I don't buy that being in the office was ever good. That's for me, other YMMV.

I wonder if this inspired in any way by Python's type system. You're free to ignore it and never use it, but for any complex Python system, it really help find bugs.

And you trust them to abide by that rule? The recommendations change to stop masking was wrong and dangerous because the unvaccinated took it as permission to stop wearing masks, too. Until deaths drop worldwide, it should be the norm to wear a mask outside your household. It's something simple that saves lives, vaccinate or not. Period.

Face unlocking is legally not different than fingerprints and and law enforcement has been using that for a long time and it's not protected by the fourth or fifth amendments and this has been upheld by the SCOTUS: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.bloomberglaw.com%2F...

I think the subject speaks for itself, but Slashdot doesn;t like empty comments.

Rian Johnson (fuckwad extraordinaire) doesn't care about fans (his own words) and won't follow story from others (threw away the notes from Abrams). The Last Jedi is easily the worst Star Wars film ever. Why anyone would hire him to do another movie is beyond me.

Really, this was a big miss in the options.

2016 is officially going to the special hell.

No, I'm serious. We use a PS 3 (several years old and 1 drive replaced; otherwise works fine). The Netflix and Amazon TV apps work fine. We tend to search for new shows on the laptop to put it in the recently watched list. We have a Chromecast too, mostly for playing Youtube clips.

You must be new here.

"comments about lack of options" >> /dev/null

What is this land line you speak of?

From the TFA:
    At the request of The New York Times, a security expert not affiliated with Hold Security analyzed the database of stolen credentials and confirmed it was authentic.

Also, the text of the 1st amendment starts "Congress shall make no law". Nothing in there applies to private entity. The first amendment has *nothing* to do with this case.

The title suggests that Google is fighting against distracted driving laws, but when you read TFA, it sounds like they are really fighting laws that ban Glass-like devices which, depending on your point of view, might not be the same thing.

When I'm using my phone to navigate in the car, I have to glance at the phone occasionally. If I had Glass active and it was showing some of the same things, I wouldn't need to look away from the road and (in theory) could be less distracted. IMHO, I would think a blanket ban on the device is premature at this point. If Glass is released to the public and the data shows that it causes problems, the it will be time to start the discussion.