Why did you not just give them access to the logfiles. Just setup a new apache on port 8080, do a few symlinks to bring the log files into the default html folder, update config to follow symlinks, add a .htaccess file and you are done. Should not take more then 20 minutes.

How exactly did you expect them to help you, if you are the only customer with problems, and you don't give them any access to your log files.

And it's time to change hosting provider if they really did the "bringing it down and poking around through my logs" part, because there is no reason to bring the server down to look at the log files. They could just copy them.

Yes switch providers and post them here so we know to avoid them.

Find a provider with a good uptime SLA (EC2 for example) that doesn't root you when they screw up.

Great point. I was over-focusing on the economic / hassle factor. You're correct that a potentially even greater impact is the fragmentation of our society based on profiles and stereotypes. I travel to Israel regularly where profiling (say - at a club or the airport) is a 100% accepted practice. Why - it works. The downside - a 2 tier society.

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."

The reason GM needed to get bailed out by the government is because they ignored the evidence of every other country on earth and presumed US gas prices would always stay the same.

Hehe.. if they had put that much thought into it I'd surprised. As late as the end of 2008, a GM spokesperson was still saying at a car show that the American consumer doesn't care about gas prices and that the SUV and big truck would continue to sell well. I don't know what his full reasoning was -- maybe he assumed that the people who bought very large trucks and SUVs *needed* those vehicles so would buy them regardless of gas prices -- but the short of it is that even when other manufacturers were at the very least hedging their bets about big trucks/SUVs by having one or two vehicles with better fuel efficiency (or at least not a big truck), GM was still barreling (haha) on with a 2002 mindset.

Video gaming in general could have used more prominence in TFA. After all, it's undoubtedly a part of the tech sector.

But not as widely relevant as computers, phones, or the internet. I'd guess those are all used by 99% of TFA's readers, and use of media such as TV and music are probably over 95%. Sure, games are popular, but not quite so universal. For example, the last console I owned was an Atari, and unless you count the couple apps I installed on my iPhone out of curiosity, the last video game I played was Riven.

Too bad!

Those children would fetch quite a price in New York City.

I have used Opera, and some Web sites still do not render properly

Never had a problem with Firefox , except websites that *Require* IE to work (and will work in nothing else)

It is -- nothing created in your lifetime will expire before the death of your universe.

My father-in-law ran into that, and had data blocked on his phones. Verizon is MUCH more reluctant to do this than AT&T was, but they'll still do it if you insist.

"If it's not cast it won't last"

Which version of Snow Leopard does all of that?

I've found it to be pretty good so far, on both my Mac and my wife's.

I've not heard of this other stuff. It sounds a little made-up, or at least cherry-picked.

At my college they solved that problem in the computer science and engineering building by making the entire front wall a dry erase board, from carpet to ceiling. :)

Most of the anti-AGW crowd is simply doing armchair, a-priori reasoning behind why AGW is false. "Humans are too puny to have an effect!" they say, or "The climate has changed drastically fast even without humanity being around!" Often there are political reasons for holding this position--certain arguments on how to deal with GW are certainly political in nature, and may come into conflict with one's own dogma, and thus psychologically one may be predisposed to oppose GW on that basis.

HOWEVER, that does not mean that some people that argue for AGW do not fit into the same shoes. Remember, just because you are "correct" does not mean your reasoning is. Naturally, someone that hates big business and "the man" may also psychologically have a reason to believe in AGW--another reason to rage on about the status quo.

If I was a betting man I'd bet for AGW, but really I know the science behind it is quite complicated and I know I'm nowhere near competent to make a good, solid argument on the matter, so I must approach the issue with a tempered agnosticism while leaning a bit towards the AGW side because that's the verdict by a vast majority of hard-working PhDs, and I highly doubt that climatologists consist of some dark, left-wing communist sect of economy-destroying conspirators. That is what true skepticism is, noncommitance (particularly emotionally) to a position particularly when you are not an expert on it. Many on both sides of the GW debate are not skeptics but reactionaries with their thought ruled by political underpinnings. Most of the people I know that rant about how AGW is a fraud no absolutely nothing about the mechanisms scientists go about acquiring the data on past climate conditions.

Why? Have you tried writing a dbus-aware program in C, and then in C#? There is a world of difference, in favor of the C# version.

But the problem has nothing to do with C#'s technical merits.

This irrational fear of all-things-Microsoft is out of control. There are good engineers at Microsoft, and some of them are even free software proponents.

The potential problem isn't the engineers, it's the lawyers.

Regardless all that, Mono is a GPL language, free in every sense.

No, it isn't. It's covered by patents.

The basic issue is: MS created a language, patented parts of it, but also said "We're not going to sue you for implementing this. Though we reserve the right to change our mind at any time". They also created a standard that might be safe, doesn't cover all that much, so most useful programs will go beyond that into the less certain patented territory.

You can write GPL/whatever licensed code all you want, if somebody has a patent on your algorithm that won't save you from the trouble.

That is the problem. It's not about C#'s technical merits, or MS's engineers' abilities, it's about what could possibly happen if MS decides to change their mind. And there's ample evidence of that getting involved with Microsoft too deeply is almost a guarantee for getting screwed.