iPad Mini is a very foolish choice. It's only 768x1024. Should be a retina iPad instead, which is 1536x2048.

The 1536x2048 resolution of the iPad 3/4 is miles better than the 768x1024 resolution of the old iPad and the iPad Mini. Frankly, 768x1024 is insufficient for reading anything but pure text like novels. You need 1536x2048 for technical material or anything serious at all.

Imagine someone from the 1500s waking up now. Hey, welcome to the future. All of your morals are horribly outdated,...

Welcome to the future. All of your morals are belong to us!

You know, if you were just joking, then you should have just let it go. Now you look like you're grasping at straws to justify what you said, since any (reasonably-educated) native English speaker will be familiar with the definition of 'fraction' that he was using.

Sarten-X is 100% correct — and his original post was hilarious in my opinion. Fractions do not need to be less than 1 (or greater than -1, for that matter). Common English definitions are irrelevant here; this is a mathematical definition.

Actually, any real number (not just the rationals) is a fraction. For example, pi/4 is a fraction (one fourth of pi).

For that matter, any complex number is also a fraction.

>Imaging with Hubble, they located a small red dot which, over the course of the following two weeks, dimmed.

So that's why my cat has been frantically pawing at the sky for the last two weeks!

- The right size for buttons is about the size of my finger (Which is fairly constant for most adults)

FTFY

Is anyone as tired as I am over these security risks, especially from CNET? I remember when it was announced that someone could spy thru your window, video tape the lights on your modem and decode your communication.

Videotape?!? That would not even work for 100 baud modems. An NTSC videotape will give you 60 fields per second; a PAL videotape will give you 50 fps.

We already have laser reflectors on the moon. Left by Apollo 13 or so I believe.

Um, Apollo 13 never made it to the Moon.

Apollo 13 article on Wikipedia

Software that's single-threaded, no it doesn't benefit from more cores.

Well that's not entirely true. If you're running several single-threaded programs simultaneously, your computer will still run faster with multiple cores than it would with a single core (at the same clock speed, obviously). But if a single-threaded program is the only thing running on the system, then it won't see benefits from multiple cores.