Google did it for me: "The diameter of the universe is 1.4 hellameters"
Fuck. Only 1.4??? That really is a hella big number!!!
But, I guess, it's actually bigger than Avogadro's Number, which I've always considered to be one of those numbers that's so vast as to make me glaze over.
So, I wonder what people do use 10^27 for then? It sounds like there's very little practical application for it.
As long as you don't say "chillax" or don't call something "sick" because you think it's good, I promise not to scream.
Then, dude, chill, sit back, enjoy a blunt, listen to some ill rhymes, and contemplate getting some shizzle on your dizzle while you kick it with some fly, phat shorty in your crib. The feelings will pass. Know what I'm sayin', G?
Peace out, dawg. Chillax is a perfectly cromulent word.;-)
I tried those... found that in bright sun they caused my eyes to get sunburned.
Really? Mine have always been 100% UVA/UVB, so if anything, I get raccoon eyes because the parts covered by the glasses never get tanned, and they're wrap-arounds. Heck, most pictures of me it he last decade have me in orange lenses.
They also mess up your depth perception and colour vision over time, tho a lot of people don't notice unless they need one or the other for their daily work.
I have no idea if that is the case -- I've literally worn them every time I'm outside in the daytime in all weather conditions for a decade. Apparently I'm in the minority, and usually have to look very hard to find a replacement pair when they break -- I literally went to 10 different places the other week to find a pair.
And, I find I don't need to wear my corrective lenses when I drive a car (weak near-sightedness) -- it actually improves my depth perception, and when I'm wearing them at least, improves my color vision. Except for night driving (which I will sometimes still use the orange lenses for), I've not worn my glasses in a long time.
For me, it's now how I'd prefer to see the world when out in daylight.
Unless Lucas has been selling Light Saber (TM) Brand Laser Swords, this is not even remotely a trademark issue. It's a different domain altogether. Coca Cola is a trademark. Light saber is, at best, descriptive. The fact that this is a tube with fins on it is likely irrelevant too.
A prop in a movie is not the same as a brand, and it isn't used the same way, and doesn't enjoy the same protections. Heck, if someone made a real "laser sword", Lucas would have no leg to stand on either.
something tells me that he wouldn't send a C&D letter because they "stole" his idea, instead he'd be happy that he could be the inspiration for such a great idea.
Yeah, it's not like Arthur C. Clarke tried to sue when someone actually put up a communications satellite.
This makes me want to wear orange goggles all the time.
*laugh* Well, if it's orange goggles, I think I'm safe.
I've worn sunglasses with orange lenses for most of the last decade because I find it improves my vision and color contrast like no other lens tint -- specifically because it blocks a lot of the blue spectrum your eye isn't making use of anyway, and therefore enhances the colors you can see.
If it also keeps the laser-equipped sharks at bay, I'm good! =)
I remember being somewhere in the mid-west in the 80's in a really crowded room when I heard someone someone ask for a coffee. In a different part of the room, another voice suddenly said "CoFFee!" in the unmistakable tone of the machine. Then another voice from somewhere else echoes "coffEE?". Within a second, a third voice replies "COFFee" in yet another tone.
Interesting. The way you describe it, one might almost think it was the inspiration for the voice of Wall-E -- where he goes through a bunch of different permutations of saying his own name before he settles on one.
I wonder if it's pure coincidence, of if there's a connection. The inflections sound very much like the voice from the movie. Or, maybe that's just how everyone thinks if computer speech in its primitive form.
By the gods, I wish that I had modpoints today. Protip: Don't argue against tattoos to the tattoo'd. They are maniacally pro-ink
And, more generally, don't go around saying "all people in group X are deficient because I say so". It's not about ink, it's about people standing on the side and saying "all people not like me are bad people".
If I said all military people are loudmouth assholes, and that's all there is to it, you as a former Marine would rightly take umbrage to it. If I said all religious people are wrong, someone would take exception to that. If I said everyone who uses emacs is a tool and should surrender and use my beloved vi... well, you get the point.
I don't give a shit if the poster is persuaded that tattoos aren't such a bad thing. I don't care if you or anyone else has their mind changed about tattoos. But don't say "all tattoos are bad and the people getting them are idiots".
As a general rule, if someone says "all people I disagree with are shitheads" (which the poster was effectively saying) -- then I'm going to call them on it. Hell, I have defended religion here on Slashdot, and I'm not religious -- because irrational gibbering is more offensive that honest disagreement.
