Slashdot Mirror

Claims that the Pirate Bay has stolen more money than exists on Earth.
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/4/2010/07/87a2852446ae55d1f15656d49f913e94/original.jpg

Why should anyone take these ludicrous moron seriously.

“Every day there’s people shooting each other. You know what I do when I see that? I look to see what guns they’re using and I think to myself, why not my guns?”

(The first and most important rule of gun-running is: Never get shot with your own merchandise.)

http://valleywag.gawker.com/5497193/exclusive-how-googles-eric-schmidt-lost-his-mistress-his-partner-and-steve-jobs No wonder.

sexual harassment is pretty serious. one would think we should be more sympathetic to jodie fisher, not hurd

I agree, sexual harassment is a very serious problem and should not be taken lightly. But could you present the evidence of sexual harassment? Larry Ellison said of it '"The H.P. board admits that it fully investigated the sexual harassment claims against Mark and found them to be utterly false." Furthermore the reason Hurd was fired appeared to be "numerous instances where [Hurd's love interest, Jodie Fisher] received compensation and/or expense reimbursement where there was not a legitimate business purpose, as well as numerous instances where inaccurate expense reports were submitted by Mark or on his behalf that intended to or had the effect of concealing Mark's personal relationship with the contractor." If that's true, misuse of company funds is also serious but not on the level of sexual harassment.

oh right, his browsing history was used against him. therefore, we should be sympathetic to him (rolls eyes)

My concern here -- and what I think the general readership thinks -- is that Hurd did some questionable things or possibly made some enemies and so they tried to dig up anything they could on them. When the sexual harassment charges didn't stick well enough, they used a company policy that everyone is guilty of: using company resources and time to google silly things or read tabloids or do things unrelated to work. "Racy" means "Mildly risque, exciting." So he visited some mildly risque sites?

Basically this looks to be a scenario where Hurd upset someone and they simply looked through his browsing history in order to find a reason to terminate him. Are they constantly searching through browsing histories of all 304,000 employees to find which employment they should terminate? No, they are not. You speak so highly of ethics regarding sexual harassment but what about the ethics of terminating the employment of just one person when he is no more guilty than thousands of other employees -- which you also have the means and option to investigate.

This article summarizes it well but I'd have to quote more than "fair use" allows:

http://gawker.com/5609386/heres-the-real-reason-hp-ceo-mark-hurd-was-fired

tl;dr Hurd was a goofus and tried to get intimate with a subordinate but backed off when it went nowhere, and probably did nothing illegal or immoral to Jodie Fischer or HP; the board just wanted to avoid publicity.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

GNAA unveils new wiki-based corporate website

Today GNAA President weev shampooed his neckbeard, put on a greasy Linux t-shirt and left the warm glow of his spamcave to unveil the new GNAA corporate website in a keynote speech. "Inspired by the success of wikis like Wikipedia as platforms for spreading misinformation and infuriating trolls, we decided to transition our corporate webpage to the wiki format," said weev in between gulps and disgusting chewing noises as he stuffed his face with summer sausages and snack cakes to gain the calories needed to satiate his anxiety at being confronted with other human beings. "Jimbo Wales and his team of basement dwelling pedophiles have really taken the wiki platform leaps and bounds in propagating biased, inflammatory garbage. You can log on Wikipedia at any given moment and start or join some inane troll battle that amounts to semantics. They even manage to present defending child molesters as an encyclopedic pursuit while making active pedophiles who host child pornography paid members of their staff. I can't think of anything more offensive. I'd like to take a minute to recognize Wikipedia as one of the most wildly successful troll organizations on the planet."

Weev went on to deride the agents of Zionism on the Internet. "Of course, we couldn't possibly go with MediaWiki. Everybody knows that PHP is run by the Mossad. As a consistent promoter of racial equality we couldn't let our Wiki be subverted by Zionist control." He went along to praise the python-based framework the site now operates on. "We went with Trac primarily because it is written in Python. As you all know, Python is a fascist with whitespace. As an organization of black men, we do believe that whites need to be regulated in their spaces very carefully. All hail the prophet Mohammed, and the messenger Malcolm X." At this point weev made a fist in the air before switching his comfort food to fried chicken and watermelon. "May Allah bless us, and bring us to the day when we may see constant troll edit wars on our wiki, just like Wikipedia.

