@That Guy: Just to point out: philanthroper.com is not a charity itself. It's just an interface. From what I've read about it today, your money is going from your bank account to the charity's, and philanthroper.com is not involved in any way except for the advertising. The benefit of donating through there is that…

Search is fine for me, since I tend to get my information from specific sites and therefore add them to my search terms from the start.

@RainyDayInterns: Or put it behind your refrigerator, in a closet, near the floor, or cut out the back of a cabinet. So many possible ways to hide things. It's all about figuring out where no normal person would look and hiding it there somehow.

@AmphetamineCrown: So maybe it's the possible implications of it and not so much this actual issue? I.e., content delivery providers having the power to prioritize their services through pricing.

As far as I'm concerned, more discussion about net neutrality can only be good for us as consumers.

@AmphetamineCrown: As I've understood it, it's because Comcast was trying to "tax" Level 3 for its "high (specifically-video) traffic"... which, in a way, would favor their own tv/video services.

@Tristam Green: Now... where do "Norwegian kids who listen to Creed" fall?

@Maori_Yelir: I think a lot of "Christian bands" are shying away from that appellation after a certain TV show revealed the formula.

Those bars are far too wide to effectively prevent determined drunks/addicts from achieving their goal.

@NorthernRoamer: I'd be pissed, but sports fans are sports fans, and Pennsylvania is crazy about its teams. So, for my own safety, I'd probably just bat an eye and not actually say anything about it... .

@The Anti-Fanboy: "What exactly is the point of getting someone to drive your car through traffic to work if you're just gonna take a motorbike to work anyways?"

@TareG: Billiowing? Powl? Bowooling?

@The Squalor Also Rises: I have a bad feeling about this.

@Kaiser-Machead: "What are/What're your feelings*"

@reddyroc: Pinch to oooh?

@Canoehead: No one would want to touch that screen.

@SkyHawkMkIV: My XX chromosomes were honestly ambivalent; though I did enjoy contemplating the possible reaction.

@geolemon: You might enjoy this article. I've been passing it around since I saw it. It has some interesting ideas.

@Manly McBeeferton: I refuse to be Cancer! I cede my crab to you [;)]. I've always been more catty than crabby anyway. Rawr for being a Leo! I even bought a beanie baby lion (like a million years ago) in Italy out of commiseration with him... Now what am I going to tell him? I don't even like seafood!

@tomatO_-: From what I've read, it's just a different zodiac (i.e., there are 2+ systems) that they decided to superimpose on the "normal" one.