I've been typing nearly my entire life. Spelling is not, and has never been a challenge to me. I can not recognize any association between my typing, my handwriting, and my spelling abilities. I almost never write by hand. The only side effect of this that I can tell is that my handwriting is either slow, or ugly, but the spelling still comes naturally.

Perhaps you have another problem...

Clearly this is the result of increased efforts to curb money laundering.

Marriage is like a static group in any RPG. The same basic facts apply.

1. You need goals to achieve anything. You need to achieve things to be happy. If one or more of your group is unhappy, the result will inevitably be dissolution of the group. Set goals early, set them often.

2. Whenever undertaking any task it is important to understand each group member's role. Though not strictly necessary, it is good to have a leadership position to orchestrate any support roles. This position may be shifted around the group based on whatever the scenario requires.

3. Eventually you will reach conflict, it's inevitable. Practice care in participating in conflicts. Attempt to understand all party's grievances and complaints and effect a useful resolution. Submit the proposed resolution to the group and hope for a diplomatic reception.

4. Keep the channels of communication open. Be sure all group members understand and approve of any actions prior to taking them. Nobody wants a Leeroy Jenkins in their group!

5. When you wish for your group to grow, the most important prerequisite is always preparation.

6. As your group grows in numbers, avoid favoritism. All members should be treated with respect and given the assistance they need to become fully useful participants.

7. Members of your group are unlikely to be so exclusively! They may still have close ties to the group or groups that nurtured them. Be sure to respect those ties and even assist in maintaining them.

8. That said, members of the group must understand their priorities. Most successful groups have prioritized with their own goals in mind.

9. Finally, you are not the group. And the group is not you. Sometimes you must focus on your own goals. Always take time to solo and be understanding of the need of others to do the same.

Those are just a few tips on successful grouping in World of Wedcraft. Good luck!

I know everyone's really excited that their imaginary enemy has finally validated their existence as a threat but let's be more realistic here. If there's anything remotely interesting about this filing, it's that android and the upcoming Chrome OS is not mentioned at all.

To me it seems more like a message of disrespect to google, a more realistic competitor, than anything...

According to an interview with a researcher or the lead researcher or something like that, it's not as much as carbon nanotubes or other existing solutions, but it's "enough" and it's vastly cheaper. All existing solutions are impossibly expensive, that's the big deal here. Something like 6 billion pounds of chicken feathers are produced as by products of the chicken industry every year with zero practical reuses.

The same interviewee goes on to explain that there are a number of other possible uses of chicken feathers as a high grade material component, in everything from car body pieces to wind mill blades for wind power. I think it's an excellent effort and I hope it bears fruit.

BTW, the response-to-date has been underwhelming â" 101 video responses and counting â" and is certainly a mixed-bag, including a one-finger salute, a talking butt, a woman "Showing my Apples", and other off-topic rants

Yes but at least the Republican senators were willing to voice their opinions in the most eloquent manner they could.

It's funny how often an errant knob slipping between some unsuspecting crevice so often leads to thoughts of early termination.

It's like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

I'd rather not have sex than have it with a condom eliminating the thrill.

Your assertion that CDMA phones are unlockable is outright wrong. People have already unlocked the Pre for compatibility with Verizon.

The issue about no SIM card is a bigger one, however, because once you do unlock the device, you still have to get someone on a competing network to register and activate your device to their network which Verizon has a policy specifically not to do with devices they don't sell you. There are workarounds such as knowing someone, but it's never going to be as trivial as sliding in your SIM.

Well at least it is hidden, that's what the privacy advocates wanted right?

I haven't read the article, but, to me it seems the takeaway here is pretty obvious: Your users are content and they are providing themselves. The question becomes "Are the users that never pay anything valuable enough to the users that may pay something to convince them to continue paying and participating at that paying level, or would those same paying users pay as much without the addition free users as human content?" And I think that's a tough question to ask which can only be answered through actual testing.

The resulting possibilities are 1) You get no money because now hardly any players join the game world and thus it is not as fun and thus people who are willing to pay, aren't willing to pay for very long. or 2) The game is equally as fun with a smaller user base, the paying base actually grows because their friends hear it's fun and put up cash before they even try it, and you end up with more revenue even though you have a much smaller total playerbase.

Big gambles because to me it seems like you have to try pay-to-play first before moving to free-to-play. And moving to a microtransaction model might alienate the small userbase you already accrued in the first situation. And switch it around? You'll lose all the free players who never would've paid and if they were required for paying players' enjoyment... yeah, I think I'll stay out of this market.

