If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Wait a minute... The article mentions that if your hardware crashes and you have not "backed up" your bitcoins, then you are SOL and they are gone for good. Sooo if you can actually "backup" or in some way clone your bitcoins, what is stopping you from making infinite copies? As long as one buyer never gets two of the same copy, how will they know the money is counterfeit? Being peer-to-peer there is no centralized server to check dupes against (I assume here).

Did I miss something?

What's your point? It's the internet...anything goes

You should have no reasonable expectation of privacy when posting ANYTHING to a social networking website.

How often is the average american sued?

Wow, just zooming in all the way on the photo there is nearly an uncountable number of stars. Zooming out only multiplies the number you can see. I don't know about anyone else, but this makes me feel really really tiny! Even seeing this photo I cannot comprehend how many of these stars and alien solar systems are within our own galaxy. And to think there are numerous other galaxies full of these as well!

I had similar software installed on my work box. Every now and then it would nag you to take a break because you were typing too much or moving the mouse too much. This software was configured so that it could not be disabled by the normal machine user, and was very annoying with its constant chiming and messages. The one funny part about it though, is that there was a small meter in the task bar that showed your usage level. If you continued to use your mouse and keyboard without a break the meter would fill up over time. We would usually have informal contests to see who could max it out.

by the author of the article. Who knows what the business model of the photographer is or what they actually had to do/pay for these photo shoots? For all we know, all the speculation in this article is completely inaccurate. Why is this story even on /. ...

Perhaps it was the "any" key

I would agree, however, the point of the experiment in the aforementioned article was to see if humans could feasibly be confined for a duration of a trip to Mars. The reason gravity is not an issue here is that we already have data from past experience in this domain. Take for example Expedition 14 to the ISS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedition_14). This expedition lasted for 215 days, in which two crew members were weightless that entire time. In comparison, this article is talking about spending a week (or few months) in space. This is pale in comparison to anything we have already done, and frankly I don't see the point of it at all. I don't doubt that the space station could be vital in testing planned missions to Mars, but I don't see anything useful coming from this simulation.

I think this simulation is a bit more realistic (apart from the gravity aspect): http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41192648/ns/technology_and_science-space/

That's pretty much the coolest thing I have ever seen.

Really? Your comment was modded up while mine was modded down...
I was being ironic. Obviously over the head of most /.'ers (cue eyeroll)

@1:40 "Usefull for disabeled people"...

But apparently not useful for PhD students who can't spell