Um. Chauvinist, much?

Doesn't look random at all to me. Looks like fairly judicious use of capitalization to focus particular aspects of your contribution to the discussion. :0)

YMBNH.

I'm a French guy living in China. Reading that China has the "most advanced [...] high-speed rail lines in the world" makes me jump on my chair. The HSR trains are rarely going to the announced 240 km/h top speed, most of the time, they aren't even reaching 200. China is just building it's first Shanghai to Beijing in 3:30 thanks to the French technology (to be ready later this year). It still takes 40 hours to travel from Shanghai to Wulumuqi. Exactly where is the advance here? The most advanced country in the world for train is France, with over 6 lines at 320+ km/h all over the (small) country and extending to the rest of Europe (Spain, London, Amsterdam)!

True... but this is not just for HFA, AS, ADHD or similar students. I have seen such a room used with NTs as well (such as teens who get out of hand). I have no problems with that sort of thing, so long as it is across the board, and not used as an easy way to seclude a student who they don't want to deal with for other reasons.

See, that's the trouble with putting switching information in-band.

And such things cannot be done by newbies in java and python? I suppose it takes real experts to code up a massive memory leak in java (*cough* meta data not unloaded in apache *cough*).

Tim Bray managed the Oxford English Dictionary project - that is, computerizing the OED, back in the 80's, before anyone blazed those trails - and did lots of other cool hacking over the years. You're saying he doesn't have credibility because he hasn't sampled enough smartphones?

You could choose to not buy Windows. But for some reason they were forced to not strongly couple their web browser with the OS. And /. applauded.

I think you meant...

:D

Thanks!

*Cringe*...I have a tendency (character flaw?) of not taking groups of people at their collective word...so I give "journalists do not reveal their sources" about as much weight as "cops don't take kickbacks or get free blowjobs". It only takes one bad apple

True enough...my concern is that this kind of moral fibre/ethical uprightness is fast waning.

Umm...no...nope, if you look right back up there, I think it's pretty clear that I said a fight between a person and a deer, in which the person only used antlers strapped to its head, would be a fair fight.

(Conversely, if you could give a deer workable digits, a rifle, and basic knowledge of rifle use, then hunting might be a fair fight.)

(1) I was not aware that this is "standard", and I submit that that's pretty fucked up. If some journalist chose to reveal these people's names, then they either have to be fired (for doing something that they were "covertly" authorized to do), or else the investigating organization has to admit that they in fact authorized the leak.

(2) I don't see the benefit of releasing this kind of information to the public, but that's likely just shortsightedness on my part.

(3) Didn't know that for a fact, but would have guessed it to be the NYT's stance (also, I don't actually believe it, but I suppose that's immaterial to the point at hand).

I have a baby girl and am in my final semester of grad school...you can guess how much newspaper reading I do. In any event, is there an obvious section of the NYT's online edition where it says "we don't pay for information"?

You strap on antlers and go head-to-head with rutting stags often? Hunting ain't exactly a fair fight...not even bow hunting, really.

WTF is wrong with people that they can't shut up?? I see stuff like this all the time, and it boggles my mind that people on the inside are willing to discuss stuff that is likely to at least partially jeopardize the investigation under way. Surely it's not a profit-motive...I can't imagine journalists can pay very much for this kind of information...so what is it?