You off a bit.

Used XBox 360 + Used accessories + a few Used games and/or some games checked out from the library for free = $100.

Your numbers on the Bike could be accurate though.

You obviously have never been poor and have never had to live off minimum wage. Most of what they are talking about in this article are the cheapest forms of entertainment that are available. Your own misconceptions of how much is spent on this stuff is blinding you.
Poor people don't buy fancy new HD TVs from Best Buy, they generally buy the coolest thing they can find at a Pawn shop or a Garage Sale, or some other second had place that may or may not be legitimate. It is quite possible to get nice stuff this way without spending even moderate sums of money on it. I know you probably think you are too good for it, but try walking into a Salvation Army some time and look around and see what the prices are, or maybe a Goodwill somewhere.
Once you've done that try comparing those prices to the cost of other forms of entertainment and see what you get. I'm sure you think that poor people should be limited to staring at the walls in the dark for a while while waiting for time to pass to go to bed for work the next day, since being able to pay the electric bill is probably "blowing your money on shit you don't need." Especially since poor people generally live in crappy apartments where the power bills are much higher due to inefficiency.

I think this explains it. "(Kaiser double counts time spent multitasking. If a child spends an hour simultaneously watching TV and surfing the Internet, the researchers counted two hours.)"

I commonly watch TV and play a video game at the same time, so if I do that for 3 hours, that would count as 6 hours here. If I wanted to spend a Saturday being lazy and say spent 10 hours doing that it would count as 20. That can have a big effect on averages. Not to mention when I was in school I would listen to the radio while studying so that would still count as time spent on media for this study, which seems a bit absurd considering I wouldn't call that "wasting time."

Pure luck is certainly part of it. Especially when you consider that not all countries set the age of consent at 18. It is quite possible to be out searching for proper porn and come across a foreign site containing a nude 17 year old; suddenly you are a pedo.

Blockbuster would be an excellent example. Completely ignoring the competition from Netflix until they were almost dead.

There was a kid a few years back that got suspended ore expelled for writing a story about zombies taking over the school. Therefore I can only conclude that you are a threat to national security.

I think there are a couple of things holding AR back right now. One is that I don't think object recognition is quite up to the task yet. I don't think we have good software yet that can see a picture of an everyday object and recognize what it is well enough to pull up information about it, and facial recognition still has a high amount of false positives.

Another issue will be privacy. If you think Google can track you now, wait until people start buying Google AR camera/display contacts and they can monitor everything you look at.

Brain hacking is a frightening thing.

I think that's how most of the successful hacks have been going in this contest. Someone finds a few vulnerabilities, hordes them until the contest, and then goes public with them.

I'm not sure that I like that, but I guess it gets some vulnerabilities fixed.

I'm impressed with your tenacity in attempting to explain something I would have expected to be easily understood by this community.

That means you have an old school keys. Modern keys have a Chip built into them, without which the car wont start. Even more modern "keys" are just an RFID chip or some such that you don't even take out of your pocket.

I think that is a perfectly valid response. I think there is nothing wrong with attempts at a new business model, and there is nothing wrong with people refusing to participate in it.
I suspect people like me are the majority. I almost never buy used games any more and I no longer sell my games. I used to but that only really works on Ebay or Craig's list since GameStop is such a ripoff (the used games there are only $5 less the new most of the time). I won't buy any games that are locked down for resale anyway because I don't like that model, but there may be a lot of people who are ok with that. It could be a successful model even if we hate it. Worst case we have to stop buying AAA game titles and stick with Indie games.
Maybe this change of business models will cause some of the Indie makers will grow into AAA producers with more reasonable expectations. Who knows, but I say let them try and, hopefully, fail.

Yes. I'm also surprised by how many vendors and developers don't know what ports they use.

I find it interesting how many enterprise software companies don't understand that. When we run scans against their software and tell them we need them to fix vulnerabilities it's amazing how often they come back with, "This product is designed to be used internally." Like that matters, if your company is bigger then 10 people you shouldn't be surprised to have internal users trying to hack your system.

I think you could simplify that by saying Communism. Eliminating property rights fits in there.