"Mark Thompson writes in Time Magazine that Air Force pilots flying the T-38 Talon can rest easy, knowing that their cockpit canopy can survive hitting a 1.8 kg bird at 300 km/h. Unfortunately, the Northrop supersonic jet trainer has a top speed of 1307 km/h. 'To my knowledge, the training planes are the only ones in the Air Force fast enough to make a bird strike lethal, and with a windshield too flimsy to deflect one,' wrote one Air Force pilot. Midair collisions between birds and Air Force aircraft have destroyed 39 planes and killed 33 airmen since 1973. That's why the USAF is seeking comments to 'identify potential sources, materials, timeframe, and approximate costs to redesign, test, and produce 550 T-38 forward canopy transparencies to increase bird strike capability.' The move follows a T-38 crash on July 19 in Texas triggered by a canopy bird strike. 'The current 5.8 mm thick stretched acrylic transparency can resist a 1.8 kg bird impact at 300 km/h which does not offer a capability to resist significant bird impacts, and has resulted in the loss of six (6) aircraft and two pilot fatalities,' the service acknowledged. 'Numerous attempts since 1970 were made to evaluate existing materials and redesign a transparency that could withstand a bird impact of 1.8 kg at 740 km/h.' Previous efforts have foundered because they'd require expensive cockpit modifications to the twin-engine, two-seat supersonic jet. 'Although it would increase the level of bird impact protection,' the Air Force said, 'the proposal was cancelled due to the high cost of the modification.'"

According To YouGov Poll, government propaganda gives its expected results.

condensation can raise the temperature of your beer by nine degrees!"

This happens only with American beer, in the rest of the world the temperature raises only by five degrees

They call me a lot less after I showed them the hidden secret of computer support: http://xkcd.com/627/

An obvious purpose for storing a message on an ISP's server after delivery is to provide a second copy of the message in the event that the user needs to download it again -- if, for example, the message is accidentally erased from the user's own computer. The ISP copy of the message functions as a "backup" for the user. Notably, nothing in the Act requires that the backup protection be for the benefit of the ISP rather than the user. Storage under these circumstances thus literally falls within the statutory definition.

Of course, in the present case, the user did not download email by POP3 or IMAP, but used the system purely as webmail.

To read his email the user has to download it with his webbrowser. If he wants to read his email again the browser will show the version kept in its local cahe. The copy kept by the webmail provider is clearly a back-up for the copy kept in the local cache of his webbrowser.

If you Read The Fine Article (I know,.. you are not supposed to do this on Slashdot) you will see that it mentions C#. This is just the author who didn't push hard enough on the Shift-key and the submitter and the poster who didn't care to correct this error.