Matter more than an attempt to dictate good spending habits. The credit card companies fear blow back from the price of the bitcoin moving significantly during the time it takes to formalize the transaction, which on bitcoin can be several 10s of minutes.

We have two switches around my house, and both are well used. While it's not mobile the way a 3ds is, it's fabulous for long car or airplane rides or situations where a kid is stuck waiting a long time for a parent. It has also been useful for easy, instant Mario Kart competitions.

I think the mobile nature of it could add a lot of sales to families like mine with more than one kid in the right demographic. Some really fantastic network play has broken out in the backseat of our family car.

I don't understand the outrage over Netflix changing the terms of the deal. Let's face it, this happens all the time. Sometimes it's good for a given customer, sometimes it's bad. Businesses that stand still don't survive. In this case you get your disk a little slower in some cases. Previously, they added a bunch of original content (Orange Is the New Black anyone?).

When the deal changes in such a way you don't think you are getting your money's worth, don't buy it anymore

Do they accept payment in Bitcoins?

It's easy enough to compare. It was not my last degree in sciences (others not at BYU), and I work in the field. Even during my undergraduate at BYU I had friends at several other significant universities, including MIT and Princeton. I took time off to spend a few week with each attending classes. I'm not looking at this from an isolated perspective.

I suppose this depends on a number of things, and perhaps in the end you may be right. But at the moment there really isn't a clear conflict; the conflict is more manufactured than real, especially if you see religion as a road to life happiness and not an explanation of all things. I admit that there is a certain about of dealing with ambiguity that is required. Frankly, I tend to be much more of an agnostic or a deist than your average Christian. I tend to believe that my life is mine to live, there is such a thing as a good way to live life from a happiness perspective, and my religion provides some guidance along those lines, but ultimately I have to figure it out for my own life

So far as science is concerned I tend to think that we are very, very far from a complete understanding of the universe. There are so many things that we simply don't understand that I don't worry too much about conflict between the possibility of the existence of a God and what science is telling me. The evidence is what it is, we build theories to understand and predict it, and we use those to move forward, but I don't kid myself thinking that we have a complete understanding of the world around us. We will be working for a long time yet to get there.

You could make an excellent argument you can only be clear minded about science or religion. That is to say, if your world is evidence based but you are willing to work with things where there is no evidence I think you can still be a clear minded scientist. On the other hand if you put assertions without evidence in the first place and try to work science around it you're going to have problems.

If the religion is really real, the first approach will leave the two in agreement in the end, but if it is not true you aren't really in a bad place when you can see the whole picture. If you adopt the other approach inevitably you will end up with some kind of conflict that just doesn't leave room for thinking.

Yea, I expect if you signed up for biology you tended to get over that pretty quick, or generally dislike your life. It's easier to have an irrational viewpoint about science as an English major where you don't have to face it to function each day.

I understand why it might be tempting to put BYU in a basket along with the rest of the evangelical christian universities. However, on the issue of evolution it could not be more different. I graduated from there with a degree in microbiology and my college at least evolution was the coin of the realm, just like it is in any serious biology department. I did not have a single professor that did not see evolution as you might expect a biologist to see it; as the only serious explanation of the data at hand, the only theory that works with what we know and provides valid predictions of future results. Not once did I hear even the smallest bit of credibility being given to creationism or its various variants (intelligent design, etc).

And yes, my professors were all Mormons. You might ask yourself how they square this. It turns out that while there are certainly Mormons that take a very literal reading of the bible on this issue, that is not the official church position, and there are many members that don't see it that way at all. Basically I had several professors that explained it as religion was about how to live life, science was about how life works, and we really have no idea how the two come together. The bible, while providing a lot of information to believers on a moral life, provides no real information on how the world works in any of the scientific fields.

Interestingly, many believe this is on purpose, that God has no interest in proving his existence; it's a matter of faith for a reason. Because of this He stays out of offering scientific explanations. I realize that sounds distinctly like a cope-out, but frankly it leads to a fairly rational place where you can function as a scientist an still be a Mormon. And by function I don't mean some half-way hands over eyes sort of a way, but in a real, go where the evidence takes you sort of a way.

Take it for what it's worth, but that was my experience

Funding or otherwise supporting a religion is understood to fall under the establishment clause. So when you fund something, or let it use your property, or otherwise enable it you are establishing it. The issues with this particular school is that it is publicly funded. There are many, many private, religious schools out there that teach all kinds of viewpoints including creationism that comply with one or more religious traditions. These are not in question, it is only the ones being funded by the government that are being looked at askance. If you choose to go against any number of supreme court decisions and take a very narrow view of the meaning of the word establishment to be a strict synonym with found or start it would allow the government to effectively promote a state religion by sending it unlimited funds. BTW, when you are reading about similar issues you will see the 'establishment clause' referenced. This is what they are talking about, saying that whatever the government is doing is supporting, funding, or otherwise establishing a religion in violation of the constitution.

Well, I often end up doing corporate in house sites where the capabilities of every machine that will access the site are known. In these kinds of cases the fallback case become much less important. I agree with your point, however, for public sites.

Thanks, I'll take a look

I would love to know if this can be made to work with WebGL. There are so many possibilities in web applications for really nice font management.