Yes a couple people find themselves radically changed from when they were young and so obviously the study is totally bogus. Here's a thought, even if this study is true for 99% (well above what is scientifically needed for causation) of the population, the remaining 1% represents a huge number. By the way, introversion and physical activity levels was not a metric used in the study. The study doesn't mention anything about an introverted youth becoming an introverted adult... The attributes used were talkativeness, adaptability, impulsiveness and self-minimizing behavior. On the subject of impulsiveness:

The original article also doesn't state that it's impossible for a personality to change from a youth to an adult. It just states it's not very easy.

What would you expect from a Bureau who's gotten by the past 9 years on writing warrants on post-it notes...

I've taken to going to apple stores and queuing up the Friend Bar on all the macs near the genius bar. The average user wouldn't even notice a jailbroken iphone when they come in. I take pleasure in getting an average joe asking about the friend bar to apple employees.

What about the time honored NES ritual of taking the game out, blowing on the cartridge, putting the game back in, pushing down, raising the game, lowing it back in, power on, power off, raise, lower, raise lower, power on and IT WORKS!! That's an experience you just can't get on modern consoles... Or what bout save game codes and how you would have em scribbled all over your desk on scraps of paper making your parents wonder if you were paranoid schizophrenic... memories...

Two "Klingon Scholars" isn't that something of an oxymoron?

16 years is the maximum possible penalty that could be imposed on this guy by the judge if found guilty. Normally maximum penalties aren't imposed unless the circumstances in which the crime was committed was particularly appalling, or if the judge just wants to make an example.

Your analogy fails here because you can choose to build a larger bed. In some if not most cases you can't 'choose' to be a smaller or larger person. I'm 6'5" with a large frame. My IDEAL body weight is 220lb's. I didn't CHOOSE to be this large. In fact I would actually be happier if I were about 3-4" shorter. I can't choose to make myself shorter to lower my costs apart from lopping off body parts. I've learned in life is that the world, even in America, isn't designed for people taller than 6'2" and being tall is highly overrated. Everyone loves to say "hey fat people should have to pay more for tickets than I do because they chose to be fat so they should have to pay more for being fat". The simple truth though is just because your 260 lbs doesn't always mean your 'fat'.

If people like you had your way I'd have to pay more than I already do because nature decided hey your going to be tall enough to be a basketball player but not coordinated enough to be a successful one. It takes more food to sustain me, it takes more gas to push my ass around this world, and I get paid the same as anyone else. Sure the cost differential is small but it's still there, and it adds up. Do you think my boss would agree to pay me more than his other programmers because I'm taller than his other programmers?? I'm no fool. I know life isn't fair, but that doesn't mean I should make less money over the course of my life because I can reach the top shelf without a step ladder.

Besides, if you honestly think that the airlines would charge less if they started charging by pounds. Your a bigger fool than I am.

and just like the Doctor, Mel "NEEDS A WOMAN!!"

Hey!! I two was a CS major and I take a fence to that!!

Am I the only one who read the title and thought "Go go gadget eyes!"?

This isn't surprising. In a way advertisers and malware authors have a lot in common. They both want to have their ware's in places with the highest visibility, and they both want you to get something you may not want or need... As much as we all love to joke about how much porn there is on the internet I think we all realize there's more to it than just that.

Easy... You get the icon to always display 3-5 bars. Then everyone can go back to blaming AT&T's network for dropped calls, as usual...

You know 5 years ago I would have agreed with you... The problem is that the price we're paying for games is essentially the same that we were paying 10 years ago. The same price when you could develop a blockbuster title with 20 people. Nowadays triple-A titles require staffs at least 4-5 times larger than that. Production costs are exploding while the products finished price remains fairly fixed

Now I know, yes, more people are playing games today than there were 10 years ago, but it's not enough to offset increased production costs especially on the PC market. So either your choices these days are try to sell enough copies to make a profit (which is hard to do on the PC platform especially with a new IP and unproven game genre), or try to sell enough and subtly incorporate in game advertisement to shore up the shortfall.

You gotta remember, developers are people too. In most cases, they like putting adds in their creations as much as you like paying to see them.

There fixed that for you.

Without being able to track analytics, AdMob wouldn't be able to give away advertisement let alone charge for it. It's essentially a ban on Admob in everything but name.

When Apple couldn't get admob they picked up another mobile advertising firm. There's nothing to stop from them advertising on Android. Google already has a a successful mobile platform. They already get data on how users interact with advertisements on a smart phone platform. The only research benefit they would get from Apple Iphone analytics would be a larger data set. There's nothing stopping apple from obtaining the same data from Android that Apple is prohibiting Google to obtain from apple. In my honest opinion the data that Apple could obtain from analyzing Android adds would be MORE valuable since it would provide data from users across different networks using different ui's.

I do believe that this move by Apple is in fact anti-competitive and will provide Apple with an unfair advantage if Google doesn't follow Apple's example. Which I would believe is very unlikely.