About GNAA:

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first
organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one
common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY ?

Are you a NIGGER ?

Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!

Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy
all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing
GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of
America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join
today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

• First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
• Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website.
• Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gn

Hopefully, the offended woman will do some Ahley Dupree photo shoots soon so we can see what the fuss is about.

Here you go.

Assange has a long history of making vague conspiratorial claims of harassment that don't stand up to scrutiny

Similarly a New Yorker piece commented on the leaked video and noted that

These pieces of missing information are not just inherent limitations in video. The producers themselves have chosen not to provide them. There appears to be a purpose to the omissions, which is underlined by the Orwell quote at the start, the prefatory explanation, the quotes and dedication at the end, even the way the helicopter crew’s cruel remarks are edited in a few places for effect. Although the producers identify the camera of the Reuters journalist who, along with his assistant, will be killed by Apache cannon fire, they don’t point to the AK-47 or the RPG launcher carried by other men with whom the journalists are walking in a group. Stripped of much context and weighted with commentary, this video is both an important document of the war, courageously leaked after the military had steadily refused to release it, and, in its way, a propaganda film

Another article

Last year, for example, WikiLeaks published the “secret ritual” of a college women’s sorority called Alpha Sigma Tau. Now Alpha Sigma Tau (like several other sororities “exposed” by WikiLeaks) is not known to have engaged in any form of misconduct, and WikiLeaks does not allege that it has. Rather, WikiLeaks chose to publish the group’s confidential ritual just because it could. This is not whistleblowing and it is not journalism. It is a kind of information vandalism. In fact, WikiLeaks routinely tramples on the privacy of non-governmental, non-corporate groups for no valid public policy reason. It has published private rites of Masons, Mormons and other groups that cultivate confidential relations among their members. Most or all of these groups are defenseless against WikiLeaks’ intrusions. The only weapon they have is public contempt for WikiLeaks’ ruthless violation of their freedom of association, and even that has mostly been swept away in a wave of uncritical and even adulatory reporting about the brave “open government,” “whistleblower” site. On occasion, WikiLeaks has engaged in overtly unethical behavior. Last year, without permission, it published the full text of the highly regarded 2009 book about corruption in Kenya called “It’s Our Turn to Eat” by investigative reporter Michela Wrong (as first reported by Chris McGreal in The Guardian on April 9). By posting a pirated version of the book and making it freely available, WikiLeaks almost certainly disrupted sales of the book and made it harder for Ms. Wrong and other anti-corruption reporters to perform their important work and to get it published. Repeated protests and pleas from the author were required before WikiLeaks (to its credit) finally took the book offline. “Soon enough,” observed Raffi Khatchadourian in a long profile of WikiLeaks

The Old Spice guy agrees with this article.

Didn't Google do this? Gave every employee a G1 with the suggestion that they might want to make apps for it? And called it a Christmas bonus as well?

Since the system is being developed in Japan, we know that crossdressing guys will be identified as evil because of the Square-Enix rules.

After all, they achieved nuclear fusion and made an energy drink that cures cancer.

This is all unfolding like a very, very bad NationStates roleplay.

Your blinders are showing.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_06/018561.php

http://gawker.com/5286144/the-rise-of-right+wing-violence

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/21/73725/4486

http://mnpublius.com/2010/03/gingrich-right-wing-violence-is-dems-fault/

(Repeat of similar post above, where you made this misinterpretation too.)

http://gawker.com/5392947/googles-broken-hiring-process

And I quote Peter Norvig

One of the interesting things we've found, when trying to predict how well somebody we've hired is going to perform when we evaluate them a year or two later, is one of the best indicators of success within the company was getting the worst possible score on one of your interviews. We rank people from one to four, and if you got a one on one of your interviews, that was a really good indicator of success.

