I always thought that the *maximum* was six degrees of separation between virtually everyone. Thus, an average would lower than six degrees...and any instances of more than six degrees would be in the minority, or outliers that may simply be because not everyone is accounted for.

Of course, this also depends on what your criteria for each degree of separation. Do you have to be just facebook friends, or should you actually have had some real physical contact (i.e., being the same room together), or verbal exchange with someone, or should there actually be a meaningful relationship that associates two people along each degree of separation? We've already seen articles in /. which that demonstrated that many people add friends to their lists without really knowing who they are or ever even interacting with them. To me, that doesn't count. Also...what about famous/popular people who have 'friends' that are really just 'fans'...does that get counted?

Using the methodology described, it's up to each person to decide who out of their list of friends is the next link is to a given 'target'...but that doesn't confirm that their association with the selected 'friend' is actually a valid social linkage (e.g., someone may pick the next linkage based on popularity, but without actually having any social ties with that person). You can make some assumptions to overcome this, and the results will be interesting...but I don't think this will be conclusive if conducted in the manner described.

I wonder how many people made similar comments when colour TV was first marketed?

It may surprise you to know that the majority of the world is not yet using 1080p monitors.

That said...nobody's forcing you to view every page fullscreen. Also, with a near-1080p monitor myself, I could care less if the screen is filled entirely from left-to-right. That actually reduces readability of most text.

Ever see a newspaper print its text all the way accross the page? No, they use many smaller columns to break-up the text. Since the website is not printed on paper, it's somewhat irrelevant if there's blank space on the sides.

Aside from all that...what the heck does this have to do with the release of 4.7?

The problem, as I understand it, is that in the US if you knowing do not exercise your copyright in one case that might be considered infringement, that sets a precedent of implicit approval for infringement by others.

So...if you give one guy a pass, you implicitly give everyone a pass, and that would be an argument used against you in future cases.

Clearly, the prop maker in this case won, and therefore has the right to make copies. However, Lucas and co. essentially had the obligation to exercise their ownership of the copyright until it was proven otherwise in this case.

Note: this is based on all the legal advice I've been getting from some guy named INAL.

Couldn't you just have said the formula (X/7)*10 to begin with, then state that it equals ~43% more?

If this requires a Java applet to run, then isn't the virtual PC essentially running in the Java runtime environment? Yeah, suppose you can do some stuff to make the browser interact with the VM and vice versa...but I don't think this really demonstrates anything special, other than demonstrating the ability to virtualize a WinXP machine in Java.

Of course, I haven't read the article...

I've been poking around in the features of G+. I have a feeling that it's going to win (unless FB changes) based solely on the greater amount of control it gives users over privacy, as well as the openness (which I'm assuming will come when an API is published) that will allow innovative integration of G+ into other applications/web services by third-party developers.

It looks pretty plain right now, but that's because I've only got a handful of contacts. The simple fact that I can decide who gets to see each post, and that I can easily move people in/out of multiple different 'circles' to facilitate this makes G+ much better IMO already. Yeah, FB has a similar concept through 'Friend lists', but it's just plain difficult to use. Ever wanted to share a comment, photo, etc. with just a handful of specific friends in FB? You simply can't...you have to create your lists first. In G+? You can do the same with circles, but you can also add individuals. When you end up with everyone you know in your list of contacts, and when social networking becomes the best way for you to keep in touch with people important to you on a regular basis (e.g., friends/family that you don't get to see very often), this ability becomes very important.

I believe only a number less than or equal to zero can satisfy that statement.

Because if a third-party site can use/hack the plugin, there's nothing prevent them from creating an innocent looking link/button that quietly loads the plugin without your knowledge...and with a bit of JavaScript/HTML manipulation, the webcam or mic could simply be loaded in the background.

If I recall correctly, Flash requires you to give permission to use webcams/mics (unless you configure it to be automatic). I'm not as sure about Java, or other plugins.

Yes, the fact that my webcam was used in the tool is not what surprised me...it was the fact there was no interaction beside clicking the first link that started it up.

Now that I realize it's the googletalk plugin, it makes a bit more sense. But if any HTML button/link can trigger the application without user confirmation, that's where I'd wonder if this plugin can only be used by Google's sites (I would suspect yes, but now I'm curious).

Turns out this is driven by the googletalk plugin, which I installed ages ago and never really touched since. False alarm I guess...although is there any way this could be hacked into somehow by a third-party website?

Thanks Adobe, but...fullscreen Flash is still completely unusable on my quad-core machine with 1gb dedicated video.

So what would be preventing the establishment of wave+wind farms? Assuming both occur in the same location...I imagine with a bit of coordination with the installation, you could harness both quite easily.

I imagine there will be locations that get lots of wind and fewer waves, or vice versa...in which case, it's good to have two techniques for harnessing the energy.

Are you talking to the people reading this, or the people that actually need the advice you're offering? I suspect those two groups are for the most part mutually exclusive.