I'm a type 1 as well and have been for about 10 years now, been on a pump pretty much since I was diagnosed. The pumps aren't really any more dangerous than injections and they're a lot more convenient and accurate as well. If your concern is hypoglycemia the pump might actually put you less at risk than an injection would. The ability to do things like dual boluses or square waves also helps a lot depending on what you're eating.

That said, I don't think this particular technology is anything special. So far as I know this is basically the existing pump/monitor combo Medtronic has been pushing for a while now just with a new feature to cut off the pump in the event it detects signs of hypoglycemia. The existing system sucks because you end up having to inject two different devices, the infusion set for the pump, and another device for the monitor, and they can't be anywhere near each other either. I might consider getting an integrated pump/monitor if they can ever manage to get both functions in a single package, but till then count me out. I'm actually betting they come up with a cure for at least some forms of type 1 diabetes before they manage to overcome that particular hurdle though.

Comes down to knowing your target demographic and making the right choices. The target demographic of Photoshop is corporations and working professionals with lots of disposable income as can be seen by the ridiculous price for Photoshop. Given that they don't seem particularly interested in catering to hobbyists by selling a sanely priced version (say something sub-$100) I see no reason why they shouldn't allow non-commercial use for free. For all intents and purposes that's the unofficial situation currently, as everyone I know who uses Photoshop either pirated it, or it's the copy their work bought for them.

Yes, we're number on manufacturing, after all look at all these goods made in... uhm... China... ok, bad example... we're number one in electronics! See, I've got this awesome computer that was built in... Japan... alright, so uh... well, our economy is... uhm... no... strong currency?... nope... uhm... I've got it, we have the best space program! What? Oh right, we're getting rid of that.

The problem with the relationship between math and programming is that math is of absolutely no use to a programmer, except when it is. That's a rather obtuse way of saying that all the math in the world won't make you a better programmer if you don't already have the foundations of programming, but if you've already mastered most facets of programming knowing more math will help you. Depending on exactly what you're doing, and with what languages you're doing it, you'll get more or less use out of different math fields and theories, but exactly what you'll find useful is going to vary wildly from project to project and language to language. Of course your basics like algebra will never steer you wrong, and to a lesser extent calculus can be useful. Beyond that a light sprinkling of statistics, basic boolean logic theory, and the odd bits and pieces from set theory are all you'll really need unless you're using something specific for the project at hand in which case you'll probably need to brush up on whatever it is anyway. Since your in school now you might as well expose yourself to as wide a range of maths as possible in case something should happen to prove useful down the line, but I wouldn't be too terribly worried about it if you struggle with anything specific as you probably won't need it anyway, and if you do you can worry about it then. The most important thing to take away from it all is a basic understanding of what's out there available to you so you know what to go looking for in the future.

I'd argue against counting a XMonad window as a tab, in fact I'd argue it's the exact opposite of a tab. The idea behind tabs is that you have multiple windows, but only one visible at a time, where as in XMonad you have multiple windows each arranged with some percentage of the total screen space. I suppose you could be using a Full style layout, and simulate tabs by only ever having one window open on a workspace, but that seems to rather miss the point of a tiling window manager in the first place.

That's pretty much the advantage right there, you don't have dozens of pages cluttering up your task bar (if you happen to be on a OS/Window Manager that uses task bars or equivalent). Tabs are essentially a superior form of MDI interface (and yes, I know that's redundant, much like PIN Number), giving you a pseudo task bar inside the application window, that's task specific to that application. A similar effect is achieved in newer versions of windows when you have enough windows open that they form groups or stacks on the task bar, but with the disadvantage that you can't manage them all at the same time. Another benefit somewhat hinted at in the previous sentence is that you can move and resize every tab at once, where if you weren't using tabs you'd be forced to manage each window individually.

Depends on your window manager. I use XMonad which is a tiling window manager and makes having multiple windows fairly painless. I've got 9 virtual desktops I can arrange things on, and I tend to group them by task. For instance, I've got my IDE open on one desktop along with 4 terminals, 3 for doing various things like kicking off builds, and one for minicom so I have access to my dev boards serial port. Another desktop has firefox and a pair of terminals. A third desktop has vmplayer with windows for dealing with corporate BS, and the last desktop I'm actually using right now has Rhythmbox and a terminal I use for mounting/unmounting the portal HD I store my music on. If I need to fire up another application, like say a view of the file history for something in our POS (corporate mandated) version control system I can just hop onto an unused desktop do whatever, and when I'm done I close it down and go back to whichever desktop I need next. Now, to do something similar on Windows, OS X, or even another Linux window manager like Gnome is either impossible, or cubersome, so I can understand why you would hate having that many windows on a non-tiling window manager.