What irks me far more on Slashdot is people who have a limited perspective making broad, categorical statements that can't really be defended or justified from any rational basis. It's just venomous screeching with no room for discourse. But, dammit, they're fucking right, and there's no way around it.
Seriously, it's not about the tattoos. It's about how you talk to people, and if you show a little respect for dissenting points of view without being a complete dick.
The Mayo Clinic says that there are health problems even if everything is done correctly
With most of those falling into how sanitary the equipment is, and the after care -- which should be treated about as seriously as a second degree burn, so not something to take lightly. By the time you have a tattoo, it's like someone took a sewing machine to a piece of paper -- the top couple of layers of the dermis are pretty banged up and if you don't treat it like a would, it can go wrong.
A scratcher who bought a gun off the web and has no training might actually have the needle penetration set too deep, in which case it will be excruciating. And, those guys likely won't know anything about sanitation -- sometimes someone will set up at a party and tattoo his friends, run from this. Always ask to see a portfolio.
I would say that the advice to use an antibiotic is actually a bad idea. Something like a polysporin will actually cause your body to drive out the ink, instead of sealing it in and letting it heal. Something more like a Vitamin E cream is what I've always been told and had good results.
While those risks are real, if you look around for a decent shop, and taker proper care, most of it is unlikely to happen. Nowadays in most cities of reasonable size, there's lots of people who have apprenticed and have the right equipment. Shop around.
Bile? I was just making an observation in somewhat colorful terms. And it annoys me when people justify fads.
I'm not justifying the 'fad' of tattoos. It took me 20 years of serious thought and waiting to get my first tattoo -- it's not like I jumped on the bandwagon and decided to get one last week. So, not everybody who gets ink is part of the 'fad'. Back in the late 80's, there were books like this. Some of us have been aware of, and interested in, body modification for a long time.
"By choice, I don't have anything more extreme that is visible to anybody unless I want it to be."
So, you are ashamed of some of your tattoos.
No. Absolutely not. I carefully placed my tattoos where I could selectively hide or show them depending on the situation. For business stuff, I prefer they not be visible because some asshats will just not get it. If I'm in a swimming pool, well, you're gonna see ink.
Check and mate.
Ass and hole. Dick and Wad. Slap and Nuts. How about Jack and Ass?
Do you really think you've scored some great point of debate? Oh, wait, you're just a professional troll, and I've been suckered. I see what you did there.
Well, it's thousands of years old. At the moment, I would agree, it is a bit of a fad. But, again, in and of themselves, tattoos aren't the problem, it's bad choices on what to get, and where to get it. Admittedly, it's a lot more prevalent.
It's really hard to take some seriously when there's shit sticking out of their eyebrows, ear lobe things that make one look like a yuppie Bush tribesmen, and a tongue piercing.
I actually understand what you're saying, I just don't understand the bile -- it's not like it has anything to do with you. Yes, I see kids getting their neck done, or getting the big ear-lobe thing, and I worry that in a few years those are going to be career-limiters. Because, even as someone involved with tattoo culture, there's certain things I am aware of will give the average person the willies.
People make snap judgments about others. Get over it. That's why you show up for an interview in a suit.
When I show up in a suit, you don't see any ink. My eyebrow piercing is long gone, and nobody seems to even notice my earrings anymore. By choice, I don't have anything more extreme that is visible to anybody unless I want it to be.
tattoos are about to look REAL dated
Well, then 40% of Gen-X is about to look REAL dated. Probably a higher percentage of Gen-Next is well on their way to getting ink. And, shockingly, an increasing amount of boomers are getting inked.
Hell, I know school teachers with tattoos. Typically discrete things that would never actually be shown at school.
You're over-generalizing to all of the "in your face" (literally and figuratively) stuff that people get done, and extrapolating that everybody who has ever gotten a tattoo. Why you're venting this much spleen at the concept of tattoo is hard to guess.
Seriously, it's not your damned lawn, grandpa. Get over it.
So? That breakup with that one girl has a pretty strong meaning, but it doesn't mean you should permanently remind yourself of it on your skin.
Well, the way you choose to remember something is up to you. Yes, it can lead to some ugly ass tattoos. But, it also doesn't mean that every person who gets a tattoo rushes in and gets some ink they didn't think through or later end up regretting.
Or it would attract know-it-alls who would come in the thread and be dismissive without adding to the discussion. Kudos to you!
*laugh* Whatever there skippy. See, I'm NOT defending every tattoo by everyone who has ever had one. Way too many stupid people have gotten tattoos for me to deny that fact. But, nobody needs to justify their getting a tattoo to you.
