Really sorry about causing all the frustration. I don't like to use my real email when signing up for garbage web sites. I really didn't think 1234asdf@gmail.com was used. Cool name though.

I'm so confused right now, but I’m going to just tell myself you are all bots, or that you have an extreme dissociative identity disorder and need to seek help! All three of you!

I just don't see what reasons they have being in the same location, maybe besides having a very open space to work with and build upon. I'm sure that sharing the same interests and having a good working background between Google and NASA have something to do with it, but I’m not convinced it's worth the new location. Sharing interests with another company is one thing, but I wouldn't go as far to invite them in and give access to things I might not want them to see. Although, I’m sure if Moffett Fields security measures are anything close to mine here (requiring 3 different security checks before given access to anything!), then there's really nothing to worry about, but I wonder if there is something else going on between the two companies as for the reasons of this placement.

Well, I would hope that certain buildings have a much higher security check than that, but even still, giving people free access to get close enough to certain buildings without a deterrent in the way is kind of foolish in my eyes. Especially, to get onto NASA and a military instillation.

I'm not aware of current NASA Ames Security protocols, as far as getting access to the area, but I could only speculate that not everyone is authorized access. So with Google now building on their land, would they have a separate control entry point? Or give access through NASA's entry point? I have a huge problem with people having access to places they shouldn't.

If you are speaking of the attempt made online to replicate, well as it also stated that is a very inconsistent way to attempt any research like this. Who's to say they weren't chatting with friends or looking through facebook while they attempted to take this test. A controlling and neutral environment where subjects can concentrate is needed. EG wasted and useless results.

I'm very interested to see what further studies conclude.

Man I wish i had mod points for that one!!! +1

I'd agree, but it doesn't matter. A company has every right to replace people when it wants to. That's just the corporate world for you. It happens to people daily, but I’m sure that because Google is standing behind their decision, that people were doing something wrong.

Our investigation is complete, and revealed you are in fact boring and just overly paranoid. We would suggest getting out some time at a local Bar/Pub of your choosing. Please feel free to keep the tracking device on your vehicles, and use it should you become too intoxicated to find it.

V/R The Government

Due to paranoia on your behalf, we believe you have something to hide, and are launching a team to fully investigate what you are hiding. V/R The Government

I don't believe in faith that much, but I look at facts and results. For me, when it comes to technology, faith is a waste of time. I'd much rather see what things can do, before believing in promises given. That's why I said I'd like to see personally what it can do, before I truly decide to knock it down.

Yes, once you purchase or install anything through Steam, obviously downloading it, it has to authenticate it through their servers. After this is done, you are able to play it in an offline mode for a time...which I believe is around a month, but after that it has to connect again to play.

I've had 2 games that came in disks for Steam, while on business, but they wouldn't even install till I was online and connected.

If you can stay connected, the cloud in this aspect isn't such a bad thing, but as soon as there are server issues or connection issues for a long time, you might as well play tic-tac-toe in paint!

I will say that Valve has implemented their use of the cloud very well (I for one use it) but in the beginning when it first came out, many users were very agitated that they HAD to be on the net regularly to use it. I still don't enjoy that fact either. Some of my business trips last for over 6 months, and I'm not always able to have internet. So Steam fails me at that point, when my offline time has run out and I have to connect in order to use it again. I wonder if the Chrome OS will be the same way?

I'm sure this would be a very beneficial OS for those that constantly feel the need to be online (some business types, stocks, and people that can't get off of facebook) but for the majority of the world, including myself, I simply don't see the need. I'm still very cautious as to systems built around the internet anyways (back when IE was first built into the OS and had many problems) but I’m sure things have changed greatly and maybe Google will get this right. I'd be interested to play around with it and see what it can really do, but I see no need to purchase one.

bi-curious?