I have a Lumia 928, and have already done a few repairs to keep it going. I can't stand Android or iOS, and for one time in its history, Microsoft got something like presenting a large amount of information almost ambiently.

I love the thing. I wish they had not abandoned it after flooding the market with cheap pointless phones, rather than present a decently priced flagship that worked well.

FreeBSD 9 to be exact.

I love me some FreeBSD.

This needs modded up.

Magnets?!?! How do they work!?!?

Mentally challenged groups of clowns need to know!

Where are all these people feeling bad for the crooks?

I see a lot of people feeling bad the tech wasn't there. A lot of people feeling bad that people were scammed out of their money. But not a lot of people weeping for the idiots that thought that if they faked it long enough, they would finally be able to deliver.

You might have missed the part where the San Francisco DA's office is suing the company for fruad, because that right there answers your question of "Who cares about the people who lost millions...".

The majority of people see the guys behind the Lily drone as either criminals, or so incompetent that they made themselves into criminals.

The guys are being sued for fraud. Most people agree these guys knew they had no capacity to honor their end of the deal. I just don't see this supposed sea of sympathy you are railing against.

I have re-read the Wired article to find where you are seeing what prompted you to say:

"But apparently we are supposed to feel bad for them and pay them on the head and tell them to keep up the good work, maybe next time it will go better.
Who cares about the people who lost millions.. After all.. The American dream!".

But it just isn't there. A lot of explanation on where the fucked up, not so much on how we should feel bad for them and let them off the hook.

Or is this just some tilting and windmills stuff? You see it, so it must be real?

I have a Lumia 928 with Windows Phone 8.1 and once it dies, I might not get another phone. Android and iOS are still clunky messes. For as much as Microsoft gets wrong, sometimes they get things right; and I think WP 8.1 on Nokia designed hardware was one of those moments.

No, some teachers at a different school sued. They were using the Berkeley videos as classes, but didn't want to pay to make the videos comply to the ADA.

No students were part of the lawsuit. Gallaudet University was trying to freeload, and they won.

Gallaudet University should have been sued for using the videos as their own classes without making them accessible.

You wold have known all this had you had any clue as to the details of the lawsuit.

The very witnesses called against Manning had to admit, under oath, that there was no evidence that anyone was outed or killed due to the actions Manning took.
The government spent millions investigating and came up with no evidence. How is it that you seem to have some secret knowledge about what 'really' happened? Where is your proof, and why have you been hiding it for the last 3 years?

You can believe whatever you want, but without evidence, it has no value.

We should strive to deal with facts and evidence, not just comfortably repeated lies.

Here is a link with actual information. It requires a bit of time to read, but isn't that a small price to pay to be able to have some idea of what you are talking about?
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/us-cant-connect-single-death-bradley-mannings-leaks/312643/

Please prove evidence that anyone died or had their cover blown due to Manning's actions.

Here is a link where the government actually admits that they cannot find any evidence that people died or had their covers blown by Manning's actions:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/31/59869.htm

If you make a claim, but cannot support that claim with evidence, then you have nothing but your opinion. It might be correct, but until you can show it is correct, it has no place in a conversation.

Here is another link where the witness against Manning admitted that there was no evidence that anyone died due to the actions of Manning:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/us-cant-connect-single-death-bradley-mannings-leaks/312643/

A lot of people believe that Manning put lives in danger. The agencies that are tasked with dealign with those lives said otherwise. They might think it 'could have' or 'might have' but when asked to provide evidence that it did, they all said they could find nothing that tied Manning's actions to any deaths. The one guy that the Taliban claimed to have killed because of the leak, his name wasn't in any of the materials Manning leaked, and appeared to be an example of the Taliban attributing a reason for a killing that was simply made up by the Taliban to try and embarrass the US.

But we agree on commutation rather than pardon. Manning and Snowden did actually do something illegal. I think it is fair that in Manning's case, time served is seen as an adequate punishment.

I have been on /. a while and don't see the problem with AC as it is now.

People will always find a way to game a system, and the effort to try and prevent that will only be used to silence others.

Leave it alone. The AC system works to allow people to post without any fear, and moderation and filters allow for people to only see it if they choose to.

You expand freedom, never reduce it. Forcing AC to register in some way is anti-free speech, no matter the good intentions behind it.

You keep bringing up the NSA and middle east bombing adventures as if other political 'isms' are in favor of such madness.

You assume that the rest of us are happy about it, and only people with your label have any principles or reservations at the hell hole we have created on this globe. At least that is how you sound.