I'll quote the original source of that claim, Peter Norvig, and his refuting of that interpretation:

What do you know? Valleywag got everything wrong. Google is hiring, not laying off. Also, our interview scores actually correlate very well with on-the-job performance. Peter Seibel asked me if there was anything counterintuitive about the process and I said that people who got one low score but were hired anyway did well on-the-job. To me, that means the interview process is doing very well, not that it is broken. It means that we don't let one bad interview blackball a candidate. We'll keep interviewing, keep hiring, and keep analyzing the results to improve the process. And I guess Valleywag will keep doing what they do...

(emphasis mine)

Eivind.

http://gawker.com/5392947/googles-broken-hiring-process

And I quote Peter Norvig

One of the interesting things we've found, when trying to predict how well somebody we've hired is going to perform when we evaluate them a year or two later, is one of the best indicators of success within the company was getting the worst possible score on one of your interviews. We rank people from one to four, and if you got a one on one of your interviews, that was a really good indicator of success.

Fifty-six percent of women in technology companies leave their organizations at the mid-level point, 10-20 years in their careers

At Google, you're old and gray at 40. [June 22]

It is something the geek has been known to give a positive spin:

3. Microsoft's senior leadership is middle-aging. Older folks with families and kids don't have the same priorities as younger employees -- and they're not as hungry workaholics.
The average Microsoft employee is 38 years old, according to the company's self-published corporate data. Only 15.9 percent of employees are under 30. By comparison, Google employees' average age is somewhere under 30. The company doesn't publicly release average age, presumably because of an age-discrimination lawsuit. According to the last publicly available data, less than 2 percent of Googlers were over 40. For Microsoft: 40.7 percent.
Most employees are young, fresh from college and have fewer family obligations and other distractions from work. The corporate culture encourages employees to work long hours and provides services that support the work ethic. Googlers can quickly advance up the management chain, and they can look forward to healthy compensation-for-results rewards.
The most innovative thinkers are at the top of the decision-making tree rather than being at the bottom (under much older managers). Five reasons why Microsoft can't compete (and Steve Ballmer isn't one of them) [June 22]

if it's an app sold through our store we might be held liable

It has nothing to do with any notion of "liability". It's all about Job's desire to control the flow of information he finds objectionable, to bring you "freedom from porn."

You know, I read the story of Job in middle school and I can't say I remember this being a part of it...

if it's an app sold through our store we might be held liable

It has nothing to do with any notion of "liability". It's all about Job's desire to control the flow of information he finds objectionable, to bring you "freedom from porn."

I.e., censorship is freedom. Let's celebrate the Information Purification Directives. Not so much Big Brother as iBrother.

Look, anyone who's been paying attention learned that Apple was evil back in the 1990s, with the look-and-feel lawsuits. Censorship is just the latest of its trail of bad behavior.

the first device that see your movements in the future!

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/9/2010/06/6db9eddafa5ee84849d020538f1008d5/original.gif

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/9/2010/06/07757512fe01652a77d524cf51795baf/original.gif

the first device that see your movements in the future!

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/9/2010/06/6db9eddafa5ee84849d020538f1008d5/original.gif

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/9/2010/06/07757512fe01652a77d524cf51795baf/original.gif

I second the motion to 'Fire that marketroid!' If Google keeps the kind of idiots that think forcing visual garbage on all their users - whether personal or professional - is a good idea

I can assure you that no marketdroid was responsible for this fiasco. Modus operandi smacks more of Larry's former girlfriend.

They may have discovered it, but they didn't report it to AT&T.

...According to AT&T. Someone is lying. From TFA:

Goatse Security notified AT&T of the breach and the security hole was closed.

Then later in the article:

AT&T sent us a statement...: "The person or group who discovered this gap did not contact AT&T."

Personally, I think that AT&T is a sack of douchebags that doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and when choosing who to believe between AT&T and just about anyone else, I'm inclined to believe anyone else. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that someone did indeed notify AT&T, but now they're trying to cover their ass and make it sound like they somehow proactively found the hole themselves.

Hackers belonging to a group called Goatse obtained the e-mail addresses after uncovering a web application on AT&T's website that returned an iPad user's e-mail address when it was sent specially written queries

My heart goes out to the poor journalists heading out to the great google in order to get their big scoop on goatse.

