I do a lot of travel in third world countries where theft risk is a big issue. I'm not sure if a long train ride in first world country qualifies for such paranoia but here's what I do:

1) Padlock all the metal zippers. Anything with in a compartment with a fabric zipper can not be secured. There is little point in securing a bag if someone can simply open a zipper and remove the good stuff. A lock is pointless if someone an simply cut the handle with a pocket knife.

2) String a cable lock through one or more padlocks and wrap it around an immovable object, like a seat leg. I use a cheap bicycle lock much like this one: http://www.campmor.com/outdoor/gear/Product___56711?cm_vc=PDPZ2 but there are plenty of options.

Security doesn't have to be perfect, just good enough that isn't worth the trouble or risk to the thief.

That said, there have been times when I would have liked something a proximity alarm: not so much for theft but so that I don't absent mindedly leave something behind.

I would say that this shows that people's priority filters work pretty well.

As popular as it is to put down chit-chat, the truth is that words spoken by real people that you actually interact with about things that actually happen are astoundingly more important for one to remember than well crafted prose from characters who never existed.

This goes to the core of why learning structured information is often so difficult. The brain's filters have not been trained to treat the information as important so it gets discarded along with all the other rubbish.

I tested it with a friend's email address. Her "real" email address is not visible but by searching for it, I can find her page.

Are you expecting C# to become less proprietary or Java to become more? And you are quite right to not trust Oracle. The worst thing to happen to Java was giving it to Oracle. Sun wasn't perfect but they meant well.

I didn't give them any phone number and the email address is only used for facebook.

Still, this is a pretty serious permissions flaw. Users that are not privileged to see information should not be able to search for it either.

Quite true, but it is difficult to distinguish the two prior to maturity. Normal 20 year old's are not perceptively aged either. They are in their prime. No parts of their bodies have noticeably declined. It would be much more instructive to check up this little girl when she is 30 or, better yet, 40.

Far less new brutal rulers, perhaps. But the risk is the same or worse for those who would rise up against existing brutal rulers.

Mostly, though, I think it will mean fewer despots. Despots stay in power partly through brutality but at least as much through controlling information. But no control is perfect and it becomes harder to stay in power when your entire population consists of people old enough to remember cases where you told them lies and they knew better.

There is no such thing as universal efficiency. A device/design is efficient if it uses less of whatever you desire to conserve. A rocket that is more mass efficient or more fuel efficient may not be cost efficient.

Why shut anything down? Granted, they may not be able to see much since the impact was on the night side but I don't see what harm there could be in keeping the camera rolling until it's explosive decommissioning.

Methinks TFA is complaining about a problem that doesn't actually exist. At least from the male perspective, online dating has a great deal of friction.

You can't just select a partner and immediately start dating them. You need to message them. It better be good or they don't respond. Actually, they probably won't respond even if it is good.

You need to do this over and over again until you get a response.

After you get a response, you need to carry about a conversion for a little while until you can arrange a first date. Most will stop replying before you reach that stage.

Only after you've met and your date hasn't stood you up or canceled at the last minute for no reason are you dating. Everything before that is just a headache.

The market has just as much friction as before. It has just moved from the finding to the getting part. It's like shopping online where there are many shops selling but hardly have stock and none will tell you one way or the other until after you've filled out a detailed order form.

Sweatshops are a tool. At Apple's direction, Foxconn builds nice products at manageable prices. For most other vendors, Foxconn builds cheap pieces of shit. I first heard about Foxconn (long before they became well know as Apple's factory) because they were the ones producing really awful motherboards for Dell.

True, but there is a world of difference in what you can plan if the interval is 20 years vs 2 years vs 2 months.

At two months, you are always selling, which is a whole job unto itself (often a hated one) on top of the "real" job.
At two years, you never forget about the selling but you don't have to deal with it all the time. Makes it hard to make long term commitments though.
At 20 years, long term commitments are pretty easy and you can actually forget about selling. This can be a problem when it actually ends.

A year and half in simulated mars mission where you know it is a simulation has to be worse. In a real Mars mission, the crew will be know their activities are important: for the excitement to be first on mars, for the knowledge that a serious screw up could them their lives. On a simulated mission, you're just guinea pigs. Staying motivated must very difficult.

So it isn't really about usage then.

Bash gets a lot of hits because it is a popular shell, not because so many people want to program in it.

C gets some lift because of so many C-like languages and C bindings used by people are not necessarily programming in C.

I think you missed the part about *12 years ago*. Would you be happy with a 12 year old cpu or 12 year old disk? Why should we be happy with screen resolution that haven't improved at all in 12 years?