Nice try, throwing your billionaire imposter buddy under the bus. You have to be the other imposter.

In the case of a second monitor, you might have some windows applications that 'know' they go on the right screen. I've never seen a mechanism for Windows to properly recover from windows that want to be too far off the screen for the current resolution. (I'd appreciate any tips if anyone has them.)

Alt-Space, M, then hit an arrow key. For some reason hitting the arrow key attached the mouse pointer to the titlebar of the window, so you can use the mouse to move the window where you want it. Also, while most apps don't require it, hold down Alt while hitting space. Firefox specifically has this issue. Windows apps are supposed to allow users to hit Alt to shift focus to the menu bar, but not all of them work.

They're not out in North America yet, so how is this news?

They've been available in Japan for a while now, so anyone who really wants one has one already, and who would until Super Mario 3DS comes out?

So, they're *34,001* years old. Get your story straight!

There's instructions on how to tie a necktie. I don't know how to tie a necktie. If I got a job at one of those banks I'd have to go dig up some instructions on-line... Or I could just use the nice document that HR provides during orientation. That'd actually be handy.

I don't know how one would get a job at a place like that without having worn a suit and tie to the interview. If they're telling people how to tie a necktie after the fact, isn't it too late?

Was anyone else living in a timeline where Siemens didn't make hearing aids in the 1920s until yesterday?

I don't ask for stuff to be delivered to my doorstep here in the US, but I can't seem to convince UPS or the post office that such a thing isn't a great idea. Although, I'm usually less worried about it getting stolen then I am about it getting wet, since it inevitably rains whenever a package is due to be delivered.

I present Trevor Blackwell's theory on how printing and then putting the paper in landfills may actually stop global warming:

http://www.tlb.org/faq.html (scroll to the bottom)

The option of sending a blank Ccc: header to indicate that at least one Cc:'d recipient was actually a Ccc: inherently leaks information and MUST NOT be exercised if there is only one Cc:'d recipient in the rewritten message because in this case the information leak is total and would eliminate the aura of mystery produced by including such a header, as it is then perfectly clear that the Cc: was indeed actually a Ccc:, defeating the purpose of the allowing the header to be optionally included. As with address obfuscation, whether this is appropriate for a given message depends on how much information the sender is willing to have the recipents[SIC] know about which Cc:'d recipients never were actually sent the message.

I don't think this restriction on not including the empty Ccc: header when only one address is moved to the Cc: header entirely makes sense. For example, I might send a message to some friends, Ccc:'ing someone. I may not care if my friends know that I Ccc:'d that person, but I do want to make sure that if they forward the message on, their recipients think the Ccc:'d person was actually Cc:'d. Since there are times this is possible, I think this behavior should be recommended but optional.

Can't we at least expect our April Fools RFCs to be well thought out? Come on!

Well played.

My keyboard has three keys.

CTRL ALT DEL?

What about doors and stairs?

Texting is fine on the bike.
It's just a bit tricky when it's also snowing at the same time.

How many times louder is 10 dB than 0 dB?