Well, according the the story about the leak yesterday, the official description is 'the group is steeped in off-the-wall, 4chan-style internet culture—its name is a reference to a famous gross-out Web picture' I don't see many people looking it on Google... unless your only reading /.'s summery.... I personally preferred the one description of 'a picture of a man stretching his anus to 'olympic' proportions'. Just calling it 'olympic' proportions is a bad mental image enough.

I saw this few hours ago on twitter. Source: http://gawker.com/5559346/apples-worst-security-breach-114000-ipad-owners-exposed http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/7/2010/06/ileakinside3.jpg http://security.goatse.fr/

http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

Take a look between 2:04 and 2:24 in that video. Sure looks like a loaded RPG in the hands of the guy by the pole. Looks like the guy next to him has an AK.

If that were the whole story, these guys might have never been killed. But the helo crew was responding to ground reports that indicated these guys were firing on them.

Yeah, except that same helicopter (same day, before the 17min Collateral Murder vid) crew DIDN'T fire when children and other noncombatants were present, and a second time when they also couldn't get a positive ID on insurgents. YEah, those damn baby-rapists....

http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

Haha - "You're trying to convict me on the ONE time I actually raped your girlfriend... what about all those times I DIDN'T rape her!?"

Please cite your own relative level of training and experience, and how you would have done a better job than the gunner in discerning the difference between civilians and insurgents dressed as civilians. Bear in mind that a) some members of the group were visibly armed with small arms, and b) they were approaching a US position on the ground.

For extra credit, discuss the gunner's proven unwillingness to fire on targets which he could positively discern were civilians. (credit for finding this goes to kidgenius)

Yeah, except that same helicopter (same day, before the 17min Collateral Murder vid) crew DIDN'T fire when children and other noncombatants were present, and a second time when they also couldn't get a positive ID on insurgents. YEah, those damn baby-rapists.... http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

Are you a fucking retard, or what?

The fact they haven't killed one bunch of civilians doesn't justify them killing another bunch of civilians.

Did you even listen to the comms? Do you have a brain, or it got eaten up by video games?

A link that helps to explain your point more: http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

Yeah, except that same helicopter (same day, before the 17min Collateral Murder vid) crew DIDN'T fire when children and other noncombatants were present, and a second time when they also couldn't get a positive ID on insurgents. YEah, those damn baby-rapists.... http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

There are actually THREE versions. There are the Collateral Murder version. The "unedited" Wikileaks version which is what Manning sent. And the TRUE unedited version that Manning edited before sending to Wikileaks. http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

It doesn't exist. Manning edited it before sending to Wikileaks. Wikileaks further edited it. Here are the details http://gawker.com/5513068/the-full-version-of-the-wikileaks-video-is-missing-30-minutes-of-footage

Will get back to you on that question in a sec - first I have to watch these babies impersonating Lady Gaga.

Apple is not pushing a "social agenda."

Apple -- or at least, Steve Jobs -- is pushing a "social agenda" that wants to bring you "freedom from porn". The fact that you are not forced to use Apple products, does not change Jobs/Apple's desire to push said agenda using the means that are at their disposal.

Apple is choosing to not allow certain types of apps into the app store.

Which is not the issue. The issue is Apple's maintenance of a monopoly on content for the devices they manufacture, and it's about time that government anti-trust regulators stir from their naps and examine this issue.

It appeared to me that the book The Road Ahead was heavily edited so that it included NO useful information. The book was, at the time, utterly boring. The "predictions" were unimportant commonplace thinking.

There are two co-authors, Nathan Myhrvold and Peter Rinearson. It is possible that Bill Gates did none of the writing, or almost none. Why does the Slashdot story say, "Bill Gates's The Road Ahead"?

It seemed to me that the book was deliberate fraud. They knew that any book by "Bill Gates" would sell. They knew most editors at the time would not have enough technical knowledge to detect the fraud. So people would buy the book believing that they had gotten something useful.

