The brittle feel of the paper
... the tactile quality of the old covers and binding...
It also makes the magazines difficult to wet or use as toilet paper, and hence means they tend to last longer as reading material for the John.
Your argument is silly because it completely discounts cost of living.
I live in Boston, and rent is just one portion of your expenditure. Taxes, childcare, private schools, parking, and even your average restaurant bill are all significantly higher. This winter, I paid more to shovel after one storm in Boston than my friends did to have someone shovel all winter in Cleveland.
My salary would get me a middle class living in Boston or SFO, a lower middle class living in NYC, and an affluent upper middle class living in most of the midwest.
Blanket statements that anything about X makes you rich (or super rich) is plain ridiculous. Heck, I'm in NYC as I'm typing this and I'm pretty sure you'd get a shoebox for $1500.
Except that the argument wasn't really "potentially vulnerable to attack" is not the same as "compromised" (though it is certainly easy to see how one could come to that conclusion by ignoring the context---and maybe I am misinterpreting the parent, as well), the argument was that all (but only) SSL sessions using the newer versions of OpenSSL were/are vulnerable (i.e. compromised), and that by virtue of not every server in the world automatically being updated to these newer versions, the statement "every SSL session is compromised" was hyperbole.
One should also note that while the dictionary definition of "compromised" is essentially identical to "vulnerable," there are nuances of meaning in the way in which the two words are used. I would suspect that most people would regard something being "compromised" as more severe than something being "vulnerable." In fact, your example of science fiction seems to make my argument for me. You aren't really disagreeing with the parent, only nitpicking semantics (unless you really do believe that "every SSL session has been compromised," in which case there is a bigger problem with SSL than Heartbleed). If you are going to argue the point (viz: "compromised" and "vulnerable" are synonyms without distinction), why don't you explain what it means to "decimate" something, and how too many people seem to use the word incorrectly.
The Japanese government actually contracts for the production of certain handmade saw blades which couldn't be sold profitably so as to ensure that the skills for producing the saws will be taught and passed down to succeeding generations of saw makers.
I don't want to "weaken government", I want to weaken the federal government.
Acckhh! No true Scotsman would ever drink cherry... port...I mean... eat Walkers.... no Taytos... ; More Haggis Agatha, I'veana'other swoon kim 'pon mea.
But as long as the common livestock never catch wind of it they will happy continue to graze, chew their cud and pick on of the two "different" options presented for their approval every 4 years and things will continue as they have done for decades now.
People do not have much of a chance against a system which forces them to operate by its rules. The system is dysfunctional, a failure of process has occurred. It does not matter if people are engaged in politics, the "sheeple" you disdain, or apathetic cynics like yourself.
All efforts to change a dysfunctional system from within its own rules will fail miserably. Case in Point: Occupy, an abysmal failure of a movement, based on the absurd notion that the system can be changed from within or by asking politely. Frankly I think that's worse than being sheeple or apathetic as it legitimizes the corrupt at the reigns of power.
So lay off the general voting population. Change is really, really hard, and I don't see you proposing many solid alternatives.
Do they always jump in feet first with these new teaching methods or something? Don't they test it on a small control group or a dozen to make sure it's not the latest new-age garbage?
Teaching methods are almost never subjected to experimental verification. They are devised by 20-35 year old academics with little teaching experience and a desperate need to get enough publications to be put on tenure track. Experiments would get in the way of such promising careers.
Hey! Show some respect! Anyone who had to live through an attack of that magnitude, all while having to put up with both Micheal Bay shouting inane directions and Ben Affleck acting is a God Danm American hero and don't you forget it!
Management knew changing the part was akin to admitting the fault. The engineer did it on his own to save lives - company be damned.
And by betraying the sacred orders of management, and placing the safety and lives of fellow moochers above the right and holy profits due to his Executive betters, this man has betrayed the Almighty Market in word, deed, and heart, and his treachery must be uncovered, defamed, and justly punished as an example to all who would turn against the Word of Galt.
See you in the Club.
See, the problem with your example is that understanding a particular tech (i.e. Java, C#) != logical thinking. A lot of people are great at understanding how to integrate Spring and Hibernate and muck around with configurations, but suck at logical thinking. A lot of people are great at logical thinking and problem solving, but for the life of them can't (or won't) bother themselves with APIs and the like.
Hire someone who's studying "real" CS (i.e. lots of discrete math, graph theory, data structures etc), engineering, or the hard sciences (math, physics, chemistry etc) and you'll see that unless they studied at no-name college, they can easily solve logical problems.
On some level, I can't help but think that the article you linked to is full of shit. Or at the very least, a hyperbole.
Computer Science grads and PhDs cannot do basic loops and recursion? Yeah right. Unless they studied at University of Phoenix or DeVry, any school worth its salt will teach you math and computational logic for comp sci degrees.
Is it true for someone who's studied, say, literature, and wants to program? I can see that happening. But the legitimacy of the whole piece is affected when they make blanket statements that the majority of the comp sci grads can't or that people with master's and PhDs in comp sci cannot solve simple problems.
There's no data there other than anecdotes, and I'll dismiss it for the hyperblow that it probably is.
I chose $10 - $20 in apps, because it really depends on whether or not a new app captures my attention.
However, I spend much more than that on music and media. Like a song I heard on the radio? Shazam it and buy it. Does someone just remind you of a favorite album from your childhood? Buy it.
Our first baby was born just a few weeks ago, and lately, I've been buying lullabies, nursery rhymes, and similar music/apps.
Given how inexpensive apps are, I am boggled at how many people refuse to spend any money on them.