You're arguing against a straw man, I'm afraid, since we're largely on the same page, from what I can tell.

For instance, you're arguing that timezones should be specified, to which I completely agree. You've suggested as well that UTC should be used in cases such as these, and, once again, I strongly agree. Re-read my previous comment, and you should see that I provided no defense for the practice of omitting time zones.

Rather, what I did say was that I believed there were sufficient context clues available to determine what time zone was being used, despite it having not been explicitly stated. By no means am I defending the omission; I'm merely pointing out that despite the omission, a Slashdot reader should have still been capable of determining the time zone. I'm uncertain why anyone would disagree with that assessment, given that the context clues are plainly obvious.

And, on top of that, lots of products contain Tylenol without prominently listing it. It wouldn't be difficult at all to exceed the recommended dosage without noticing it.

All the astronauts combined managed to cover an area smaller than Manhattan Island. For anyone to declare that we know all about the moon is absurd, but that won't stop the anti-space nutters. They're convinced that we'll never get off this planet because there is absolutely nothing else in the entire Universe that could possible be of interest. I suspect that my ancestors' neighbors said something similar when they left the farm in Cornwall for the wilds of the Vermont frontier.

Why should we pay attention to celebrities on global warming? That's as stupid as believing vaccinations cause autism because of some celebrity. It doesn't matter whether the celebrity is saying something backed up scientifically or not, because I'm at least as competent at figuring things out as most celebrities.

I was enormously disappointed when Mir was deorbited. I always thought that it should have been boosted into a higher orbit and left as a museum, but I suspect that the Kremlin had more say in its ultimate fate than Baikonur did.

On average, we lose more of those who are less able.

If the ability you refer to is the ability to survive exposure to certain illnesses without vaccination, why is it worth developing? We've got that covered with the vaccines.

What is the benefit of evolution moving faster? What do you consider an "improved species"? Why should it matter if my immunity to certain diseases is inborn (perhaps at the cost of other things) or supplied externally?

If you're going to re-post someone else's extensive work, A) don't falsely suggest it's "a short list" when it's clearly an exhaustive list, and B) link to your source material so that the original author can get some recognition for their efforts, rather than implicitly claiming it as your own by not providing attribution.

Second, I never suggested he had failed to accomplish anything, though I can see why you might infer that from my post. To clarify, I was attacking the previous poster's notion that Obama was a "dreamer" of sufficient merit to be mentioned in the same breath with the Wright brothers and Woz. To me, that seems like a poor characterization, particularly given his recent track record (none of which is in your copypasta, since your post is outdated by a couple of years), most of which has demonstrated that he's simply more of the same as his predecessor.

What's well reasoned and defensible about it? It isn't just that there is no scientific proof of a link between vaccination and autism; the subject has been studied in detail and no link has been found. If there is some sort of correlation, it's really, really weak.

Thing is, where can I get better information? The US vaccination schedule was set by the CDC, meaning that quite a few doctors (who know a lot more than I do about medicine) who considered more factors than I can decided this was the best overall scheme. It may be near-optimal. It may not be. However, it is almost certainly better than listening to Jenny or going by my gut feeling.

I'm not blindly trusting, but if you've got a better idea I'm waiting to hear it.

The newest systems sold with XP are netbooks. I think production of netbooks with XP stopped around 2010, and that really isn't that long ago. So Microsoft can't support something five years after issuing the license and selling it?

No, not really. Honestly, I don't really care why you seem to dislike crowdsourcing so much. I'm not the person to defend it, as I neither use it nor contribute to other projects. It just seems like you have to consider the source of those projects very carefully - that's up to the individual contributors, but that seems like common sense to me.

You're essentially asking "Why aren't all games as good as the best ones ever made?" Is that something I can even answer? Why aren't all composers Mozart? Why aren't all directors Steven Spielberg?

80% of everything is crap, and that includes games. Of the 20% that isn't crap, only a small percentage will rise to the very top, and probably make everything else look bad by comparison, even though they're probably not.

Making games is harder than most gamers think, incidentally. To make a top-notch game, you need a fusion of talented programmers, game designers, artists, plus (and this is probably the rarest) enough financial backing and managerial foresight to see a project all the way through to it's true completion, not just when the contract says it's due. Incidentally, that's not the same as giving developers unlimited time and money, because that can bankrupt companies. To me, it's a miracle that as many high-quality games are released as there are, since I've seen how incredibly hard they are to make first-hand.

Lumping Obama in with Woz and the Wright brothers seems incredibly misguided. Lumping him in with the group making this car though? Probably appropriate.

Note that the deficit is going down, after some really terrible economic circumstances that made it pretty much impossible to reduce it. Also, "obamacare" by itself is not a reason to dislike anything. If you have quarrels with it, and its apparently successful signing up of millions of people, get specific.

That being said, you sound more like a Republican than a racist to me.

Are you saying this project can't get off the ground?