If you don't have anything informed to say, you could try saying nothing at all.

RTFA much? The coffin is not a mock funeral for the respective prime ministers, but rather for the 'death of science'.

I'm not Christian, but Take 6 is an unabashedly Christian group that also happens to be a very critically acclaimed (10 Grammys) and are pretty fantastic even to my sinful atheist ears: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kcg9OV8ZVuI&feature=related

So what's the difference between this and all the US air force bases that fly manned fighter aircraft? What? Did they think these drones just naturally fly without any training or practice? Not exactly a good idea to put an expensive drone into a war zone when it's being controlled by an unskilled/untrained operator. Must be a slow day in the news room.

But that would be a free market! Companies are notoriously terrified of such a concept.

Who said it's a toy? Considering the discussion it has fostered, the catcopter has certainly served a higher purpose than it would have had it just been stuck in the ground.

Clearly this time the best mouse trap has been built, unlike all the previous other times that someone built a better mouse trap. From what I've seen in our helpdesk, most of their job is fixing users' screw-ups, like spilling coffee on their devices, unjamming printers, user hardware provisioning, etc. Not much can be done to remove all that physical work.

From the article it seems their key argument is that depressed people are identified by inconsistent heavy Internet usage, as opposed to just heavy Internet usage. If this were applied to heavy Internet users that are also parents, have a steady job, own a home, etc, they would likely show up as depressed. In reality they can only be "heavy" Internet users when free time exists. Also, I wonder if the test is properly separating people who are depressed from those that are just introverts. Introversion != Depression. I would challenge that a lot of these people that are being categorized as depressed are actually just introverts trying to deal with the very extroverted college/university lifestyle. It takes a lot of energy for an introvert to deal with all those extroverted people, and a perfect way for them to unwind is to have some quiet time downloading, chatting, surfing, etc. Catching up on all those things that they feel they missed because they were feeling they must go out and be social. Once they've recharged they go back out and be social for a while. That could explain a lot.

It's a good point, but the platform itself is just getting started. I can't believe how many people have responded to, "I want a gadget that works as a traditional watch" with "Just get a watch." The Pebble is an open platform, so you can make it whatever you like, and while it's current form is a far cry from something you'd wear as a formal timepiece, it's not half bad looking.

How about some respect for a false dichotomy? Who says you can't own more than one watch? I'd wager that many folks who do own watches own more than one.

You can go nerdcore, as some below have pointed out, but there can be a medium. I love my Tag Heuer, it's a stylish and a quality timepiece, but it won't be too long (I dunno, 4 years?) before the two ends meet and the high end meets the unobtrusive technology. Case in point, you used to need a fucking nerd machine calc to graph shit on the go, now you can do it on your status symbol smart phone. The guy specifically says he's not specifically looking for jewelry, but the idea that high end tech isn't a part of the status symbol equation now a days is a little out of touch.

Oh, and it will have an open SDK so you can develop your own apps for it :)

Bluetooth e-paper watch with apps, talks to both Apple and Android. Made a splash on kickstarter earlier this month:

www.getpebble.com

You can't buy it now, but I have a hard time believing this isn't the future of watches, in terms of not needing to pull the phone out of your pocket, it can send just about anything to the watch, and you can use the watch to control your phone.

Republicans and Democrats do not like paying money to crooked bankers, cronies of local politicians, corrupt unions. (The inference that you think they do is amusing, since presumably these corrupt individuals couldn't possibly be Tea Party, and therefore would be Republicans and Democrats. Yet I wasn't aware that corrupt people like wasting their own money.) So sure, corrupt people steal money. The idea that Tea Party politicians would be systematically immune to wasting tax money is hilarious. Let us know when you find that magical stick that identifies how you achieve 100% tax base efficiency. All I hear is, "Bad tax bad! Good tax good!" Your local essential services waste tax dollars just as well as the bankers (although obviously not at the same scale.) When I say I'm willing to put up with a certain amount of wastage to support single payer health care, you say you are not. But the notion that any one system is inherently less prone than another abuse is naive and a prime example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

You're pedantically sorta right except that it's completely impractical. If you don't want to pay taxes, you get to give up your right to private property, since presumably, you would accept that you're on your own in protecting it. Okay, fine. Propose to me a system where by the police do not respond to a theft in progress before checking to see if said property belongs to somebody who has pre-emptively given up their right to private property.

Here's a clue: a right is a man made thing. Nobody has any rights. At all. But they do have 'rights' as defined by law. If you arn't going to pay for the enforcement of those rights, under the pretense that it doesn't waste any of your neighbours tax contributions (you're free to argue that, but you are simply in the historical wrong) them, guess what, we're gunna come over with a bunch of thugs, and threaten to put you in the jails we pay for, unless you /help/ pay for the practical solution of the general will of society.

You couldn't be an island even if you tried. In the above scenario, you'd probably gang up with some folks so that you all shared the responsibility of protecting each others' properties. Okay, cool, how are you gunna fund that responsibility? You'd pool some resources together, and bang - guess what, now you're trying to claim sovereignty. So just do it and see how far it gets you. I'm prepared to call the government 'a bunch of people who put people in jail if you don't pay the 1000$'.

as for "with a demand you stop smoking pot, a demand you stop drinking milk from a cow, or your stereo is 'too loud' and you tell the cops they need a warrant before coming on your property"

This is not a just world. This is not a meritocracy. Stop acting like a big baby, and work to change the system. You don't get to declare the extent of your involvement with other people on your own terms alone. It's a physical impossibility.