Comment Re:They should stick to making modems (Score 1) 87
Underrated comment.
I laughed my ass off.
Comment Re:burying the dead (Score 1) 87
This comment made my day. Thank you.
Comment Re:What? (Score 0) 87
It obviously didn't work for that nurse in Texas.
Or the WHO volunteers in Africa who were massacred by the locals.
So, yeah. Robots seem appropriate.
Comment Re:burying the dead (Score 1) 87
Please don't give robots religion. We don't need to have robots fighting for the same reasons we do.
Comment Re:I don't believe them (Score 2) 135
Fry: "I can't swallow that!"
Farnsworth: "Well then, good news! It's a suppository."
Comment Re:It's probably not the best experience of your l (Score 4, Funny) 135
Great. Now I'm imagining a bunch of guys pooping on a conveyor belt.
Hershey Kisses anyone?
Comment Insults (Score 1) 135
"Eat shit!"
"Joke's on you. I already am."
Comment Well... (Score 1) 137
At least it's not Uwe Boll.
Comment Re:pigeon holed (Score 1) 92
Dammit, you made me spit out my cereal.
Comment Re:warm regards (Score 1) 95
If it weren't for the AD, this might have been funny as sarcasm.
Comment Dead Trees (Score 1, Insightful) 95
If I can't download it, then what's the point of this even being posted? Am I really going to have to fly to Britain to read these?
Also, It's in Russian. These aren't useful in their current form.
"Hi guys! I'm going to leak the TRUTH! But you'll have to be able to know how to read Russian, be in Britain, set up an appointment, and have 2 forms of ID!"
Hopefully, some nice person will bother to scan these, just like they did with JD Sallinger's "unreleased" stories.
Comment Re:Obvious omition (Score 1) 199
Anybody remember those:
"CONGRATULATIONS! YOU'VE WON A FREE iPAD!"
Those used to startle the shit out of me, since my speakers were usually on high.
Comment Still insane (Score 1) 668
The Unabomber knew lots of science too. It didn't make him any less crazy.
A Ray of Hope For Americans and Scientific Literacy? 668
An anonymous reader with a snippet from Politico: "A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers. Yale law professor Dan Kahan posted on his blog this week that he analyzed the responses of more than 2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative. However, those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn't, Kahan found. The findings met the conventional threshold of statistical significance, the professor said. Kahan wrote that not only did the findings surprise him, they embarrassed him. 'I've got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I'd be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension,' Kahan wrote. 'But then again, I don't know a single person who identifies with the tea party,' he continued.'" More at the Independent Journal Review.
Comment Re:Easter Egg (Score 1) 121
Nah, I don't work for them. I just felt like doing it for some reason.