They are still practicing that fraud. Patents are obtained using the name Bill Gates. Publications are still fooled. Do a Google search: Bill Gates patent. This is the truth: Bill Gates' Name Surfaces On Patent Applications. His name is "surfacing". Possibly he had little or no involvement.

If you have ANY way of showing that Bill Gates has technical knowledge, please comment. There is no evidence that I can find. Supposedly Bill Gates wrote the original (very buggy) Microsoft Basic in assembly language. After that there is no evidence that he has an interest in technology.

The real Bill Gates is socially backward and abusive. For example: Bill Gates Unleashes Mosquito Swarm.

Why Microsoft is angry. http://valleywag.gawker.com/384221/salesforce-to-become-an-all+mac-shop Revenge is a dish best served cold. (Or something like that.)

Only music users purchased some time ago that was under the old DRM scheme and they did not pay to upgrade.

Why should one have to pay to "upgrade" music they already own. In essence, they're trying to get us used to "renting" items and no longer "owning" them like we did before... I should be able to upgrade the track without a fee if I've already "bought" it.

All music sold on iTunes for some time now is DRM free.

I thought this depended on the label?

The engineers at Apple, when you talk to them at WWDC, are on a personal level very happy to give back to the community which Apple really heavily depends on. Apple at the heart of things is VERY much a bunch of really technical people, not marketers.

I've never been to WWDC. It's on my "todo list." It'd be great to talk to some of their developers but the cynic in me has to point out that most company workers "tow the line." On a similar note, I'm actually very impressed with Steve Jobs late night e-mail conversation with a gawker reporter. Although I might not agree with the censorship part, I am absolutely in awe that Steve would enter into such a conversation, and give such candid responses.

Maybe Slashdot covered this whole story and I missed it. Odd it wouldn't have it's own submission.
http://gawker.com/5529322/racist-harvard-law-email-the-cat-fight-that-turned-into-a-national-scandal-updated

Anything you say can and will be used against you. Period.

Oh, thanks, I'd forgotten about the Sex for Edits storm in a B-cup.

Presumably all you have to do to get your content the Jimbo stamp of approval is to "fuck his brains out all night". Don't all queue up at once.

It's bizarre how you keep going back to Microsoft and Yahoo, as if I ever expressed any support for them. I never even mentioned them.

This debate is about you claiming Google is some bastion of privacy, even when the CEO is flat-out telling you not to expect any privacy and that they're beholden to the Patriot Act. Privacy International gave Google a ranking of "Hostile to Privacy" in 2007.

Notice that you completely ignored the Google Buzz controversy I mentioned. Notice that you completely ignored that Eric Schmidt said they are compelled to share data with the government and the subsequent confirmation from Google Australia. You ignore all the indexing Google does of your private data solely for their advertising platform.

I don't know if you have a vested interest in Google (many employees astroturf around here), but it's obvious you don't care at all about privacy, despite your claims to the contrary. As before, I expect you to ignore Schmidt's statements and Google's recent privacy blunders.

I'll quote Eric Schmidt again since you have yet to address it:

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."

In the HP case, I don't think they publicized or gave away that information to potentially harmful persons. Palin could legitimately fear identity theft while the HP case that was more invasive seemed to have a very small group of people accessing the private information. Basically, was there potential identity theft in either case? Kernell's jury was hung on that, if I remember. The other thing is that the HP employees didn't seem to want to press charges (aside from one, if I recall correctly). So the pretexting victims need to step up and remember, the telephone companies weren't the biggest victims, it was the actual phone account holders that had their records accessed via pretexting. I'm no legal expert on the issue but I think if the people whose records had been accessed stepped up to sue then the result would have been different. I imagine Palin will exercise all options in prosecuting Kernell and since she's not in anyway trying to salvage a relationship with Kernell he'll get the book thrown at him whether he's sorry or not.

Also, I read about this in ValleyWag and didn't see it linked to in the summary. Not sure if theodp works there or if it was just coincidence but if this comparison was gleaned from there, some small credit should be given.

I think the line "don't go all Howard Hughes on us" qualifies for the meme of the year.

All it will do is make a few Atheists happy.

