I, for one, am tired of the stereotype that geeks can't be expected to maintain a wardrobe of nice clothes, understand what goes with one's bodyshape, skin-tone and how to mix fits, patterns and colors etc.
You could say the same thing about health insurance. I have paid more in premiums that I have made claims for (I think), but I still find the insurance valuable. For some monthly amount that I have already budgeted, I am protected against the cost of any health-related issue. Not worrying about this is worth "throwing money away" for -- it is about balancing risk. (Things that aren't risky, like savings accounts or health insurance, aren't necessarily the best use of money. You could have made more money investing in subprime mortgages. Of course, too much risk, and you lose everything.)
Warranties are like this; some people are happy paying $50 for unlimited iPod replacements for 2 years. Personally, I look at me breaking something as an opportunity to upgrade to the latest and greatest. But some people don't want to pay $300 for that opportunity.
The difference is that the maximum downside of not buying the warranty is the cost of the unit (actually the cost of the unit discounted by the regular warranty period ) the downside of not having medical insurance is that you die (at least in the land of the free / home of the brave)
That makes sense, but for me it would be more convenient if I could wear glasses while using the computer and not while doing other activity, which hopefully will be possible with the research that's going on.
A better example would have been the recent Air France crash off Brazil. While the real news outlets (even the BBC) are showing pretty graphics, reporting other reporters fabricated stories as 'sources' and making stupid technical goofs (the black box doesn't send messages to a GPS satelite)
Blogs like aviation safety network and askthepilot are reporting comments from people that fly the same type on the same route, designed the black box in use and serviced the exact aircraft in question.
His biog says he skipped high school and went straight to grad school - that also wouldn't be possible here. He would need the correct number on his "key stage 3 year 11" exams to be entered into the computer before he could be allowed to do key stage 12 exams.
Strange how we supposedly won the cold war but the losers system seems to have been adopted.
We have had to stop accepting child geniuses into our maths dept because anybody that works with under 18s (even escorting them on a campus tour for an open day) now needs extensive police checks - 'to protect the children'.
Searching Google, I assume you're Australian? I don't know what "stage 12 exams" are.
In the US it's quite possible for a child gifted in mathematics to skip all sorts of things. My third year of college I taught 11th graders the subject I had just covered the previous quarter, Algebraic Topology, and also the theory of computation.
The 9th and 10th graders in the program were learning linear algebra and Scheme (the programming language).
It's weird to be in a room full of people who are in high school and are approximately 100x better at the subject you're studying.
UK - I was making an ironic point that the name of the tests seem to change and get more 'bureaucratic speak' every year.
Under a soviet centralised government system there was apparently more freedom to teach to the student's abilities than in the free world - where everything must match upto the central government stanardized testing quango.
Once you own a pair of jeans, a black T shirt and either Tevas or hiking boots (depending on which coast) you are pretty much set.