Actually what is being offered is a compromise. The full retail value of the 32 GB model is $699 not $499. AT&T is offering those iPhone owners who purchased their 3G upgrade last year, under the terms of a 2 year subsidization contract, the opportunity for a special upgrade at half the subsidization cost. So, for example, when I bought my iPhone 3G last year on day 1, even though I promised to complete an entire two year contract to cover the major discount offered at the time, I will still be able to restart a new two year contract and be rewarded with a $200 discount.

So even though those with no further contract obligations (actually, in many cases you can upgrade at full discount after only 18 months of your 24 month contract) and those new purchasers will get a nice $400 discount, I think I'm getting a pretty honest deal with a half discount halfway through the obligation.

However, many people are clearly confused for various reasons. One cause is likely that many of these iPhone customers were never smartphone customers before. These people had no idea just how much money smartphones cost MSRP. The other part of it is original iPhone (Edge) buyers were not subsidized at all, and when the 3G came around, the offer was presented as though it was a special situation allowing for an early upgrade. Well that is partly factual, if you wanted to upgrade to any other phone you would not have been able to at only one year. I find this aspect to be particularly disgusting on AT&T's part, but it's all part of the contract... At any rate, since there was no subsidization in the original two year contracts for AT&T to cover, it was a no-brainer for them to offer full subsidization to 3G purchasers.

So ultimately, many people are expecting to get exactly the same full subsidization "special" offer they got with the 3G but there has never once been any promise that they would.

So I say: If you're not happy with the pricing, don't buy the new phone. If you feel bad about the whole situation, at least try to fully comprehend what happened and why the 3G's subsidization was not nearly as special as it seemed (AT&T sacrificed zero subsidization from your original contract whereas now they are offering to sacrifice half of the one from the 3G). It's understandable to be dissatisfied with an offer regardless of the terms, but not understandable for people to go all emo over the terms as though they were somehow owed or promised something else when they obviously weren't.

For the record, I intend to pick up a 32gb upgrade for $500 because frankly, I was happy to buy the original 8gb for the full original price. To me it's valuable for the added space alone. Everyone has to make this decision for themselves obviously but at least have the character to realize you are not being ripped off, and you are not somehow owed a better offer just because you really want the phone.

Fandom does not make you special.

Granted, the damages do seem high, but these are only applied where the conclusion has already been made that a proper case was brought about and the crime proven without a reasonable doubt.

Why focus on this after-the-fact nonsense? In a perfect judicial world where only copyright violators were convicted, I would whole-heartedly support brutal monetary punishments to these self-entitled jackasses.

But in reality, shouldn't this crowd-sourced angst be directed at the flawed proceedings and discovery that is the real issue here? Please, for everyone who cares about "justice" and fair use and other copyright issues, let's focus the energy, however fickle it is, on what really matters here.

This whole "browser war" nonsense has gone on long enough. Back when a browser was a novelty, perhaps even sold on the shelf at the store, maybe it made sense to worry about competition. However, now that the browser is essential to everyday computing and part of the platform, the demands being made entirely idiotic. It should not matter if people are given IE8 out of the gate or not. I do agree that they should be able to disable or uninstall it if they feel it's a security problem. However, forcing vendors to include other browsers is only slightly widening the selective controlled distribution and does not address any of the problems IE's dominance has caused in the first place.

Quite simply put, the reason IE is popular is because people do not care about which browser they use. A small percentage does, and it seem this site is popular with that group but at this point, a browser is part of a platform as a steering wheel is part of a car. Occasionally an enthusiast replaces his steering wheel but most people don't care about it.

But what does a steering wheel have in common with browsers besides being a platform staple? They support standards. The steering wheel is a standard interface, and while they do vary from car to car, they all support a common baseline of functionality and features.

So the real solution to this IE problem is not to force a company to support their competition. No I vehemently disagree with that, it's simply wrong to force a company to collude with their competition. Instead, the solution is to enforce IE's support of recognized standards. If you truly wish to neuter Microsoft's control of the WWW, then limit them to implementing standards compliant browsing only, let the community and the market decide what that means, and then let people continue to make their own choices about browsers.

Frankly if you look at all platforms, not just personal computer platforms, you will see that they all include their own browser choice, whether it be a Linux based OS that includes firefox, or a smartphone that includes a webkit based browser like Nokia's S60 platform. Macs include Safari, my Wii came with a free Opera download, my DSi came with a free opera download, and my PS3 includes a browser based on the same tech they use for their feature cell phones.

So targeting microsoft just because this mattered 10 years ago is pretty ridiculous, especially when you're failing to target the real problem in the first place.

65 year old feet used to walk!

10 year old bicycle used to ride!

Wait, what's the significance of a modem, modulating and demodulating as it was originally intended?