Why would an atheist, in particular, care who the Pope is? Is there some pro-atheist papal candidate who might have a shot at the papacy if the current Pope is ousted? It seems an odd statement.

Even better: these guys might end up in charge.

Either Schmidt is stupid (and I don't buy that) or he thinks you are.

Or he was grossly misquoted?

If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place, but if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time, and it's important, for example that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act. It is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities.

The latter part makes it seem like he's talking purely pragmatically: it's always possible others will find out what you do, so the only safe option is not to do it. He's also clearly leaving open the possibility that you might legitimately want to hide something: "maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" (not definitely), and then "but if really need that kind of privacy . . ." (implying that some people do need it). The last sentence makes it sound like he's only talking about crimes.

But we really have no idea, since we don't know the full context. If you look at a clip of the video, it's clear that what was said immediately before this line was cut off in the original published interview video. We can't be sure what question he was even responding to, or what context he was putting the statement in.

But hey, let's just pick a soundbite that proves Google is evil, then paraphrase it so it's even more clear-cut. That makes things simpler.

The Catholic Church is populated by (I assume) the most faithful, pious, dedicated and god-worshipping of us all. Otherwise they wouldn't have been willing to "give up a normal life" for the strict teachings, disciplines and pure lifestyle of the clergy of the Church; nor would the Church have ordained or otherwise embraced them as "holy enough" to do the work of the Church.

This can also be assumed of those who enter into the Islamic clergy.

However, we are now witness to the endemic abuse and dysfunction within the Catholic church, and within Islamic schools as well.

In response to which, the Catholic church tries blaming it all on anything but themselves.

So where is Faith in all this? If God speaks though the agents of the Church, does that make God complicit in paedophilia by His inaction to prevent it, and all other bad deeds done in His name? One would assume not - that His voice was simply not heard by those assumed to be closest to Him.

So if you can't trust the Church, and you can't trust God to do anything about His own institution, where does that leave Faith?

After all this, the answer is simply that Faith is a human need. It has nothing to do with what really exists or how the Universe really works. It's a basic human need, the most fundamental form of which is faith that "life has meaning" or that "it all makes sense". You don't need to be religious to want to feel that. Most people want to feel that in some way.

The other basic human need is fraternity. If you're a member of a group who dresses the same way and preaches the same stuff, it's an awfully powerful emotional high. You feel secure, supported and - sometimes - superior. However, those of the latter disposition are of questionable integrity. Some people just love to feel superior and once in a position of power may abuse it.

All our beliefs and institutions have evolved as expressions of basic human emotional needs and desires. God is a part of this process, in that He is also a manifestation of our needs. That doesn't make religion a bad thing, not at all. But perhaps a realisation of this would make us more *responsible* for ourselves, for our own behaviour, instead of being so willing to blame our weaknesses and transgressions on Something Other.

I think Downey would be happy to do an Avengers movie, even if it weren't already required by his Iron Man contract.

And why do I think this? Fuck D.C. Comics.

http://gizmodo.com/5495946/ipad-alternatives-the-main-contenders
or in a chart form
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2010/01/slate_chart_v2.jpg
From the not shipping just yet to the over priced to the Linux to Windows units.
You have the choice to wait, over spend, be locked into Apple/MS or pick up a cam, flash supporting low cost super slate with ok battery life.

It's like car designers intentionally doing all their drawings such that only 3' midgets can use the car

Welcome to the world of rat rods:

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jalopnik/2009/02/Bettie_Paige_Rat_Rod.jpg

http://s-seriesforum.com/albums/jman/rat_rod_s10_2.jpg

At least on this one the roof has been helpfully removed:

http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/1932-ford-rat-rod_100170259_m.jpg

I don't Google for others who just cry "Source - because I'm too ....." But, today I'm in a good mood. http://valleywag.gawker.com/323882/gun-owner-says-facebook-gave-employer-access-to-her-private-profile

In the future - Either keep up or do your own research.

-[d]-

Nanoparticles and Transferrin receptor, Simplified diagram:
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/4/2010/03/a24330d4c386a394de94deac3aeb8e7a/original.png