I think we can safely say that a field filled with land mines is effectively "destroyed" for most practical purposes already.

You would think that would be the case, but then again, how long have Linux WoW players been asking for OpenGL mouse acceleration. They have it in the Mac version. One would think that the work has already been done, so what's the big deal with enabling it in the Windows version for us Wine users? I haven't played since December, but as far as I know it still isn't there.

I have several Mac using friends who are quite excited about Steam for OSX. It's very cool of Valve to do that, but the selection of games is very limited. I see no reason the situation on Linux should be any better. Indeed, it will likely be worse, as developers at least make an effort to target OSX.

Of course, Steam-Linux could integrate with Wine to support Windows only games, which would be very cool IMO.

Financially, yes that would be preferable. In terms of results, not so much.

Corporations can only be trusted to do one thing: maximize shareholder value. That means reducing costs and increasing profit margins. Publishing multiple versions of a textbook increases costs, and thus the publisher cannot be trusted to make the decision that is best for the students' education. Honestly, if there is one thing that we should have learned from the last two years, it's that corporations cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

FWIW, I am a Californian, and in general I think Yee is a jackass, but the only thing I can find fault with him on here is his claim that current textbooks are apolitical (though, to be fair, I think there has been an honest effort on the parts of authors and publishers).

I only call myself "conservative" because you took-away the word "liberal" and used it to describe communism, corporatism, and other top-down tyrannies/monarchies/oligarchies.

Say what?

OK, I can see "Communism" being liberal, but Corporatism? Sorry, but as a Republican, that one's all yours. The Republican party has been solidly Corporatist for decades. Reaganomics (aka "Trickle Down" or "Supply Side") is pure Corporatism, and is the cornerstone of Republican economic policy.

As for lumping in "other top-down tyrannies/monarchies/oligarchies," I'm afraid you've really gone off the deep end here. If you bother to listen to what liberals actually say (as opposed to the words Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh put in their mouths), I think you'll find that liberals are generally concerned with the welfare and liberty of of the people. Not just certain individuals, mind you, but all of the people. From that perspective, Socialism makes sense, but you display a serious ignorance of political reality when you conflate that with Communism. There are no significant American liberal pundits or politicians advocating Soviet-style Communism, as it goes against the fundamental liberal/progressive beliefs.

RE You're sig: I'd say Comp Sci, unless you're specifically interested in chip design. My impression of Comp Eng is that it's basically a faster way to get a CS/EE double major done, but you've already got half of that. CS will give you a wider knowledge base, and thus should open up more opportunities.

As far as I know you are required to have ID in California.

I want autonomous driving now. There are all kinds of things I would rather do for 2 hours a day than stare at the bumper of the guy in front of me. So what if it's not practical on surface streets right now? The small amount of surface street driving I do is not sucking away significant portions of my life.

Fixed that for you.

All of my friends from China, Vietnam, and Japan have said pretty much the same thing as the GP. Eastern schools are all about rote memorization, and any "analysis" pretty much has to be exactly what the teacher told you to say. It goes back to the civil service exams that were implemented in China over 2k years ago. I doubt India follows the Confucian system, and while I do know several Indians, I've never discussed education in their home country with any of them, so I'm not going to comment on how things are done there.

IR? So I have to have the controlling device within my field of view? What would be the point then? Just put your 8x8 pixel array on the controller and forget the contacts.

Try bluetooth. For that matter, with so few pixels, something like RFID might even work, especially if they can get passive pixels going.

The only argument I can think of to justify the money going to the state is that it might encourage government regulators to do a better job. There would certainly be more political pressure on them to do so, since it would potentially have a direct effect on the budget.

Yeah, I've seen a few that I like as well, I just happen to be in the wrong district to vote for them.

And yeah, I've heard that "lacks popular support" talking point bandied about by the Republicans plenty, but not where it comes from. The actual poll results I have heard show strong support for a public option and increased regulation of the insurance companies, and a general feeling that the current version, if it retains the mandatory coverage part, is essentially selling us all up the river. In other words, we don't like the concessions made for the obstructionist Republicans.

It's not that I dislike all politicians, just that I have dislike all the incumbents I've been able to vote for in the last 10 years or so since I implemented this policy. And note that my policy is that they have to have done something that has impressed me. I said nothing about that being canceled out by doing something I disagree with, and in fact I generally don't do that unless it's something I consider particularly egregious. My standards for voting for an incumbent are actually pretty low.

Essentially, it just boils down to them doing something that is actually good for the people, rather than to their personal/ideological advantage. So, I must conclude that more people adopting my tactic would, at least in theory, reward politicians who did the right thing, while promoting a high turnover rate for those who were in it for personal gain. Term limits would actually be counter-productive in that situation. Unfortunately, I can only say "in theory" since there isn't enough consensus on what the "right thing" is, and we have an entire industry of lobbyists, pundits, PR flaks, and media lapdogs devoted to convincing us to support policies that are actually to our (meaning the average citizen's) disadvantage.

In general, I advocate people actually voting their conscience. If a third party candidate better fits your ideals, you should vote for them, regardless of the fact that "they can't possibly win." Imagine the difference it would make in the American political landscape if everyone did that. And by the way, I do support reforms that would change how we vote and whom we vote for, such as instant runoff voting and redistricting methods that don't involve the politicians.

Yeah, I'd want that too, but I haven't voted for a single incumbent even under the low standards I've set, so it seems a bit silly to be any more picky than I already am.

It could be that they do know the difference, but their language doesn't discriminate between the two. Chinese astrology isn't anywhere near as much concerned with stars and planets as Western astrology is.