I'm pretty sure that reproducing a government seal as part of a description of the relevant part of the government is the textbook definition of fair use. This isn't counterfeiting, impersonation, or any attempt to fool or misrepresent anyone. It is *helping* people learn to recognize the real FBI. Jeez....

As an advocate of the world's 273rd most influential and popular religion, I stenuously object to your exclusivist support for the "big eight." (Popularity != truth) && (popularity != legitimacy).

The benefits of not being able to see polarized screen content, plus the fashion sense of Drew Carey! A guaranteed winner.

Seriously, this looks like a weak rehash of Festinger's (1957) Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, only without the data or depth of study. People change their opinions to suit their convictions, and shown by Festinger's study of the reactions of doomsday cults' reactions to the fact the the world didn't end on the expected date (c.f., "When Propheshy Fails"). Really, what am I missing here?

Well, books are just 'tools.' Would you expect them to have any effect on education? If so, then why (or why not) computers?

Look, if you don't like the research, then criticize the methods, findings, or logic. What you've got above is just an ad hominem attack on social scientists.

Does anyone find it odd that the libertarian Tea Party candidate goes running for governement/federal/legal support when she runs into difficulty campaigning?

Leave = move assets to somewhere else. If was was Google, making what might possibly be a departure statement on April 10, I'd make sure that my critical assets were safe before, say, March 1. I don't want to donate my IP to the Chinese government (or any other, for that matter).

The real question to ponder is why they have to use tiles at all. This isn't monopoly, and it isn't rocket science to figure out if circle overlap or if a resource is within reach... Just thinking...

Actually, it's hard to say. The lower-priced e-books may have the effect of reducing the price of old dead-tree books. This is bad for publishers, at least until electronic books are the lion's share of the market.

The real question about market share is not Amazon vs. McMillan, it's paper vs. electrons.

Scaring the drivers is not a better idea than making cars safe enough to tolerate drivers' faults. It's just not.
Machines have to be usable.

Maybe, maybe not. Elasticity is not the same thing as softness... steel is pretty elastic, but you don't necessarily want a face full of it in a car wreck. OTOH, landing in a bed of inelastic potato chips wouldn't be particularly painful (though it would be itchy).

As a former manager and an "email direct-marketing" firm, I should point out that the spammers can increase the amount of complexity/variation in the templates by a wide variety of techniques, including rearranging paragraphs instead of just letters, making parts of the message optional, performing syntactic modifications of the included text,... Each new minor modification starts a research effort on the detecting side. The cost of detecting spam will rise much faster than the cost of generating spam.

If you try to outsmart the spammers with this, you will lose. Complexity favors the spammers.