I'm simply pointing out that for a lot of people, getting ink is something they think about, and which the result has meaning for them. It's not an all or nothing "every body with a tattoo is a doodie head because I say so", which is about what some people are saying around here.
Saying "all tattooing is stupid" or "nobody ever gets a meaningful tattoo" or "all tattoos will get you hep C" is basically the kind of statements I'm talking about as being pointless, because it's largely uninformed drivel by people who don't actually know anything about tattooing.
The biggest problem with tattoos is that the tend to viewed as less professional, it is the only reason why I don't have a sleeve myself.
Indeed. Lots of people rush to the sleeve, because that's the most visible thing they can find. Even as someone with tattoos, a sleeve is a little too ever-present for me. It's a cool notion, but people don't always react well. Those who don't know about tattoos don't always see a sleeve and see good imagery, so they may unfairly judge you.
My rule is if long pants and a golf shirt will cover them, you're OK, and don't run the risk of being perceived as scary to people.
There's definitely a knee-jerk reaction going on around here about tats.
Tattoos hurt, they endanger your health, they are expensive, and most of all they are superficial. AKA they are for looks only.
OK, yes, they hurt. That's true.
As far as endangering your health, it means you're going to the wrong damned shop. Any tattoo place that doesn't have an autoclave, and single-use needles should cause you to flee. I've never seen an artist not using latex gloves, not using sterile gear, and not using ink in little disposable cup that get tossed when they're done. Any modern shop is actually very clean, and if it isn't, don't go there.
As to being purely superficial, lots of people get tattoos that have a strong meaning to them (and, admittedly, lots don't). Some people get tattoos so that other people can see them and say "wow, he's got a tattoo, cool". Others get them entirely for themselves -- you can't see any of mine unless I want them to be seen. You're making absurd generalizations -- if 40% of Gen-Xers are sporting ink, there's almost no generalization you can accurately make about why people get them.
Somehow I knew a story about tattoos on Slashdot would trot out a bunch of people who know absolutely nothing on the topic. Now everybody gets to make categorical statements they can't support with anything but opinion.
Not everything outside of your experience is bad, or stupid. Just something you don't know about.
Tattoos aren't in and of themselves lame. People get all sort of lame tattoos, however. There's an awful lot of really beautiful stuff out there too.
It's going to be an ugly green smear you will regrat (sic).
You're largely thinking of low-quality ones done in pen ink by some guy in a back room. Those tend to be real crap jobs that over time look like shit.
Modern tattoos done by a qualified artist are an entirely different animal in terms of how they look, and how they hold up over time.
And, really, if the sum total you have to add is "tattoos are lame", why are you even bothering to comment? You obviously have nothing better to contribute to the topic.
I've been thinking of getting a sleeve of math and science tattoos for quite a while now. With the money saved up, the only question remaining is, what equations/ideas should I get?
Do you really want to do this? It's going to be extraordinarily lame, and everyone is going to be forever looking at you like "Dude, what?".
I'm not dissing the notion of getting ink, I've got my fair share. But, really? Geek tattoos?? Equations? Chicks won't dig it.
And, as a purely practical matter, an artist is going to have a hard time adapting what you're describing, and won't know if he's making a mistake. If an artist isn't adapting it, you're going to end up designing your own tattoo, which will be mostly math -- your artist maynot know WTF it is. It could end up looking like you wrote crib notes in your arm and had them immortalized.
Go for a theme, or maybe something which depicts what you're getting in a more abstract way. But, a bunch of equations as a sleeve? I'd discourage it. It might not turn out a nice/cool as you're hoping.
Unless you have a very concrete idea with some sketches, this could go wrong. Rule of thumb is if you describe it to your artist, and his eyes glaze over like it's a dumb idea, you might not like the end result.
Wake me up when they add easy account switching to GMail. Then I'll be impressed with the "updates" to the system.
How much easier is sign out followed by signing in on the page it leaves you at?
One click followed by a username/password and you're back in gmail. That's not too many more keystrokes than it takes me in Windows two switch users.
I don't find it to be an onerous task -- or, are you hoping for one click to logout, one click to select login from a drop down, and then have everything happen for free? That would be fast, and easy, but not exactly secure.
Alex Jones claims it's because governments are being run by a banking elite and megacorporations, but I don't think it's anything so complicated.
Then you, sir, have lost sight of the power of lobbying.
