Sorry, I didn't realize the size of the explosives and intelligence of the attacker made the difference.

So, let me make sure I understand the nuances.

1. "Large explosives" on an airplane are terrorists. "Small explosives" are a bunch of goofs looking for a laugh, and nothing to worry about.
2. Failed bombers are "idiots" and successful bombers are "terrorists."

Richard Reid would approve of this new distinction. Let him loose and buy him a beer. "Sorry for the mistake, Dick. Try again next year."

Excuse me? A firecracker on an airplane is not a terrorist attack, no matter how much your government would like to claim it is and as much as your sensationalist news outlets want to say it is, it is not.

This. Even if this was some idiot sympathizer or a "useful idiot", Quaeda is getting mileage from this.

"Why do we hold Google to a higher standard?"

Because they keep telling us how holy they are and how we can become more holy too.

You are making 2 distinct statements. On the first, you seem to be wrong as evidenced by their actions. On the second, so what? Jealous much?

Bloggers have their place. They're not journalists in the traditional sense, but they're not useless either. Bloggers can spread disinformation if they are careless or malicious. But most often than not, they also have a reputation to uphold, and for those catered to a more educated crowd, they have to do just as much work as any traditional journalist to ensure their stories are accurate.

Bloggers differ from journalists in that their articles are always opinionated. They offer a biased view of the world, which makes them more attractive to the people who share the same biases. This is why they're so specialized. There's no blog for "everything" (not even a place like Fark) because there's a whole lot of everything and bloggers can't catch up. But the intense specialization is the value of blogs. Instead of having journalists who do journalism very well write about technology, law, foreign affairs, recipies, parenthood, etc., specialists in each respective field write about their field, and often for other like-minded people.

Ideally, blogs fit into the space between traditional journalism and trade journals. But traditional journalism is so desperate to jump on the blog bandwagon they've started to lose themselves.

From the description :"and either used or attempted to use Comcast service to use the Ares, BitTorrent, eDonkey, FastTrack or Gnutella P2P protocols at any time from April 1, 2006 to December 31, 2008;" Well, I think their $16 million just blew up. Since bittorrent is a P2P service, I'm sure any one who used bittorrent AT ALL "attempted to use Comcast service" to download something.

Personally, I think they should have to pay $16 to all of us.

I don't know, I rather like the part at Jabba's palace. The rest I don't think was as good as Empire but still good stuff. Speeder bikes, cooler Death Star battle, Jedi showdown... Maybe a bit unimaginative (another Death Star... Really?) but good times.

It is silly. And don't call me Shirley.

I may be wrong, but I can still say it :P
Ok, effective certainty.

Her predecessor had disappeared on a similar trip, probably killed by a shark. 'She was a hero,'

...

In a decade we think it will be commonplace to have roving fleets of these gliders making transoceanic trips.'

...

The platform isn't necessarily commercial-hostile, it just lacks the ease of access to commercial software and the install base to justify it.

Right now the n900 is crying out for better integration (google mail/contacts/calendar, push email, various online sharing services), better email software (it's a step backwards even from android), better text entry recognition (i miss Android's context sensitive capitalisation - such a simple thing, but on that form factor saves so much hassle), a suite of Office applications and a few other innovations that you take for granted with an Android device or iPhone.

So there's plenty of scope for selling superior software to a demanding userbase, and indeed providing that software would drive the userbase. It's a fantastic piece of hardware.

However, you're right, at the moment the application selection is inadequate. I just disagree that the platform is hostile to commercial software.

(Of course, I say that having never bought an app for my Android phone)

Get your facts straight. Two party systems are an outgrowth of a one-vote-per-voter system, the number of parties and voting system have nothing to do with the strength of democracy, and we don't even live in a democracy - it might be at best a 'representative democracy', but it is functionally more like a republic. None of that is my opinion, just poly-sci 101 and the math behind voting systems.

In a one-vote-per-voter system, a vote for a third party erodes support the the most closely aligned major party - thus all 3rd parties are necessarily fringe. Pick a different voting system, get a different result. Any of the more complicated voting systems have common results where 'compromise candidates' (i.e. middle ground) will win out. You don't just get the more moderate sounding candidate from the two extremes.

What does all of this have to do with music? Everything. The #1 selling song at Christmas is... just the most commonly purchased song. You vote with your wallet. You are not limited to one vote, or one song. If you cared, and had enough cash, you could make most any song the #1 selling song.

What happened here is that a minority of people like crappy pop, and they buy whatever the latest crappy pop is. The vast majority of the population buys music they actually like, but their 'votes' get diluted among all different genres of music. Most of the time, it doesn't matter, because good music and popularity are only slightly correlated, and may in fact be anti-correlated if you happen to dig the indie scene. Once per year, though, someone does a big press release about how crappy-pop-du-jour is outselling everything else. It may only account for a tiny fraction of total sales, but it is the #1 single. People got tired of it, and shouted it down, which they could do by picking a compromise - RATM.

Everyone who wanted *anything other* than crappy pop used one 'vote' on that song, and Bob's your uncle. That didn't change what else they went and bought - it just skewed the stats about #1 singles in an attempt to make certain advertisers STFU.

You can do that when buying music - the cost of one extra 'vote' is low enough that people who are pissed at Simon are happy to spend a bit to spike his wheel. You could do with voting for politicians, too - all you have to do is make it so that a compromise vote doesn't hurt your 'main party' candidate. Voila - 3rd parties start showing up with moderate views, the wackos still get left out of the final picture, and pretty soon, you get people voting on the merits of a candidate instead of their party affiliations and campaign promises you know they are going to break anyway. You'll still have a small number of dominate parties, but you'll have real 3rd, 4th and 5th options, and an overall decrease in cognitive dissonance among politicians.

And less crappy pop music. Or not, but one can hope.

The article states the size of the asteroid as 900 feet ... which is three American football fields ... $1.2 Billion in tax payer money is needed to study the discrepancy.

How is that even legal? He’s working for public research. The only reason he gets to decide things, is because the public allows him to do so, and pays everything around him, including himself.

Or am I wrong about this?

And the only reason they let him decide, is because he tells them the reasons and therefore is supposed to e trustworthy.

So Mr. Pickens, you better explain yourself, if you don’t want to get your ass kicked so hard, that you think you’re staked! ^^

Unless I’m seriously wrong about his obligations (and in that case, ignore this comment altogether), that’s just... I have no words anymore...