The health data the Watch collects is sent only to the users phone. From there other apps can request access to parts of it, but the user has to explicitly grant permission to allow it - and they would first have to install an app that could even ask...

So tell me again how it's a data collection initiative when there are so few ways to collect the data it collects?

Maybe, just maybe, some of the fitness tracking stuff the Apple watch does is useful enough to people that it encourages healthier living. Maybe, just maybe, being told to stand every hour and stretch has long term benefits.

But no, lets discount all of that and go for the Slashdot Paranoid Delusion #75757, Standard Evil Corporate Overlord wants to know my average run pace.

If you're going to Mars at all anyway messing around with just a few people means certain death for all. With enough people you have redundancy in skill and ability, a lot of pure manual labor on tap if required, and lots more of a drive to make the community continue. In think the timeframe is pretty realistic to be honest and the goal not very out of reach. Think of where we were technologically forty years ago, across many fields of science...

Complete with pic.

No I'm trying to explain an observed effect, far more thinking than you have ever done in your miserable life.

I don't care really care either way which of the two goober was the slightly less goobery one, I'm approaching this as a strategic issue.

I hope that increases you post count enough you get that bonus from the Hilary campaign! The money came from Wells Fargo bilking customers, but whatever. I'll not respond further since you are an even larger goober than the pair of the candidates combined.

Other book scammers offering books tht look like low-cost omnibus editions, but which are actually compilations of Wikipedia articles and other content-scraped public-domain material, are:

• Hephaestus Books, and
• Webster's Digital Services

Let the buyer beware...

Sounds like the debate/hofstra thinks they have a license for that band and don't have to accept any and all interference like FCC Part15 specifies. I don't think this will end well for them.

Jesus, read my WHOLE POST. I said they may well have left it on but were not really watching... I explained that that had to be the case because of the poll results.

Is it really so hard for people here to comprehend words now??? I mean I literally spelled it out for you.

I have this printer that does everything it was advertised to do correctly and prints just like it is supposed to. I have never seen it fail to produce a document that doesn't match the electronic version it was sent, except for hardware related issues (out of toner, e.g.)

Why the hell would I want to "update" it when "update" means "change" and "change" means it may do something different than it used to? It is doing what I want; change is not necessary.

I have yet to have any of my HP printers update anything. Maybe that's because I'm smart enough to not put the gateway address into the networked ones so they couldn't talk to a remote update server even if they tried.

You're going to lose that wager. Early Neilson ratings are showing the debate broke the all-time record for viewers.

Yes, that's people who "tuned in" - that is watched it at all. I agree that was very high.

I'm saying a lot of people "tuned out" after the first half hour or so, I saw a ton of people on social media saying exactly that. They got tired after a while, both voices are irritating. Even if they didn't turn it off, they were not really watching with full attention after that point. The Neilson ratings say anything about that.

Hillary may technically have "won on points" but if you read the link I posted (not from a conservative source either) it shows Trump actually won massively among watchers. So the only way that happened is if people were not paying attention later in the debate.

Trump was better earlier, then it evened out and at times Hillary was better.

I would have called it a rough tie. But the important thing to remember is - how many people watched the whole thing? I would wager not a lot. So Trump doing better earlier probably means he won with the general populace...

This is borne out by polls taken immediately after showing that Trump actually won the debate, by a pretty large margin.

The CNN poll being an outlier is just an illustration of how the media is rigged strongly in favor of Hillary. I was going to vote for Johnson but I think an important part of this election is to consider just who the press will actually watch closely and call out anything wrong - they are going to do that constantly with Trump, and very little to not at all with Clinton. A representative democracy needs a functioning press and the unfortunate reality of the times is that the press is so Democratic, you have to have a Republican president if you want issues widely discussed in the news. You heard about war protests all the time under Bush, not at all under Obama despite drone strikes on civilians that would have had the press howling under Bush.

No, it is rent-seeking. Music in the past was sold in terms of public performance and perhaps sheet music - nothing about which I have a beef with. Now they want to get paid for cost-free audio recording duplication without doing any of the work associated with it - they literally charge the costs back to the performer! It's pretty much the definition of rent-seeking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

No bucks, no Buck Rogers.

Or rather, no Buck Rogers, no bucks.

Here's why. None of it matters.

Let's talk about analogies. Remember the Manhattan Project? Probably the most significant intervention of geeks in all history. Started off with some busybody physicists and a letter from Einstein. They were convinced that they were doing a good for all mankind by contributing to the destruction of the Nazi state.

The problem was, Hitler was defeated before their bomb came to fruition. Then, some people started getting cold feet about the use of the device. Regretting their intervention in the first place, even.

General Groves' and Oppenheimer's recollections of the project talk quite a bit about prima donna scientists. What should be obvious is that they put up with the geeks for about as long as it took to get what they wanted, and then told them to go fuck themselves.

Leo Szliard found out that his opinion was worthless, as was the opinion of every one of the geeks. The politicians and military had firm control and weren't interested in power sharing or criticism. And the bombs got dropped on civilians.

The takeaway from this is that on climate change, the only time the geeks get listened to is when the politicians have a good reason to make common cause with them...mostly when the goals are congruent. The moment the congruence ends, the geeks get told to go fuck themselves. This mostly means election year pandering with no action. So, therefore, arguing about this is moot. Nothing is going to happen.

Over supplementation of Vitamin D (particularly D2) is known to cause oxalate stones. I have a metabolic disorder characterized by low D levels, and my endocrinologist had me supplement heavily. The end result was that I was taking powdered kidney stone pills, essentially.

Just FYI