ACTA, and anything related to trade and copyright have been pushed through because they've been beneficial to business interests. Most of the US bailout funds was spent on big banks because it would be awful if they had any inconvenience. Then, 6 months later, they're paying it back from record profits so they don't need to listen to the government telling them what they should do.
'The people' are ignored because they're not making campaign contributions on the scale of the MPAA/RIAA, and ACTA is being pushed through because precisely those industries want to be sure that the world is beholden to the US DMCA style laws.
You are correct, the politicians have decided they're the modern elite -- but, they still take a lot of direction from the corporations who tell them how they want things run.
Wrong as in factually incorrect or Wrong as in 350 pound man wearing a Sailor Moon costume?
(You're welcome for that lovely image too)
I'm not sure what is more disturbing -- the fact that you described it, or the fact that when I googled for images with fat man sailor moon, I actually got pictures.
Slashdot Mirror
Fuck. Only 1.4??? That really is a hella big number!!!
But, I guess, it's actually bigger than Avogadro's Number, which I've always considered to be one of those numbers that's so vast as to make me glaze over.
So, I wonder what people do use 10^27 for then? It sounds like there's very little practical application for it.
Then, dude, chill, sit back, enjoy a blunt, listen to some ill rhymes, and contemplate getting some shizzle on your dizzle while you kick it with some fly, phat shorty in your crib. The feelings will pass. Know what I'm sayin', G?
Peace out, dawg. Chillax is a perfectly cromulent word. ;-)
Wait, is this naming for units, or the lineage of the Marx brothers? I'm confused. ;-)
Seriously, Hella is much more fun. :-P
Really? Mine have always been 100% UVA/UVB, so if anything, I get raccoon eyes because the parts covered by the glasses never get tanned, and they're wrap-arounds. Heck, most pictures of me it he last decade have me in orange lenses.
I have no idea if that is the case -- I've literally worn them every time I'm outside in the daytime in all weather conditions for a decade. Apparently I'm in the minority, and usually have to look very hard to find a replacement pair when they break -- I literally went to 10 different places the other week to find a pair.
And, I find I don't need to wear my corrective lenses when I drive a car (weak near-sightedness) -- it actually improves my depth perception, and when I'm wearing them at least, improves my color vision. Except for night driving (which I will sometimes still use the orange lenses for), I've not worn my glasses in a long time.
For me, it's now how I'd prefer to see the world when out in daylight.
I guess your mileage may vary. :-P
In case you haven't noticed, that's why the Onion is so damned funny. Because, at any given time, life is in danger of imitating parody. :-P
A trademark only applies to, well trade.
Unless Lucas has been selling Light Saber (TM) Brand Laser Swords, this is not even remotely a trademark issue. It's a different domain altogether. Coca Cola is a trademark. Light saber is, at best, descriptive. The fact that this is a tube with fins on it is likely irrelevant too.
A prop in a movie is not the same as a brand, and it isn't used the same way, and doesn't enjoy the same protections. Heck, if someone made a real "laser sword", Lucas would have no leg to stand on either.
Yeah, it's not like Arthur C. Clarke tried to sue when someone actually put up a communications satellite.
Sometimes being prescient is just way cooler.
*laugh* Well, if it's orange goggles, I think I'm safe.
I've worn sunglasses with orange lenses for most of the last decade because I find it improves my vision and color contrast like no other lens tint -- specifically because it blocks a lot of the blue spectrum your eye isn't making use of anyway, and therefore enhances the colors you can see.
If it also keeps the laser-equipped sharks at bay, I'm good! =)
Interesting. The way you describe it, one might almost think it was the inspiration for the voice of Wall-E -- where he goes through a bunch of different permutations of saying his own name before he settles on one.
I wonder if it's pure coincidence, of if there's a connection. The inflections sound very much like the voice from the movie. Or, maybe that's just how everyone thinks if computer speech in its primitive form.
And, more generally, don't go around saying "all people in group X are deficient because I say so". It's not about ink, it's about people standing on the side and saying "all people not like me are bad people".
If I said all military people are loudmouth assholes, and that's all there is to it, you as a former Marine would rightly take umbrage to it. If I said all religious people are wrong, someone would take exception to that. If I said everyone who uses emacs is a tool and should surrender and use my beloved vi ... well, you get the point.
I don't give a shit if the poster is persuaded that tattoos aren't such a bad thing. I don't care if you or anyone else has their mind changed about tattoos. But don't say "all tattoos are bad and the people getting them are idiots".
