Presumably you post anonymously because you don't truly believe your bullshit and have no wish to be associated with it in public.

There's an interesting tale behind the word "programme" and its use to describe television or radio shows.

When TV & radio listings were first printed regularly in the (London) Times in the 1930s, the listings were headed thus: "Television and Radio Programmes". But if you read news reports on the topic you'd see that "programme" was used in its traditional sense, i.e. this is a list of the programme of events. The individual shows they struggled to give a name to, as "show" or "series" hadn't gained wide usage (new technology after all).

But eventually that heading stuck and people interpreted it to mean "programmes" as in "a list of programmes on today". So programme gradually gained traction in the UK as the term for an individual edition of a show. Well into the 60s the Times was still heading its listings in the same way, and by then the term was in widespread use.

Of course in later years, the computer program would come into being, and as much of the theory and early development came from the USA, their spelling stuck when describing a set of instructions interpreted by a computer. That almost goes back to the original meaning of a distinct set of events addressed as a whole. But it means that in the UK we are now saddled with "program" to describe a set of computer instructions and "programme" to describe a single edition of a TV or radio show (and indeed a magazine sold at music concerts or sports events, or a set of individual events combined to make a programme).

I'm not sure but I don't think "program" is used heavily in the US to describe TV shows, and it's an interesting example of how new technology can change the use of long-established words, even in just one part of the English-speaking world.

They say tea contains caffeine and yet I can drink one before bed and not feel any effects of insomnia. The reverse is true if i drink coffee. Are there different types of caffeine or is there a lower concentration in tea?

They got the megaupload servers offline, with much publicity, even if the whole thing is overturned there's no way it's returning in its old form. I'm sure the US authorities are thinking, 'job done'.

These people are desperate and without work in their country except for criminal con tricks such as this so the most compassionate thing you could do is ignore them and continue to educate your community about the trap. Baiting them is only likely to maintain their interest in subsequent scams - 'after all I nearly scammed him there, maybe if I try again with different tactics it will work' - and possibly delays them getting a legitimate job so that they can put food in their children's mouths.

Why pay anyone? I press +1 minute on my remote three or four times, and ads are skipped. Do we really need to invent technology or pay humans to counter this very minor inconvenience?

I'm going to click that because I like your style.

bit.ly much? Is it reasonable that I check the outcome of every shortened URL for referrer data?

To this day you can see the effect on BBC News stories on the web - notice how the first 100 words give a summary of the entire story with additional information in the rest of the article. Obviously that's good, concise journalism but it's also done so that the first 100 words (or even the first sentence) can be lopped off and placed into a medium where space is limited.

Here's my biggest issue: in your country you are allowed to wander round with loaded, concealed guns and you are allowed to discharge them and kill people under certain circumstances.

Would you use a false name in the phone book too?

It makes sense from a kids perspective - much easier to hide a phone. Or just the sim - by day you insert the family sim, but by night...

I had to do a Google search and read a random blog post to find out how to add shapes to a picture in Gimp. This and its stupid name are some of the things which prevent mass adoption of such products. The response from the Gimp authors on the shape issue was according to the blog, "we don't think you need that function". This is a third reason why mass-market adoption is but a pipe dream.

I'm not sure what's more depressing - that this 6000 year joke is made EVERY time such a story appears on slashdot, or that it's modded +5 Funny EVERY time.

If your wish is to marginalise the religious then the best course of action is to just ignore them.

I agree it's a bizarre stance. It's a bit like saying I want all the benefits of being in the phone book, but I don't want to listed by my real name.

If you want to remain private, then don't join the club. Or would you prefer to eat your cake as well as have it?