He was doing something for the express purpose of annoying other players with no benefit to himself, in other words, the definition of griefing. Just because he didn't violate any specific rules doesn't mean he gets a free pass. Even if his actions were within the "rules" of the game, they very clearly were not within the spirit of it. And before you get started on that bullshit "he was a hero, he had to kill the villains", that's not how the game is designed, merely the premise of the world, it's the lore as opposed to the actual game. Quite simply the area he was exploiting was designed to prevent exactly the behavior he was committing, the idea being to provide a safe haven for the players, but by exploiting an oversight in the design he turned that safe haven into an insta-kill zone. Further more he made it worse in that PvP in the game is designed to have no adverse effect on the players, that is, even if someone were to for instance figure out a way to camp your corpse and repeatedly kill you there would be no in-game side-effect other than the waste of your time. The method he was using to grief players however essentially tricked PvE elements of the game into performing the actual kill which by design has negative repercussions on the player. In essence he found a way to apply PvE effects to a PvP kill. The game is clearly setup so that PvP has no adverse consequences, yet he found a way to do exactly that. How exactly is this not griefing?

Long Live TPB 2.0, whatever they decide to call it. Not to be confused with TPB post buyout which will have a presence and relevance much like that of Napster post buyout, IE, none at all. When will companies learn that just because you bought the name, doesn't mean you've got the people. People don't go to TPB because of the name, they go because it offers something they want, once you stop offering that, then people stop coming, it's so simple even an MBA could figure it out (eventually).

I had looked at eclim in the past when it was essentially a way to re-skin the guts of Eclipse using vim, but it looks like they've since added more capability to allow you to embed vim inside eclipse itself, which is pretty cool. I don't remember whether viPlugin was what I used previously, but it's possible as all I really wanted it for was to be able to quickly jump around and do search and replace (e.g. :$s/foo(baz[0-9]+)/bar$1/i, or :?baz) which it seemed to handle just fine in addition to providing some minimum scripting support.

There are a couple, but last I looked none of the free ones were any good. There was one that I think I paid $10 for that worked very well though.

It's both productivity and quality in one when you use WTF?s/Lines as your metric. Low line count, or high WTF? count will equally degrade your rating (not strictly true mathematically, but close enough). Hint, smaller numbers are better. You could of course also measure it in Lines/WTF?s, in which case larger values are better, but a lack of WTF?s leads to a division by zero.

Having had the misfortune of using Visual Studio, it really makes me wish someone could do for C#/C++ what Eclipse does for Java. VS is mostly there, but for instance not being able to quickly and simply find all classes that implement a particular interface, or to find all occurrences of a class or subclasses of that class can be a real pain in the butt when you've grown used to having that ability in Eclipse. I understand of course some of that is the fault of the language, what with C++ being such an unbelievable rats nest of dependencies.

And interestingly enough some of them evolve systems to encourage their consumption where it's beneficial to do so (see for instance most fruits). One might argue that the tobacco that's been selectively bred is in fact a superior strain of tobacco that's developed a symbiotic relationship with humanity. We get tobacco to smoke, and in return the tobacco plant is spread far and wide and cared for to maturity. How much of the original species of tobacco still exists today, and how does it compare to the bred strains in terms of distribution? Darwin might argue that makes the bred versions a more fit species. One might also argue of course that the new tobacco is a overspecialized species at this point and too dependent on its symbiosis with humanity making it fragile, but only time will tell.

BTW, for those that actually bothered to RTFA, you notice everyone involved was drinking ridiculous quantities of soda (most of the referenced individuals had consumed at least 4 liters per day). Every time I see one of these stories invariably it turns out the people involved are consuming quantities of something well beyond reason which people then turn around and try to turn into some sort of blanket statement that X is bad for you. The chemical reactions that occur inside of any living organism are a complex balancing act, but are to a certain extent very resilient (certain portions more than others), but too much of ANYTHING in the mix will cause problems, I don't care what it is.

Look at the ratios of things in our natural diet and try to stick with that, not because there's something "magical", or "holy" about things found in "nature", but because it's a fairly good rule of thumb for the inputs our metabolisms are balanced to handle. As I said previously, everyone is different, no diet will work for everyone, so adjust as needed, but stop trying to preach that there's something special about "natural" foods, or that when you drink or eat quantities of something way beyond reason that that proves it's inherently bad for you.