I'm just wondering how, all these years, flipping a page in a book/magazine has been instantaneous for everyone else but me ...

This study is, as studies in general tend to be, lacking in real detail and offers no real conclusion. At best, it serves to inspire debate about shit that doesn't need debating.

If you want to know how e-books compare to their print brethren, try an eReader or two out. Presumably, you have read countless paper-based writings, so you ought to know fairly quickly how well the format works for you.

Sheer speed isn't necessarily the "be-all" either.

Some reasons I have chosen the eReader format going forward:

- Unlike someone mentioned above, "how to hold it" is far less of an issue with an object of consistent size than with varying sizes of books/novels/mags. I read a lot in bed, laying on one side or the other. This generally means that, while one page will be a totally comfortable read, the opposite side requires a change of placement of book, head, or both. Other issues arise with the size of a book and amount of pages. The start/end of a large book can be unbalanced due to the distribution of the pages, thus being difficult to read.

- I find the same issue (how to hold) actually kept me from reading most books in public places (such as the metro, where you have limited space and time). NOw it is far easier to hold my ereader (sony 505) in one hand than most books, and I can flip the page with that same hand. This means I will actually break out a book on a 10 minute bus ride, where I did not bother to before.

- Portability: The fact that I can carry around a TONNE of books in one tiny form-factor means I can do far more reading when I am not at home.

- variable text size: This actually allows me to read faster as I dont find myself getting "lost" in large paragraphs of text, causing me to have to re-read parts of a book.

- exposure to new material: Let's face it, not everyone can get published, and no one want's to read a 100+ page pdf on their computer. I think the single largest benefit to these devices is that it allows you to read things you otherwise would not be able to. It lends exposure to the "little guy" (I have friends who have written whole novels, theses etc that I am now able to read).

There are more pros, and certainly some cons too, but the bottom line is that I am reading far MORE (and more varied) material now with my eReader than I ever was. Isn't that the most important thing.

Im sure there are cases where libel/slander comes into play (I can never get them straight),
but isn't the real issue that people are taking the law into their own hands?
Vigilante justice is a bad idea (as well as being illegal) for just that reason.
Even if what was said about your neighbors was true, those vandals broke the law. Why didnt they ask questions before flying off the handle?

So if I (in Brazil) think you're an asshole, and I don't say so, I'm adhering to X. But in so doing, I have violated IV because I was not free to express my thoughts.
Sup wit dat?

Disclaimer:
I don't think the parent is an asshole, yet.

No it isn't. Not if it's called "a demo".

I just checked the HP Envy out, it is EXACTLY like a macbook. They didnt even try to hide it.
Still, I applaud the rip-off. It shows, at the very least, that they understand how ugly the rest of their lineup is.
The guy who said "NASCAR" was right on the money. No other term quite embodies the black-hole-of-suck that is PC laptop design.

Logic fail.

Had this plot "gone through" he would have actually been charged with something other than "solicitation of murder", the charge carrying a 20 year sentence. Let's assume the murder charge is worse.

again, the 20 years ... not for ACTUAL MURDER. Not to mention, Im pretty sure this guy wasn't weighing his jail time options and "settling" for 20 years. I think he wanted to silence the witness(es) and not get caught doing it.

from my post on TFA:
Here's the thing, it doesn't really matter if she is plain old lazy, or truly depressed.
The issue here is that the insurance company is making the call, and it is not their job to make that decision.
The insurance company's job is to collect premiums and pay out when the doctor says "this person has a bad back" or "this person has a broken leg" or "this person is clinically depressed".

It is my assumption that this woman has regular meetings with a doctor at which time she is assessed to see - "is she still depressed?", "Has there been any improvement?", etc.
THAT is the ONLY information the insurance company needs to make their decision.

Anything else, such as info from FACEBOOK, does not tell the whole story, hell, it might not tell ANY part of the story. It may be irrelevant, and it may just be misinterpreted completely by someone who lacks the professional designation to be making decisions and pointing fingers in the first place.

The insurance company no doubt will argue that the have to "protect their assets" and that "people scam insurance co. all the time". While that is no doubt true, we must not forget that the insurance companies make plenty of cash by ripping people off on a daily basis. It's a two way street.

Bottom line, insurance companies HAVE to take the advice of "trusted" professionals, trusted or not, really. That is why we have doctors and lawyers etc - we must have someone who has the proper knowledge to make the ultimate decision.

If they want to save money so bad, they can start by firing the person that is paid to browse facebook.

What's the big deal? At least he isn't addicted to MMA. Could be bad for the health.

Or MMF ...

http://www.google.com/chrome

Maybe Im a little late on this, and no doubt the display is impressive, but you dont really seem to have a clue what the parent is talking about. The fact that you fed the same signal to two different monitors doesn't tell anyone a single thing. The way colors are display on said monitor is dependent on a profile used by the OS. If your displays arent profiled and calibrated properly, you are just talking about dumb luck when saying one looks "better" than the other. Since you "split the signal", can I assume only one (or none) of the displays were calibrated and profiled properly, and that was the profile in use by the OS? Or even worse, were you simple using the "generic LCD" type profile? Im not really blown away by the fact that you can change color spaces in the monitor either, since (I assume) color correction is still required for a properly managed workflow, changing these settings on the device would throw off calibration, and require re-profiling.