As a teenager in the house might say tldr. But I have my theories on the rise of texting. Texting is cheaper than voice calls, while at the same time more portable than email. With the focus on "cheaper", I suspect most of those teenagers are using non-smart phones (perhaps feature phones but no iPhones or Androids) which would allow them to use more advanced communications methods (like IM or Facebook). Google and Apple still have their work cut out.

I'm probably not the first to note the similarity of the paper's title to that cliché about rock stars and their groupies. One has to wonder how much the authors were influenced by the Zeitgeist of the sixties, the so-called Flower Power era.

Still it makes for an interesting read that shows how much we already knew about space before Yuri Gagarin and John Glenn finally reached low earth orbit. Maybe a doped astronaut isn't such a bad idea, getting high in the high of space.

Well, compared to a year ago, social networks consume about the same amount of my time, which is none. Actually, I was looking for the following radio buttons:

[ ] I'm antisocial, you insensitive clod
[ ] Does Slashdot count?

There's a confusing reference to "containing malicious executables" in the first sentence of the summary, which appears to be a nearly direct quote of the first few paragraphs of the article itself. However, the emails only contain a "link" to the malware, which, of course, is less exciting news, since that's what some s(p/c)ammers already do. (To be sure, this is corrected in the second sentence which mentions the "messages contain a link" to the file.) This is a two-stage browser-based attack, which uses social engineering via email as its point of entry.

Incidentally, the link to the article is to a site hosted by a anti-virus vendor, rather than an independent security company. So take it all with a grain of salt or puff of powder.

Actually I kind of like the idea of a lawn mower that sucks. It makes for a cleaner garden after the blades of grass are cut. Vacuum mower, anyone?

Hey, editor! This is in the wrong section.

Jellyfish, strictly speaking, are software. (Unless you reinforce them with an exoskeleton.)

I see a double standard in the way you praise Facebook gaming while "dissing" open source games. First, you say that we should consider Facebook games as just as good as "real" games. On the other hand, you also say that "the state of open source games is not good." But for every popular Facebook game (e.g. Farmville, Mafia Wars), I can download dozens of FOSS games that are just as good or even better. So okay, maybe these FOSS games are just knockoffs of some commercial game. But aren't those Facebook games that you say are "fun to play" also knockoffs of, let's say, Sim City? Oh well, I'm logging off now and playing another round of Megaglest and Sauerbraten.

The technology's best application is probably in outer space, where we don't have to worry about wavelengths (since there's so much more sun out there). I can even envision its application as a possibly more compact plant substitute for the life support system of a long-duration space flight, say, to Mars.

When I skimmed the summary I thought it was gray goo time already. On closer reading, however, it appears that the molecules still need to be given a push to reassemble. The article doesn't answer the question of how much energy is needed to remove the surfactant.