The rest of us don't think a change in tax policies will fix anything. People are the problem and until we choose to stop murdering each other over stupid shit, or evils of the past, nothing you do will change anything other than the name of the philosophy that claims to have the cure for the problem.

But at least you are trying. Regardless of the end result, willingness to try something is better than the alternative.

No one is chasing you. If anyone were, then there would be this swath of libertarian promised land and the idea of 20k people agreeing to move to/invade a part of New Hampshire would be moot.

'Us' Liberals can condemn Israel and the Palestinians at the same time. Not sure what libertarian kool-aid you are drinking that makes the scale of the violence the thing that determines if the violence is good or bad, but I'm pretty sure it has less to do with libertarianism and more to do with your inability to defend your position without painting those that disagree with you as 'the real ISIS'.

This doesn't even touch on the historical fact that before Israel was dumped into the Middle East by Jew hating Europeans, there were already millions of people living in the land we now call Israel. And that it is the descendants of those people that are fighting Israel today, because Israel, backed by the people that hated the Jews as much as Nazi Germany (just never enough to try and kill them all), declared the land to belong to the Jews and started killing anyone that disagreed. And the US didn't need to chase them out, since we refused to allow them entry into the US, even after we knew that Germany was rounding them up and making them disappear. But you ignore these recorded facts because your rant doesn't work if people know the actual history.

So, maybe you should use fact and reason to make your case for why Liberals are wrong and leave the insane ramblings to people that have nothing but ignorance and hate to support their nonsensical delusions.

If you can. No one that has even an elementary understanding of 20th century history could ramble off the nonsense you did. Unless you are either intentionally lying, ignorant of recorded fact, or delusional. None of which make you ISIS I might add, just sad and pathetic and part of the problem you seem to blame on people that wear a label you do not like. It should be the genocide that angers you, not which genocidal cause is better at the actual evil of genocide.

Or, in the name of freedom and liberty, keep making an ass of yourself in public because you are so consumed by your hate of anyone that doesn't agree with you, that you feel the need to demonize and belittle them, rather than provide proof and fact that would make your case for you. No insane nonsense about being chased by the Liberal devils required.

People like you are what fires the public image of Libertarians being gun nuts wanting to build a compound out in the woods because they think hiding in the woods makes them any more free than the rest of us. It is an image that defames the people behind the Free State Project, and distracts any real conversation about if a more Libertarian society can or should exist. If you feel the need to demonize your enemies, there are countless groups you can go join that would be glad to give you a target for your madness. Please go find one and leave the adults alone so we can discuss the serious issues without distractions like you interrupting the conversation.

There is a difference between being angry and being mad. One can fuel determination and resolve to see a some injustice corrected. The other leads to madness.

Pick one.

Hear hear for the AC. This guy gets it.

My Logitech Cordless Optical Trackman. The singular failure of this device is that it is not Bluetooth, or Unifying receiver compatible.

You kids can keep your mice, forcing you to move your arm all over the place. I'll stick with my finger control.

You should learn to read more carefully.

Most of the people here talking about the 'interview' are talking about the last segment of the show where a person comes out and talks to Jon regarding something. Those are almost never edited, and as has been mentioned, when they are, they tell you to see the entire interview on the web site.

The 'guest interviews are edited to hell and back' that you keep parroting are in fact the bit segments where one of the show's corespondents go out and talk to someone. Those are so completely and obviously edited, It surprises me that you seem to think no one does.

I would argue that they are edited for comedic effect, especially when it is a guy saying that $2 an hour is a wage for interns and, in his own words, the 'mentally retarded', or a guy that has a state level job of representing a fetus in court, even though the state (my home state to be exact) doesn't provide the same level of representation for already born people, even though the Constitution suggest that everyone in a criminal case has the right to legal counsel. And oddly, the people that seem to complain the loudest are not ones that claim that TDS twisted their words into saying something they did not say, it is almost always people complaining because they didn't think TDS would air them saying that the only people willing to work for $2 an hour are interns and retarded people.

They are upset because their distractions were cut out of the bit and all that was left was a guy saying that people do no deserve to make a living by working. Unless the honestly believe that people can survive on $2 an hour?

One is the interview, the other is a bit carried out by the correspondents; not the same thing.

If you are going to disagree with someone, it would help if you were talking about the same damn thing. Doesn't mean you are wrong or right, just that you cannot talk about something with another person unless you actually talk about the same thing. Otherwise, it just makes it look like you are repeating a phrase because you have nothing substantive to offer in the conversation, or you are not aware that you are not talking about the same thing as the rest of the group.

Just saying.