I don't know. Just wait until have a generation of Brazilians speaking English and sounding like a Jewish grandmother. ;-)

It takes an engineer to make a scientist's work truly dangerous.

No. Do you see a "Jews and/or Muslims don't eat pork" subtext in all jokes involving bacon? Do you fret about the fact that orthodox Jews will never truly understand Jimmy Buffett's song "Cheeseburger in Paradise"?

I develop amateur radio hardware (shameless plug: http://www.mobilinkd.com/) and iOS devices are so locked down that my products do not work with them. Apple will not permit SPP/RFCOMM Bluetooth connections. All of my customers that use iOS also have an Android device. Many of them will stick with Android devices once they experience the features they have over Apple.

iPads may be experiencing a market decline, but tablets in general are not. Both my wife and I spend a lot of time on our tablets these days. They just happen to be Google Nexus 10s.

C'mon, fess up... do you work in the porn industry?

"auto" is there to reduce the typing -- that is all. Instead of writing MyContainer::const_iterator::value_type x = ... I can write auto x = ... because the compiler can deduce the correct type. It is not "too complex".

It is a convenience, like a "for loop" with a built-in iterator is there because requiring the programmer to write the boiler-plate required for a "for loop" with "do/while" is stupid. Your headline might as well read "C admits it is too complex with for() loop construct."

And C# is not collapsing under its own weight. Any programmer, no matter what language they program in, that is not using a modern, intelligent IDE is wasting time and money -- they are a hack (in the worst sense of the word) and not a professional.

Red dwarf stars cannot synthesize anything beyond He. They will never create Pb.

Take your fancy liberal arts trivia to some other site. We don't need your kind around here. This is "News for Nerds" -- history was an elective.

I am too. And I agree with Stevens that it needs to be changed. I don't think the Constitution should be ignored because parts of it are no longer useful or fashionable. It should not remain some relic of a bygone era. It should be a living document that enshrines how we have grown as a nation and as a people; how we as citizens want to live today and in the future. I think that is what the founding fathers would have expected of us.

This is not for a remote control. It's a simple slide latch for a radio battery. And the problem with the design is that the plastic it was made from was the same as the battery case, which is too brittle for the switch. A less brittle plastic such as ABS or HIPS would actually work better and last longer. Was a material scientist consulted when designing the battery? Doubtful.

Since you have no idea about the problem I am trying to solve, the "ignorant" comment seems misplaced. Will the solution be ideal? Certainly not. But it will be "good enough" and even "better than stock". Probably. I currently have six different types of material for my 3D printer, each with its own purpose. Is 3D printing a panacea? No. But there are real problems that it can solve today. And putting more of them in people's hands will encourage innovation in printing technologies and materials science. Hell, the materials available to work with today are way more versatile than the limited rapid prototyping materials available to me 20+ years ago.