Wasn't SnapChat's confusing interface deliberate, though? I thought I read somewhere they meant for it to be confusing, and many features to be hidden or unintuitive to force users to talk to each other about it and share tips/tricks. I can see kids liking that their parents don't understand it; lots of videos kids grabbed of their parents confused about how the lenses worked, for example. I never liked that mentality; thought it was self-defeating. Once Instagram came out with their "stories", I think it was the beginning of the end for SnapChat. They must be trying to draw the novices the initially spurned.

For what it's worth, the way to make "background checks for private sales" work is to have a gun registry. It's the only way to enforce it, and it's one of the main reasons gun supporters are so opposed to checks for private sales. Currently, I could transfer a gun to my neighbor, and there's no way to know that I transferred it, or he went and bought it himself. BUT, if there was a registry that said that I owned this gun at one point, they could figure out if I did an illegal transfer. Obviously no one talks gun registry now, but it's inevitable when people realize (or admit) there's no way to enforce checks for private sales with out it.

In short, background-check-for-private-sales = comprehensive gun registry.

It's even more fascinating than that. There's an entire body of geometry based taking the opposite of the base assumptions of Euclidean geometry (parallel lines DO cross, triangle angles add up to something other than 180 degrees, etc) and can prove all sorts of crazy stuff from there. Sorta makes your head hurt if you get too deep into it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

Subject should say DVORAK > QWERTY... stupid HTML...

The idea that QWERTY was designed to slow us down, and that DVORAK is significantly better are both surprisingly long standing urban legends. Liebowitz and Margolis wrote the definitive article debunking this (in 1990!) with loads of research. The jamming issues were sorted out before QWERTY became standard, and it actually won out over a number of other layouts over a period of years. Additionally, the studies show DVORAK is better generally came from Dvorak himself. Independent studies (like one done in 1956) show there's no appreciable difference. This is probably the main reason DVORAK hasn't really made much ground, even though it's been around since 1936.

http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.html (1990)

They wrote a follow up in 1996 showing how this myth keeps propagating, and how authors keep referring to each other, making the myth sound legitimate. Having 25 citations certainly makes it sound like it's true.

http://reason.com/archives/1996/06/01/typing-errors (1996)

My guess is DVORAK users may have some form of "sunk cost" bias, considering they spent the time and energy converting to the new layout. Possibly some affirmation bias on the old studies. Not sure how else you could justify the costs of using a non-standard keyboard with no conclusively proven gains in speed.

If you're gonna troll to be the first post, at least make sure you ARE the first post...

Nukes are used on the last day of the war by definition. Similar to how a lost item is always found in the last place you look.