Statistics show this to be the opposite. People with lower income (and thus having a lower tax burden) tend to reproduce more than those more well off. Moreover, people with a lower income are more likely to gamble away what little they have (high rollers are a minority). Online poker has lower buy-ins than brick and mortar card rooms, making it even more likely that lower income populations will play. I am a firm believer in personal responsibility, so I don't believe that online poker should be banned for this reason; however, it should be regulated to prevent money from funneling to unsavory endeavors (terrorism, human trafficking, etc.)

We're whalers on the moon,
We carry a harpoon,
For they ain't no whales
So we tell tall tales
And sing our whaling toon

Yes, but idiots are more likely to find value in worthless things. A computer is a useful tool; the more expensive the computer, the more use a particular individual will get out of it (though idiots also buy more expensive computers than they really need).

If someone tries to put it into a bill, then you can whine about censorship; until then, it's no different than you, me, or anyone else asking for the app to be pulled. I'll concede that they might have a bigger voice than the rest of us, but the burden still falls completely on Apple to heed or dismiss the request. Perceived authority is not the same as actual authority; both you and I have been around long enough to know this, and so have the people at Apple who will ultimately decide this app's fate.

noone knows how to spell any more.

The article fails to mention whether he initiated the voice mail recording for the specific purpose of recording his interaction with the police officer. If so, then the city might have a case (NH is an all party consent state). On the other hand, any competent judge should throw out a criminal case where the sole evidence was a snippet of conversation accidentally recorded from a cellphone. Intent still matters in this country... For now, anyway. IANALBIPOTGL (I Am Not a Lawyer, But I Pretended Once To Get Laid).

I couldn't agree more. Many don't realize how much computers run our lives, mostly because of how seldom they fail. On the other hand, most peoples' direct experience with computers are PC's running badly written software. The paranoia is understandable, but people need to realize that these are two different animals. A system designed for a specialized task running on standardized hardware is more reliable than any person on the best day of their life... Which is why we have anti-lock brakes on cars and autopilot on airplanes.

I'm not suggesting that an AI be given full, unchecked reign of the road (at least not right now, anyway), but a type of "smart" cruise control with a human backup wouldn't be a bad thing.

Do you trust student drivers with instructors in the passenger seat? At least in this case a capable, trained driver can take over at a moments notice. Being cautious isn't necessarily a bad thing, but there comes a point with every new technology where it has to be tested in the real world (or are suggesting that it never be allowed off the track? I can see it now: fully automated stock car races... And you thought NASCAR was boring before).

Do you have a driver's license? Have you ever declined to show it when asked? If so, you know it causes more trouble than it's worth. Not having one is even more of a hassle. It's great to have principles, but at the end of the day you have to pick your fights; it's easier to just comply and move on with your life. We no longer live in a society where people can be anonymous; Accept it and move on.

The details of our evolutionary line may be incomplete, but there is enough information to chart a rough lineage from the earliest organisms to modern man. As for Natural Selection, which is the scientifically accepted mechanism behind evolution, the evidence is overwhelming; humans have been controlling the evolution of plants, dogs, and other creatures through artificial selection for thousands of years. It's a very short mental step to infer Natural Selection from artificial.

As for the teachers fumbling over tough answers: that's an inadequacy in the education system, and perhaps a bit of hubris on the part of the teachers. It is okay for a teacher to say "I don't know the answer to your question, but I will find out and get back to you." Instead, we have educators who make up answers on the spot using incomplete or inaccurate knowledge (I once had a CS teacher who insisted that a page fault was something that happened when a program crashed), or who just don't care enough to formulate any sort of answer, leading to students who mistakenly believe that evolution isn't a complete science.

What about the children? Won't somebody please think of the children!?

Not sayin this guy used Ubuntu, but still....

I used to fight against apathy, but now I just don't care anymore.

The necrophiliacs.

It is what it is; geeks (for better or worse) may be responsible for creating the technology, but in an era dominated by computers even people who "have a life" need to have an basic awareness of computer security practices. The problem is that people are lazy, afraid of change, or just plain stubborn. Every new technology has a breaking in period, but computers have been in the home for over thirty years. It's time people get with the program.