Soybeans are also yuk. It seems fitting that they'd be combined with roundup readyness.

Isn't that what you're supposed to do - type to mitigate some of the shoulder-surfing issue by making it that much more difficult for someone to notice where your fingers are.

The first couple seasons were far superior, but the original at least didn't get to the point of having a disappointing and non-sensical ending.

Kickstarter is terrible advertising, because their discovery interface is not well designed. I've literally never found anything on kickstarter I was interested in that I did not already know about from other sources (such as here...).

I've tried to find stuff on my own, but I don't have the time or inclination to drill into one of their overly broad categories and browse through everything. You can't even do an intersection of categories like music and <my town> which should be a pretty obvious one to make available.

The most prominent stuff you can find is also the stuff that is already past the funding date...

That's not unique to indie films. That's not even unique to films with the word, "star" in the title...

Also, you need to not have any friends who use facebook, or you'll get a "shadow account" created for you if you don't sign up....

If you were using bitcoins for everyday purchases, you could potentially have hundreds of transactions in which you would have "realized the value" that you would then need to calculate your taxes on.

If you buy a sandwich worth of bitcoin, and a month later you spend it to buy two sandwiches, have you not realized gains which the government will feel ought to be taxed?

Eh, even if he made up this usage case for discretizing, it's a reasonable interpretation of the word, especially given the context - take something that is continuous (say, the range of possible values a thing being measured) and transform it to something that is a series of discrete values (the actual measurement of that thing).

Communication happened in that post, and the use of the word in that context does not preclude its usage in other contexts with more precise meaning, so other communication was not prevented or limited by the connotations established. Does there need to be an issue over this?

That statement is true, but it fails to capture the real problem -

most people don't think that there is anything wrong with what the TSA is doing..

Perhaps they haven't read the constitution. Perhaps they have and think it's a reasonable tradeoff because 9/11 is such a powerful fear-button that they shut off rational examination of the issues in favor of rationalization.

I don't know the reason. I do know that I have yet to be able to convince one member of my extended family to even opt out of the rapey-scanners, and the argument I get back isn't that they're in a hurry. It's, "well, you gotta be safe." They think it makes them safe!

Those are the domain of state governments.

The role of the state governments does not justify the federal government. What does the federal government do for you?

There are a few things. Enough to justify its bloated budget... I'm not sure.

Does it really take surgery to fool, or does it just take a photocopied piece of paper held with the toner side away from the scanner?

Why do we even have "over drive" systems in digital displays? The signal is digital and has a specific pixel size, as does the screen. If those sizes match, why scale the signal to larger than the screen size for the dubious benefit of chopping off bits of it?

The tech specs for the range of motion are listed on the linked page. Tilt requires more force than rotation and moving around, probably because it would generally be set less and you want it to stay, but it is not difficult, and does not require un-screwing anything.

Some tragedy happens, perhaps a mass murder like newtown, and people who want power come out and seek to use it to control people who are scared.

Perhaps the first thing they try is to invoke a visceral response to some aspect of the tragedy, the tools used, for instance. "Let's ban guns," they say, then the tragedy wouldn't happen because the perpetrator wouldn't have the tools (conveniently ignoring the possibility that a different tool would be used...)

Some recognize this for what it is - a manipulative power grab by people who desire power, for what checks the power of a government better than a citizenry who can convincingly chose not to consent to be governed. But they can be manipulated as well. They might be tricked into bargaining for their rights, arguing for whittling down rights guaranteed by the first amendment to stave off encroachments on the second amendment. "Oh, it must be violent TV shows and video games that are the cause," they might say, and talk about "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater."

So, now we can't bring water bottles and have to take of our shoes and treated like criminals when we want to travel any great distance quickly and safely, and we're talking about regulating minor tweaks to magazine size (is 7 rounds really all that different from the typical 10-round magazine?), regulating video games and movies (are books next? newspapers? blogs?), and giving law enforcement carte blanche access to our medical records.

We shouldn't put up with any of this. Don't let the bullies divide us up into camps all arguing that this thing is important, so it's ok to concede this "less important" thing to keep it, playing us against each other for their own benefit. That path leads to the irrelevance of the rights supposedly guaranteed by the 9th, 10th, and 13th amendments...

Ironically, the answer is yes, in this specific example. The only situation I could find worse than every chain restaurant participating in the public embarrassment of their patrons by loudly singing a brief jingle is if every restaurant had the same awful song....