8 out of the top 10 largest PAC's fund Obama
Cite? I looked up http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php, and it looks like all the PACs give to both D and R. Of the top 10 in that list, 4 gave mostly to D's, 6 mostly to R's. Is there a different list you meant?
A system like this will be written by a team of programmers, some of them very experienced, backed up by quality assurance folks and thousands of hours of experience.
On the human side, you're only as safe as the least safe driver. Older people with slower reaction times and diminished sight, brand new drivers with only a few weeks of experience behind the wheel, intoxicated drivers, and the whole slew of distracted drivers out there on their cell phones. Stand at an intersection sometime and count the number of drivers using cell phones, it's horrifying.
I believe that people who think computers will never drive better than humans are today's version of people that thought a computer would never beat a grand master at chess. It may take awhile, but it will happen, believe it.
US companies want it both ways, though. They want to sell Windows to the US for one price, and to China for a different (lower) price. Right there, that's fine, but if a guy in China wants to sell his Windows copy to me for slightly more and make a profit on it, it's illegal.
Arbitrage is apparently fine when investors do it, but illegal when the rest of us want to balance out the crazy price differences that exist in the world right now.
The coal power plant is still more efficient than your tiny internal-combustion engine. Even with power losses from lines, etc, the electric car is still more efficient overall. So, that's present state.
For future state, if we had mostly electric cars for commuting, running to the store, etc, we could replace coal plants with wind turbines, for example, and suddenly our cars are green. If all cars are internal combustion engines, we're stuck with using oil, or using up valuable farmland to grow vegetation for bio-gas. Just because electric cars aren't 100% green right now, doesn't mean they're not better than what we have. We have to start somewhere.
Cable is getting real competition from Over the Air and streaming content. They know they have to offer something compelling to get me to stay. If they can get me the basic channels + all of the science channels that are hard to find on streaming for a reasonable cost, I'll stay. If they can't, then I might leave. OTA is free, and free almost always beats better.
You can bring matches, though. Go figure.
One book of safety (non-strike anywhere) matches are permitted as carry-on items, but all matches are prohibited in checked baggage
Is Wikipedia running out of disk space all of a sudden? Why do topics have to be "notable" to be included? One of the great things about Wikipedia originally was that it wasn't limited to a certain number of pages, so finally there were articles on topics that never could have been included in a paper encyclopedia. Why is it the standard that topics have to prove themselves "notable" or die, given that it angers people that spent time and effort adding information to Wikipedia and often removes topics that people were interested in reading about? In effect, it seems like the Wikipedia organization is working hard to make Wikipedia less useful to many potential users and actively pushing away potential contributors.
From your post it sounds like you have inside knowledge about Wikipedia, so if you can help me understand this, I would greatly appreciate it.
Adding features does not necessarily increase functionality -- it just makes the manuals thicker.