As a general rule, if someone says "all people I disagree with are shitheads" (which the poster was effectively saying) -- then I'm going to call them on it. Hell, I have defended religion here on Slashdot, and I'm not religious -- because irrational gibbering is more offensive that honest disagreement.
What irks me far more on Slashdot is people who have a limited perspective making broad, categorical statements that can't really be defended or justified from any rational basis. It's just venomous screeching with no room for discourse. But, dammit, they're fucking right, and there's no way around it.
Seriously, it's not about the tattoos. It's about how you talk to people, and if you show a little respect for dissenting points of view without being a complete dick.
With most of those falling into how sanitary the equipment is, and the after care -- which should be treated about as seriously as a second degree burn, so not something to take lightly. By the time you have a tattoo, it's like someone took a sewing machine to a piece of paper -- the top couple of layers of the dermis are pretty banged up and if you don't treat it like a would, it can go wrong.
A scratcher who bought a gun off the web and has no training might actually have the needle penetration set too deep, in which case it will be excruciating. And, those guys likely won't know anything about sanitation -- sometimes someone will set up at a party and tattoo his friends, run from this. Always ask to see a portfolio.
I would say that the advice to use an antibiotic is actually a bad idea. Something like a polysporin will actually cause your body to drive out the ink, instead of sealing it in and letting it heal. Something more like a Vitamin E cream is what I've always been told and had good results.
While those risks are real, if you look around for a decent shop, and taker proper care, most of it is unlikely to happen. Nowadays in most cities of reasonable size, there's lots of people who have apprenticed and have the right equipment. Shop around.
I'm not justifying the 'fad' of tattoos. It took me 20 years of serious thought and waiting to get my first tattoo -- it's not like I jumped on the bandwagon and decided to get one last week. So, not everybody who gets ink is part of the 'fad'. Back in the late 80's, there were books like this. Some of us have been aware of, and interested in, body modification for a long time.
No. Absolutely not. I carefully placed my tattoos where I could selectively hide or show them depending on the situation. For business stuff, I prefer they not be visible because some asshats will just not get it. If I'm in a swimming pool, well, you're gonna see ink.
Ass and hole. Dick and Wad. Slap and Nuts. How about Jack and Ass?
Do you really think you've scored some great point of debate? Oh, wait, you're just a professional troll, and I've been suckered. I see what you did there.
No word of a lie, I have seen bodybuilders with tribal tramp stamps. :-P
Utterly hilarious.
Well, it's thousands of years old. At the moment, I would agree, it is a bit of a fad. But, again, in and of themselves, tattoos aren't the problem, it's bad choices on what to get, and where to get it. Admittedly, it's a lot more prevalent.
I actually understand what you're saying, I just don't understand the bile -- it's not like it has anything to do with you. Yes, I see kids getting their neck done, or getting the big ear-lobe thing, and I worry that in a few years those are going to be career-limiters. Because, even as someone involved with tattoo culture, there's certain things I am aware of will give the average person the willies.
When I show up in a suit, you don't see any ink. My eyebrow piercing is long gone, and nobody seems to even notice my earrings anymore. By choice, I don't have anything more extreme that is visible to anybody unless I want it to be.
Well, then 40% of Gen-X is about to look REAL dated. Probably a higher percentage of Gen-Next is well on their way to getting ink. And, shockingly, an increasing amount of boomers are getting inked.
Hell, I know school teachers with tattoos. Typically discrete things that would never actually be shown at school.
You're over-generalizing to all of the "in your face" (literally and figuratively) stuff that people get done, and extrapolating that everybody who has ever gotten a tattoo. Why you're venting this much spleen at the concept of tattoo is hard to guess.
Seriously, it's not your damned lawn, grandpa. Get over it.
Well, yeah. :-P
Well, the way you choose to remember something is up to you. Yes, it can lead to some ugly ass tattoos. But, it also doesn't mean that every person who gets a tattoo rushes in and gets some ink they didn't think through or later end up regretting.
*laugh* Whatever there skippy. See, I'm NOT defending every tattoo by everyone who has ever had one. Way too many stupid people have gotten tattoos for me to deny that fact. But, nobody needs to justify their getting a tattoo to you.
I'm simply pointing out that for a lot of people, getting ink is something they think about, and which the result has meaning for them. It's not an all or nothing "every body with a tattoo is a doodie head because I say so", which is about what some people are saying around here.
