I like the way my company handles this. One partner (primary caregiver) gets 12 weeks. The other (secondary caregiver) gets 2 weeks. It addresses all the discrimination/same-sex issues, while also handling the "someone who just had another person come out of them should get more time off" common sense. If the mother works, the father is automatically considered to be the secondary caregiver unless he can provide documentation from her employer saying she only was able to get 2 weeks off. I know fathers who have been able to take 12 weeks off because their wife's employer only allowed 2 weeks of maternity leave.

The alt-text on that comic is one of my favorite quotes ever.

2 things:

1. I haven't run into user-agent blocking where I live, maybe it is a regional thing. I have the user-agent on Opera mobile set to use the desktop version without issues. Additionally a few weeks ago my power was out for a couple days and my phone became my primary home internet connection, no browser on 1 windows and 2 linux PCs was blocked.

2. I doubt they would be able to see the TTL. The TTL of the ssh packet would be unchanged, and the TTL of the tunneled packet would be encrypted.

Pshhh.... qzjkh is a perfectly cromulent word.

Let's just call 1970 year 0 and be done with it. Previous years are negative, following years are positive.

and he will cook in a similar way to how he would on re-entry without a heat shield.

The key here is JPEG quality factor. This only works on a specific quality factor. Just pick a different one. I just tried it using their example image. At some quality factors you can see somthing funny going on (spots on image). But, at any factor you would use to actually compress a photo (above 90) the image looks fine.
This could work for the bandwith-saving proxy mentioned in the article since they will have low quality factors. But what would be the point then? Mangling images when viewed on a cellphone?

I believe the article said their solution algorithm did not search for optimal solutions, only for those that are 20 moves or less. (It has already been proven that there exist positions that can not be solved in less than 20 moves)
So, they can probably give an upper bound on the number of positions solvable in 20 moves, but not an exact number.

Um..... RMS, Linus Torvalds, Guido van Rossum, Larry Wall

Good point. My guess is that is how this tool actually works. It relies on the assumption that any statistically psuedorandom files (or maybe even partitions) must be encrypted, since every other file will contain some sort of pattern.

New phrase: "font-snob"

Copyright thehickcoder 2009