Am I think only one that doesn't really think a social engineering hack should be described as a "massive hack exploit"? And it's not confined to one company anyway even though they are trying to pin it on Apple (because page hits yo).

You should know by now Giz loves to hype the headline, stuff it full of hyperbole, and then let the story fall apart with each passing sentence. By then you've already clicked.

Knowing how a plane works, and seeing that piece, I don't think it would really bother me too much.

I could think of a lot of reasons to strengthen both of these endeavors. Why does it have to be one or the other. If you want to cut budgets, look at things that are destructive instead of constructive.

This picture can only mean bad news..... for the next jerkoff who says to me the US space program is dead.

The articles I've read up to the landing said that the Skycrane was actually the least insane of all the options that were on the table. And before you say "airbag", the rover is way to big to land by way of an airbag.

Well, Prof Brian Cox says it's true. Sorry Im taking his word over yours.

You're a curmudgeon. And FWIW, I don't see any evidence of Live Trace. And before you give me "what the hell do you know?" I've been using Illustrator since version 2.

Its the lack of a magnetic field like the Earth's that allows the solar wind to strip away any atmosphere Mars has ever had (or would have). The core of Mars differs significantly from Earth's which explains why the Earth has a protective magnetic field and Mars does not.

The funniest part is when the guy is laying on the ground and the cop puts the orange cone next to him.

TL;DR

I love this film with all my heart, especially its deft portrayal of complex scientific ideas like Einstein's theory and the Drake Equation. And John Hurt's portrayal of S.R. Hadden gave me chills at just the right moments.

And yet every day millions of people assure themselves of the existence of God.. you know, just because they "know" it's true.

The remainder of that article states that the flags are most likely bleached white by 40 years of sunlight. Ironically this makes them easier to spot from lunar orbit.

The images in this story came from the LRO, not the Hubble. Even pointing the Hubble at the moon wouldn't give the visual clarity you seem to desire. These landings sites are small. The landers are the size of a small truck. The moon is about as wide as the United States.

How do you know he doesn't prefer Burger King or Taco Bell?

As someone who has (literally) made a career out of Photoshopping images for advertising and branding, it sickens me to see this sort of manipulation. For one reason, it's just blatantly unethical in an editorial situation and also because taints the legitimate use of Photoshop for the purpose of commerce.

Adding complexity to a function is not good design. A standard pizza cutter will work just as well and be easier to clean. No need to take it apart to clean it.

Another "oh it's cool looking but functionally it's crap" design. Just wait until the cheese and sauce that gets caught up inside that thing starts to harden and start going moldy. They say "form follows function" for a reason.

I use AOL as a new client filter. If they email me from an AOL address, I pretend I'm too busy to do work for them. It just portends trouble.