Saying "all tattooing is stupid" or "nobody ever gets a meaningful tattoo" or "all tattoos will get you hep C" is basically the kind of statements I'm talking about as being pointless, because it's largely uninformed drivel by people who don't actually know anything about tattooing.
Way to ignore the rest of what I wrote.
Indeed. Lots of people rush to the sleeve, because that's the most visible thing they can find. Even as someone with tattoos, a sleeve is a little too ever-present for me. It's a cool notion, but people don't always react well. Those who don't know about tattoos don't always see a sleeve and see good imagery, so they may unfairly judge you.
My rule is if long pants and a golf shirt will cover them, you're OK, and don't run the risk of being perceived as scary to people.
There's definitely a knee-jerk reaction going on around here about tats.
Man, I thought that said testicles -- and testicles and tattoos should never be spoken of at the same time. :-P
OK, yes, they hurt. That's true.
As far as endangering your health, it means you're going to the wrong damned shop. Any tattoo place that doesn't have an autoclave, and single-use needles should cause you to flee. I've never seen an artist not using latex gloves, not using sterile gear, and not using ink in little disposable cup that get tossed when they're done. Any modern shop is actually very clean, and if it isn't, don't go there.
As to being purely superficial, lots of people get tattoos that have a strong meaning to them (and, admittedly, lots don't). Some people get tattoos so that other people can see them and say "wow, he's got a tattoo, cool". Others get them entirely for themselves -- you can't see any of mine unless I want them to be seen. You're making absurd generalizations -- if 40% of Gen-Xers are sporting ink, there's almost no generalization you can accurately make about why people get them.
Somehow I knew a story about tattoos on Slashdot would trot out a bunch of people who know absolutely nothing on the topic. Now everybody gets to make categorical statements they can't support with anything but opinion.
Not everything outside of your experience is bad, or stupid. Just something you don't know about.
Tattoos aren't in and of themselves lame. People get all sort of lame tattoos, however. There's an awful lot of really beautiful stuff out there too.
You're largely thinking of low-quality ones done in pen ink by some guy in a back room. Those tend to be real crap jobs that over time look like shit.
Modern tattoos done by a qualified artist are an entirely different animal in terms of how they look, and how they hold up over time.
And, really, if the sum total you have to add is "tattoos are lame", why are you even bothering to comment? You obviously have nothing better to contribute to the topic.
Do you really want to do this? It's going to be extraordinarily lame, and everyone is going to be forever looking at you like "Dude, what?".
I'm not dissing the notion of getting ink, I've got my fair share. But, really? Geek tattoos?? Equations? Chicks won't dig it.
And, as a purely practical matter, an artist is going to have a hard time adapting what you're describing, and won't know if he's making a mistake. If an artist isn't adapting it, you're going to end up designing your own tattoo, which will be mostly math -- your artist maynot know WTF it is. It could end up looking like you wrote crib notes in your arm and had them immortalized.
Go for a theme, or maybe something which depicts what you're getting in a more abstract way. But, a bunch of equations as a sleeve? I'd discourage it. It might not turn out a nice/cool as you're hoping.
Think of the poor guy with the Zune tatoo.
Unless you have a very concrete idea with some sketches, this could go wrong. Rule of thumb is if you describe it to your artist, and his eyes glaze over like it's a dumb idea, you might not like the end result.
How much easier is sign out followed by signing in on the page it leaves you at?
One click followed by a username/password and you're back in gmail. That's not too many more keystrokes than it takes me in Windows two switch users.
I don't find it to be an onerous task -- or, are you hoping for one click to logout, one click to select login from a drop down, and then have everything happen for free? That would be fast, and easy, but not exactly secure.
Then you, sir, have lost sight of the power of lobbying.
ACTA, and anything related to trade and copyright have been pushed through because they've been beneficial to business interests. Most of the US bailout funds was spent on big banks because it would be awful if they had any inconvenience. Then, 6 months later, they're paying it back from record profits so they don't need to listen to the government telling them what they should do.
'The people' are ignored because they're not making campaign contributions on the scale of the MPAA/RIAA, and ACTA is being pushed through because precisely those industries want to be sure that the world is beholden to the US DMCA style laws.
You are correct, the politicians have decided they're the modern elite -- but, they still take a lot of direction from the corporations who tell them how they want things run.
No, I'm an outlier. I don't have a facebook account, and have no interest whatsoever in the damned thing. :-P
I'm not sure what is more disturbing -- the fact that you described it, or the fact that when I googled for images with fat man sailor moon, I actually got pictures.
You bastard!! I didn't need to know that! :-P