Politicians are part of the problem, thinking that we can legislate all sorts of things and put up road blocks to change. By making it difficult to get through the endless series of red tape, agencies and other petty dictators that just get in the way, government is the problem. This is what my (R) and (D) friends fail realize, as they keep voting for more government, then complaining about the results.

Typical Scenerio: X is a problem, we must do something, this is something therefore it must be done. It doesn't matter what the X is, nobody stops to think long enough to ask the question, why must we do anything to solve X. Perhaps X is just something we should live with, because the solution might just be worse than the problem.

Take the High Speed Rail system in California, nobody asked "what problem is this solving" because there are plenty of alternatives available (air, slow train, car). SO what does High Speed Rail system solve? I need to go from SF to LA, I can fly, or drive. HSR doesn't solve the problems of flight (still need to rent a car) nor solves the problem of speed, as it would probably take 1/2 the time of driving, and twice as long as flying. Does the Huge expense, we can hardly afford, really solving a problem? Or is it more of a "make work" project for the Unions. Or worse, a "feel good" project designed to illicit emotional response, to garner power among the elite ruling class. Yet, Gavin was a huge proponent of the HSR.

No, the best thing Government can do is simply get out of the way of normal business, and go after the bad guys who do wrong. One cannot stop bad things from happening, al we can do is punish those who are criminals.

And ... because you believe that, so must everyone else?

What gets me, is why have a bulky touch friendly device for data input, when a lighter one with connectivity where you need it, tied to a back end database is much easier and with HTML 5, easier to make compliant with multiple types of devices and OSes?

Touch UI is great for content viewing, but sucks for content creation. For data input, give me a keyboard and mouse, and a well designed UI. Touch is almost useless on anything like a normal desktop screen (14"), and content creation on small screens is painful.

" Every time you blinked you'd have to prove to yourself that the whole universe hadn't just been switched off and then instantaneously recreated itself."

I thought the universal sign of universe reset was Deja Vu.

Until we get some sort of faster than light mode of communication or travel, it is unlikely that we will find life outside of our solar system any time soon. And since E=MC2 is more or less accurate the top "speed" is C, we are not going to see any evidence of life outside of our galaxy. Thus we will only be able to "guess" that there is life outside our system(s) through statistical guestimations. The real problem is, that we cannot fully know how special (or not) we really are in the Universe. And that is unlikely to change anytime soon.

So people stating that they "believe" in Extra Terrestrial Life is exactly the same as believing in invisible man in the sky. Our testing capabilities are not sufficient to prove (or disprove) existence of EITHER kind of Invisible men in the sky.

Exactly what my point is. It isn't what was said, it was what was said will be misconstrued as fact at some point down the road. This kind of "reporting" reflects poorly on true "science". This is nothing more than Psuedo-Science at this point.

How do you test the hypothosis that there is such a thing like this "rodent" creature from a few hundred million years ago existed. Either you have a fossil you can point to that "might" be this creature, or you don't (which is THIS case).

This is the problem with untestable hypothosis being introduced as "science", and it is no different than trying to create a hypothosis to test against the idea of a diety. None. Except for the fact that it is "sciency".

Aaron Swartz kill himself, it wasn't a government that did it to him. If you can't stand the heat, don't go into the kitchen.

No, but it is designed to illicit recitation as fact later. In very short order, you will have "scientists" who state "All Mamals evolved from a single rodent" as a fact, and it will be place in Textbooks as a "fact" and so on. The fact that in the original source it is clearly hypothetical bullshit is irrelevant. Shit like this should NEVER be published as "science". It isn't "science" ... yet.

IS not scientific proof of anything. Often science is found where statistics fails. In other words ... Science is just as often found in the "that is odd" moments, that lie outside of what statistics suggest. Statistics is math, math is used in science, but math is not science. Math is just a tool.

Where is the proof that life exists elsewhere? This isn't about your bigotry towards people of faith, it is about the level of science required by Atheiests who believe in life outside our solar system demanding upon those of faith.

And if you want to use examples of how aweful SOME people of faith are towards their fellow man, I'll toss out Mao, Lenin, Stalin ..... people who kill MILLIONS in the name of the Atheist state. Of course those people killing in the name of atheistsm get a pass by you and excused as "not authentic atheists", which is the same arguement atheists reject when used by people like me who reject violence.

Let me be perfectly clear here. One does not have to treat their fellow man poorly simply because they are different, or because one disagrees with their moral choices. But hey, if you like to dehumanize people and that makes you feel better about your "non-scientific" evidence (math is not scientific proof), by all means keep believing in your fairy space people.

Other than one belief requires no proof, and the other doesn't either.

So, how does one scientifically justify wild ass guesses without any proof or evidence and call it science in your world?

And while you MAY be correct in that there is life elsewhere in the universe, it has never been observed or tested, making it not "science" but more "math". For all we know, the earth is unique in the Universe, and if it is, that would be pretty special, wouldn't it? You believe differently, and that is okay, but doesn't make it science.

Your browsing habits aren't a secret. You're telling each server you what you're browsing. As long as you browse the internet, it isn't really a secret. If you want to keep a secret, tell no one.

What you do at home IS your business. The internet is not your home. If you want to keep your "private life" private, then don't let it escape from the confines of your house, cave, or mom's basement. Viewing porn on the internet means someone knows you are watching porn, and if you don't want others to know, then you've already lost that battle.

If you want to watch porn, anonymously, then get a good disguise and go to the porn shop in the next couple towns over, pay cash and hope nobody recognizes you. Once that is done, watch it alone, and don't tell anyone.

Anything else, is sacrificing privacy for convenience. But that isn't nearly as satisfying as instant access by typing "Lesbian Whores" or "gay anal sex" into Google, is it?

"The universe is enormous, no doubt there's *someone* out there."

So, you believe in the "invisible man in the sky" too huh? ;)

No, but LastPass does!