavian region, ripening it for all the economical exploitation by Western capital which was about to happen.

Mary-Ann Russon, Technology Reporter for the International Business Times UK, believes in them, while both don't exactly exist.

... there's something else that might. It's the ever-increasing percentage of functionality we implement through choosing, including, configuring and glueing together existing frameworks and libraries.

If it'd still reliably run on 64-bit systems, my suggestion would be to try and get a copy of StarOffice 5.2, the ancestor. No version of OpenOffice[.org] or LibreOffice has met my demands as well yet. Unfortunately, it doesn't. So what I'm doing today is running StarOffice 5.2 on 32-bit systems, like my netbook, and OpenOffice 3.3 on 64-bit systems, which is the latest of the StarOffice descendants still capable of saving documents in StarOffice 5 compatible format. (StarOffice 5 binary formats are still fully readable with current versions of OpenOffice and LibreOffice, for that matter.)

There is a working trick, and it works because the real eruption needs slightly longer than one microsecond (remember, TFA said it's one microsecond until the first bubble implodes, and one bubble doesn't make an eruption yet): as fast as you can, grab the bottle, put it to your mouth, and drink! Many years ago, there was a time I was quite good at it... It doesn't even need much training, only a minimum of alertness and quick response. Which, of course, deteriorates with the amount of beer you've already drunk...

"Why are illegal immigrants being called undocumented?" Because, if to use correct language is more than just a pretense for anti-humanist, misanthropic political propaganda, there is no such thing as an illegal person, which is what the term illegal immigrant amounts to. There may be an offense called illegal immigration, but that doesn't make the offending person any more illegal than theft, speeding or tax fraud.

Yeah, and a perhaps even more adequate analogy would seem to be the 'garbage collection'...

That's how internet presentations of election results ARE developed and tested: with current data as far as possible, meaning of course current candidates, too, but with old results. Many years ago, I could get an inside look into the internals of the web presentation software for certain elections within a European country, and that's just how it was done. If they would have accidentally put the test results online, that's what it would have looked there, too. (Perhaps people should form a habit of testing elections using extremely improbable made-up test data...)

"Both" in that sentence refers to Bernoulli and Laplace, not Weber, which is why it doesn't say "Bernoulli, Laplace and Weber" and "the three of them".