Now I need this in the next James Bond or Mission Impossible movie. Our dashing hero shows up with all the latest high-tech spy gear, ready to hack into the mainframe (or whatever technobabble) only to be confronted with these archaic systems.

SW compatibility. The HVAC monitoring SW was probably written 15-20 years ago, and if it ain't broke, don't spend the money to fix it.

Also, a familiar user interface. When you send the HVAC tech out, everyone has a basic grasp of using Win 95/98. The old guys train the new guys, and the cycle perpetuates.

It's not the tech itself that poses a problem, it the people ("What a bunch of bastards.)

Tech is a force multiplier. It allows good people to do more good, and allows evil people to do more evil.

Exactly.

My wife and kid use my Netflix account (the freeloaders) because we all live in the same house.

That puts us right in line with the article. Three users, one account.

Aren't many college students living in dorms, frat/sorority houses, or other shared space?

Makes sense that one roommate would have the Netflix account, and they all could use it. Wouldn't even require simultaneous logins, if the player was in the shared living room.

One instance does not constitute data.

That said, I do think Nintendo screwed up by making a lightweight tablet console. Nintendo consoles and peripherals have always been built sturdy. I grew up with an NES and SNES; the console and controllers were drop-tested thoroughly and never missed a beat. There are legends of people dropping TVs (full sized old CRT monstrosities) on their N64, and the console shrugged it off. My gamecube got kicked and tossed around, and never suffered for it. The Wii-motes came with protective sleeves, not for their own protection but for yours.

The fact that this story about a single bent console seems even reasonable ... that's a problem. People have reported scratched screens, joycons getting stuck, and the dock itself is absolute garbage: a nickel's-worth of cheap hollow plastic.

Nintendo skimped on build quality here, and they're paying the price.

The trailers for upcoming movies I can forgive. Maybe it's just because they've been around so long that I'm used to them, or maybe it's because they're in theme with the movie I'm planning to watch. There's also the potential that they are new trailers, or reveal new info about something I'm genuinely interested to see. So I can forgive.

What I cannot forgive is the random other BS commercials that play beforehand. I don't want to hear about some TV special for 20 minutes, and I definitely don't want to hear someone blather on about sodas and snacks. If you need something to keep the plebs entertained while everyone finds their seats, put some trivia questions onscreen (just be sure to have enough so we're not cycling through the same 3 questions over and over) or just play some quiet music and let people actually interact with others.

My question is: At what point does global warming no longer become the impetus for switching to renewable energy. Even if burning fossil fuels didn't cause any harm to the environment (which of course it does, but that's not the point right now) they are a very temporary solution. There's only so much oil and coal in the ground, and we're going to run out at some point. Switching to renewable energy sources is simply the pragmatic option. The longer we wait, the more of an emergency it becomes when it does run out, and we're left with hundreds of coal fired plants with nothing to fire.

Plus it makes financial sense. For anyone in a sunny region, solar panels provide very good ROI. Not investing is throwing away money.

"Arctic Ice Loss driven by mankind, not just natural swings, says study with a better headline" Of course natural has always played a part; the existence of an ice age should pretty much wrap up that argument. Leading the headline with "caused by natural swings" seems duplicitous.

I haven't read through all 8000+ pages of the latest dump, but I couldn't find anything that outlined specific programs, plans or even intentions to use these tools on American citizens on American soil. Can we assume that someone will misuse the tools to spy on their ex? Probably. But that's just an assumption.

Until we have some evidence to prove otherwise, all we're left with is CIA doing CIA shit. They're a spy organization building spy tools. Color me shocked.

At what point do we stop praising companies for "going green," when switching to solar just makes financial sense?

The company will net profit from this investment. It also happens to be good for the environment, so hooray, but I'm willing to bet the former was the real reason for this.

It kinda feels like praising companies for cancelling their ritual kitten sacrifice. They might be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, or maybe kittens are just getting pricey, and then you've gotta steam clean the carpets because SOMEONE tracked blood everywhere...

The catch seems pretty obvious: bait and switch.

"Sign up now and you'll get access to These Great Games!!" A month later, those games are gone, but you can buy them individually to keep playing

This model works with Netflix: new movie or tv series shows up, I watch it, it goes away, I don't care. Games are a more perpetual experience: you play to get better (gear/skill) so you can play at a higher level, granting even more gear/skill so you can .... you get the idea. A month or two later, when the service takes that all away, you have an increased incentive to purchase the full game.

Also (not sure if this is a "catch," but) it drives multiplayer game purchases. If I own a full copy of Some Game, but my friend doesn't, this might allow us to play together. Once he gets invested, he's more likely to purchase the game, and all of its DLC

If Apple let you assign a separate fingerprint as a duress code, that would be easy to remember: middle finger.

They could even add an extra safety step: "duress code detected, enter pass code or phone will be wiped in 10... 9..."

That's kinda what I was getting at with the caveats. I wouldn't support a blanket warrant for every phone in the office (or some other arbitrary scope) in the same way that you wouldn't see a warrant to search every house in a city block. But if you have a specific warrant to get into someone's phone, and that person secured their phone with their fingerprints... then yeah, law enforcement should be allowed to execute that warrant

In that case, I side with the cops, as unpopular as that may be.

If there is a warrant issued for the contents of your phone, and you carry the keys around with you at all times, law enforcement should be allowed to use those keys, biometric or otherwise.

That said, I've got a few of caveats: This is by warrant only. Not at a routine traffic stop, border crossing, or similar. This shouldn't include any rubber-stamp FISA warrants, but that's a separate issue. It also shouldn't include warrants that broadly say "search everything," but rather one that specifically calls out phone or other electronic storage device. And finally, it does not extend to pins or passcodes. They can't make you remember something, but they CAN take a physical key and put it in/on a physical lock.

I would also extend this to say that you can't be forced to tell which finger you used, or what part of the finger... but now I'm just getting petty

Part of the reason I'm perfectly comfortable with this is that you don't HAVE to use a biometric key. It's an option. So you need to balance the ease of use for you against the ease of entry it grants law enforcement. Plus we already have a fail safe. Just turn off your phone. It will require the passcode (no fingerprints) upon reboot. Problem solved