@twophrasebark, while you're urging people to grab their dictionaries for the word "subtext", you may want to flip over to the definition of "overwhelming." The first parts of the documentary dealing with the use of mirrors and discontinuity and shifting between real and imagined action really was fascinating—and the…

How is Lego not eco-friendly? Has anyone ever thrown away Legos intentionally? No. End of discussion.

So you spend $200 on a snazzy Nespresso machine, plus $51 a pound for fancy capsules in eight shiny colors (retailing exclusively at Nespresso boutiques in the world's leading cities!), and I'M a snob for brewing $14/lb coffee in my $30 chemex? Which takes a grand total of 4 minutes?

It is not hot enough to properly extract coffee, no—they max out at about 180 degrees, from what I've read, don't brew for long enough, use far too little coffee to begin with, and are, by nature, using coffee that was ground months previously and has lost much of its flavor. But plenty of folks don't care. (It's…

There are many things I feel when looking at this advertisement, but outrage just isn't one of them. Don't they get points for pure, mindless brazenness bordering on hilarity?

Ah, I see the Deadspin spirit lives on here at Gizmodo. At least over there, when they're trashing the personal lives of completely innocent bystanders, it fits in with the whole swinging-dick bravado of the site. Here? Like nails on a chalkboard. I don't come to Gizmodo to take voyeuristic pleasure in watching you…

Ah. Curious, if you have decided that bitterness is purely a matter of perception, why are you insisting that grapefruit is not bitter? For someone who believes that words like "sour" and "bitter" have no objective meaning, you are spending a lot of energy arguing that something is objectively one and not the other.

Fight! Fight! Fight! It is a nice opinion to have. Because it is based on scientific fact.

Lemons are sour. Grapefruit is sour + bitter.

Yes! That's the best part of the post! Whatchu got winter? Nothing? Yeah, that's what I thought.

@John Frum: What's compelling me to be negative? I like buttons. I don't think touch screens are functional in a remote. (And I consider myself a remote aficionado.) For the record, I did not bash this particular remote. It's a prototype. There is not enough information to bash it. I noted two functions I consider…

What's truly terrifying: The only reason we're even aware of this level of ignorance is because we understand this particular subject matter. Think about all the things state and federal legislatures are crafting bills about every friggin day, in every area you can imagine. How much of that legislation is equally…

Do you have to "wake up" your touchscreen to pause or mute? Then it fails. Can you pause, mute, back up 10 seconds, skip ahead 30 seconds, strictly by touch—i.e., without having to look away from the TV so you can look at the touchscreen? Then it fails. Sometimes buttons serve a purpose.

Apparently I have become a complete coffee snob. (not sure when it happened exactly.) but at this point, I just couldn't make a cup with coffee ground earlier than a minute or so before I'm brewing it. Nope, can't do it.

No way that came from a focus group. That was a top-down strategy decision. And it makes sense in many ways for the long term future of the business, but it was implemented so haphazardly, it just reeked of hubris.

I can buy criticizing the communication plan with the price increases. But the rest, I have to wonder how much is really the fault of a poor marketing strategy, and how much is simply the result of the people at the top making crazy-ass, poorly thought-out decisions by the seat of their pants. The Qwikster thing, and…

You are not alone. Gizmodo has spent the last two years telling people that Sense was a major improvement over bare-bones Android.

Hmmm... Disappointing. Longtime Android user, and I was thinking about finally moving to an iPhone next summer when my contract runs out. There are other reasons (I'm more comfortable that Apple will stand behind its products if, for example, a software update bricks my phone.) But for me, the biggest question mark…

Just the tidal forces from nearing the sun as it progresses in its orbit could tear a comet apart. All of the smaller fragments would then continue their orbit around the sun, unless and until they pass near another body massive enough to change that orbit. There doesn't need to be an actual collision with anything.

Wow... I know gizmodo loves Apple, fine, I get it, I expect it. But what is this supposed to be exactly? Your pitch to get hired by Apple marketing? Your first draft of the brochure? Jesus... At some point don't you want to try to maintain at least some shred of credibility as an independent source of information…