But it seems it's dated March 30, so it's probably serious?

While I understand the need for research that also confirms the obvious, not sure why it's news. The whole point of the sketch is that walking like that is incredibly tiresome and nobody in their right mind would do it. My understanding is that normal gait is the most energy-efficient solution for the chosen speed (varying between individual due to their specific bone structure and weight distribution). I also seem to recall research during the space race about the optimal way to move on the lunar surface at various speeds.

And by 1.1.1.1 I meant 1.0.0.1, of course, and why does Slashdot still not allow comment editing?

Nah. it's valid. If you have the IP routed to your device, there are ways to listen and respond on it.

To note that in most IP parsing libraries (or at least the ones I'm familiar with) 1.1.1.1 can be also expressed as 1.1 (if less than four numbers the last number is interpreted on as many bits are left till 32). So you can now be cool and ping 1.1 or dig google.com @1.1., making the old favourite, 8.8.8.8, quite a mouthful in comparison.

I'd expect someone reporting on IETF standards to know that "Internet Standard" is a different maturity level that "Proposed Standard". I get that "proposed standard" sounds less definitive for someone not used with the lingo, but surely one could have come with a different expression.

I am reading the Baroque Cycle these days, it made me extremely giddy to recognize the context of the book :)

Same here. I am apalled that this criticism doesn't feature more frequently in G+ games reviews. Having 3rd party developers have full information about my account and contacts was the main reason I ditched my FB account. I'd be okay if some features required extra permissions (like friends leaderoboard and so on), I'd even be willing to show the game a particular circle of friends, but not like this.

This and the "identity service, not social networking" thing are the two major letdowns from this service. And I think i can imagine the tsunami of cash pushing on the other side, so my hopes are really low.

"Do no evil" my foot.

Some of the stuff, yes. All of the stuff? Next to impossible.

I've been online "only" for about 13 years. Most of these years I posted on the mailing lists of a local Linux community. In time I ended up the administrator of the services and mailing lists, and I've tried for years to gather a complete archive of all the emails, a task that has so far proven impossible ( a couple of server crashes and upgrades, nobody with such an extensive personal email archive, so on). Bits and pieces are still there (one of the lists was archived on mail-archive.com for a while, other things have been cross-posted, so on).

So yeah, there are a lot of stupid (and some smart) things that I said out there, but I'm absolutely positive I can't gather everything, as much as I'd try.

Come on, at least try to read the whole phrase before moaning. It says it would revolutionize our views on Meditations on First Philosophy. It's not the digital age, it's the Twitter age :-(

Well, kill-ing with SIGCHLD the zombie parents is more efficient and elegant, usually. The first rule of kill -9 is that you should not use kill -9 in the first place.

Maybe it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but this sounds very much like redundancy (I think the correct grammatical term is "tautology"), probably induced by some so-called SEO expert: "screw common sense, just toss in the keyword 'video' as much as possible".