Horses? You'll be hard-pressed to find a more finicky, vulnerable and easily damaged animal than a horse. One mortar shell in close vicinity and your supplies are on their way to Dagestan. If the horse does not bolt, it will founder instead, or eat something it shouldn't, or walk straight into something sharp, or break one of those matchstick legs, or... or... or... Better to carry the pack yourself.

Horses are not made for war. Neither are humans, but we happen to be so dumb as to go looking for it voluntarily - mostly. A horse would not do this if it were given a choice. I'd say let's respect the animal's choice, and therewith keep our own sanity.

There is another possibility here: pcAnywhere, being closed-source commercial software made by a vendor who is keen to sell as many copies to as many countries as possible, might contain one or more backdoors to enable Those_Who_Make_The_Rules (or those who pay enough) to access any pcAnywhere installation out there. These backdoors might not have changed since 2006, especially if they are based on some 'secret' certificate or another 'secret' sauce. With the source leaked, these secrets might not be so secret anymore - and might have not been so for the past 6 years. This being pcAnywhere, made by a commercial vendor who is keen to sell as much as possible while doing as little as possible, the fact that they knew the secret to be out there might not have bothered them all that much as long as it was not published in CEO magazine.
Is this tin foil territory? It might sound like it, until you contemplate what mobile communications vendors regularly do to get access to controlled markets.

This story about the Iranians 'spoofing GPS' sounds unlikely. Jamming, sure, that would be easy. Spoofing, not so. I'd say it is way more likely they intercepted the (relatively slow) drone and found a way to force it down (stall its engine by dousing it with water, throw a parachute at the air intake, whatever). It would not surprise me one bit if the thing just went down all by itself and was found by the Iranians. It is not like those defense contractors are know for delivering high quality materials after all...

Really? I watched several Republican Primary Debates

I thought you just said you watched Republican Primate Debates... it must be getting late on this side of the Atlantic...

Every time an autistic freetard calls millions of users "sheeple" I want to pull their tongue out of their body and strangle them to death with it.

Read your reaction again, please. Does it remind you of something? It does for me.

That reaction sounds very much like the type of reaction you'll encounter when 'offending' some religion. And isn't that more or less what those 'autistic freetards' you talk about claim about the'sheeple'?

I'd say your reaction is proof that the 'autistic freetard' is at least partly right in claiming that the 'sheeple' engage in more than just rational product comparison when they make their product choices.

Who says sidecar bikes 'aren't serious transportation'? I ride my (soviet-era) Ural all year round, through all weather. Roads are often unpaved here, but that does not stop me. The distances can be substantial, but that does not stop me either. Temperature varies from around 20-25ÂC summertime to -25ÂC winter. In winter we often have up to a meter of snow on the ground.

I live in Sweden. The bike weighs 350 kg unloaded. The Red Army chased the Germans back to Berlin on (the predecessors of) these things. Not serious transportation... not for you, maybe.

I'll give you the lack of crash protection - just don't crash the thing and you'll be fine. It is them silly cagers - that is people rolling around in four-wheeled cages - you have to look out for, they are the real hazard out there on the roads.

There is one thing I just don't get with the way Chrom{e|ium} and FF do their auto-updating thing: both browsers seem to assume that the user who runs the browser should have write rights to the browser binary. The way I install software (on Linux), normal users do not have write rights, only read and execute are available. Giving users write rights to their browser binaries makes it a lot easier to subvert those binaries, either through malicious 'updates' or by the action of some external program. I see no reason to change the way I install software to something which mimics the way software was (and probably still is...) handled on the majority of Windows installations. That means I have to use different means to update these browsers, but that seems like a small trade-off compared to the alternative as describe above.

It'd be nice not to have to move a window or resize a window, but if I don't do it, how's it going to get done? The computer doesn't know where I want to put that window, or how large I want to make it.

The computer might not know where you'd place a window, or to what size you'd resize it, true. What it can make a good guess at is where that window would be placed best, and what size would be appropriate for it. This is the way many tiling window managers (Xmonad, dwm, ratpoison, etc) work, and it *does* work for many applications. The more flexible tiling window managers (Xmonad being a prime example) can be made to adapt their window placement logic to most scenarios.

You *do* have to let go of the urge to be in control of every last detail of window management for these types of window manager to be effective. For comparison, look at the difference between a word processor like ${whatever}Office and a document processor like LyX. In the former, you are assumed to take control over the exact formatting of your document, while in the latter the program does most of the formatting for you. In most cases the document processor will be far more efficient and produce better formatting than the word processor, but there are situations where the word processor is preferable. The same goes for window management. Some tiling window managers (Xmonad being one of them) can actually be made to stack windows as well for those corner cases where you want more control over window placement. It is a handy option to have at hand, even if you'll find that you hardly ever use it.

Odd, isn't it? Some software works for some people, while the same software does anything but for others. Take Firefox as an example. I generally run the Minefield version, and it generally works fine. It hardly every crashes anymore - a marked change from a few years ago when running Mozilla betas was tiring at best.

Now take Chromium. It just does not work around here, on several computers by several manufactureres with several different distributions (Debian and some Ubuntu). Chromium will start rendering a page, stop, freeze, and finally give up. Time after time. On different user accounts. On different computers. Chromium is unusable here. Firefox works. It stays up as well, and keeps memory consumption within bounds:

user 26186 5.2 11.8 1297920 476064 ? Ssl Oct29 773:18 firefox-10.0a1
user 26260 3.4 1.2 336752 50584 ? SLl Oct29 507:32 /opt/APPfirefox/firefox/plugin-container /usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/libflashplayer.so -greomni /opt/APPfirefox/firefox/omni.jar 26186 true plugin

See? It has been up for 11 days, has been cycled from 1 tab to >50 tabs to 1 tab several times. The machine this version runs on has 4GB of memory and runs Debian Sid. Firefox uses about 470 MB, flash gobbles up another 50 MB. That's it. Flash is currently playing audio in the background.

This instance of Firefox has 16 active add-ons (plus another 16 disabled).

Given that most network assets registered under facebook and related domains resolve to 0.0.0.0 on my network, this would seem like a counterproductive strategy.

In other words, making your site dependent on the availability of a function offered by facebook is not a good business strategy - more of a lousy exit strategy. Oh well, answers.com belongs in the bin anyway.