I'll just add to the online poker discussion since I played a LOT as well (though never for a living) and am now reduced to playing live, which I've been doing a lot recently.

I'm not sure how much collusion really went on. It turns out that a LOT of people were making a decent living (70-150K) playing stakes as low as 1/2 grinding multiple tables, and if any collusion was going on it was probably a lot higher stakes than that. The sites were definitely on the lookout for that kind of thing, and there were also sites like pokertableratings (much reviled by good players for a number of reasons I won't go into here) that captured hand histories and make them public so the general population had an eye into what was going on as well (they were not a philanthropic organization, but it did allow for people to examine closely players they thought were winning outside of an established winrate).

Winrates at onoline hold em are MUCH smaller than live, so the only way to make big money is to play a TON of hands (or play higher stakes). If someone is making an abnormally large winrate, people will know and they will be scrutinized.

One of the more intersting problems in poker (and this happens in all games, online and not) is what happens when the games get really tough like they were online (and still are, as far as I know). You end up with 5 players at a table who are very good and know who the other four players are that are good, and one bad player who basically is the reason the game goes. These good players aren't going to play very hard against each other because they know they don't have much of an edge- if you play 100,000 hands against an equally good player you'll both come out losers because you are essentially trading money back and forth with the poker site taking a cut out of every pot.

The pratical implication of this is, unless the bad player (The "fish") is in the pot, the good players (sharks) aren't going to bother, and they aren't going to play that hard against one another. This looks a LOT like collusion, and even though they tehnically aren't, when people get out of the way of each other and target a single player, that looks (and behaves) a heck of a lot like collusion. True they aren't seeing each other's cards, but the reality is they don't really need to. They have a good idea of where each other player is at and where the money is.

I've actually been enjoying playing live quite a bit more than online (the games are much, MUCH softer), but when you run bad you can lose a lot fast (which has happened to me over the last three months). I also struggle a lot with playing 30 hand per hour when I've played several hundred per hour in the past. It takes some getting used to

I use my iPad mainly for media consumption. However, one of our lead engineers here uses his iPad for taking notes and sketches during meetings. I have my plethora of notebooks, depending on the program, he has one iPad and does everything on that.

I was down on a production (or destruction I guess) line looking at parts that were questionable with a couple other folks. One guy had his iPad and was taking notes and pictures directly with it to keep everything in order. The rest of us relied on pencil drawings, copious notes and descriptions and a dedicated camera that we'll have to use to integrate all that stuff into a single document. I think his productivity (and the lead engineer's here) was probably enhanced quite a bit by their iPads. It really depends on what you want to do I guess.

Okay, so a portable computer with webcam helps.
That's not unique to an iPad.

Nope, but it is a lot easier holding a tablet up to take a picture than trying to maneuver a laptop/netbook around to get a picture based on the camera orientation

The killer feature of an iPad is definitely the form factor.

And it's a lot easier typing notes on a real keyboard than on a touchscreen imitation!

But yeah, that sexy form-factor turns heads for sure!

Mark, that depends a great deal on what sort of typist you are.

I am a fairly proficient touch typist (~100 wpm) and if I had to do all my typing on an iPad, I would soon turn it into a Frisbee and go outside and play with the dog.

My wife, marginally a touch typist, is perhaps a fifth my speed, and it probably makes little difference to her whether she is typing on a touch screen or on the holy grail of keyboards, the IBM Selectric typewriter.

The third category is the group that types with two fingers, probably wondering what all the fuss is about. "Screen? Hard keys? What's the difference?"

Is there a fourth category: "Thumbers"?

I'm guessing that you fall into the first category, maybe even at the extreme guru level of being able to use the number keys on the top row of the keyboard without looking at your fingers. I've always been in awe of people who could do that...

tanstaafl.

It also depends on the person and the physical keyboard. For whatever reason I can type more accurately and faster on the iPad keyboard than I can on the physical keyboard of our netbook.

I think part of the reason is the auto correction and auto completion on the iPad, it really does mean you can be a lot less accurate but still end up being accurate. I suspect the netbook keyboard with similar auto correction would be as fast for me as the iPad. Does Windows 8 add any sort of auto correction ?

I'd rather be on a real keyboard, but the form factor of the iPad means I can generally carry it around with me and it's usually within reach. I don't type essays on it, but for a quick post here or there it's much easier than keeping up with a laptop.

But by in large the keyboard is a non-issue, as what I'm using it for doesn't require much keyboard use. I use it to read, surf the web, follow forums, watch movies, stream webcasts to my TV, and check email. These are all things where the size of the iPad makes it a much better experience than my iPhone, but the flat, light form factor makes it more portable than a laptop.

Sure if I'm writing a novel or slinging code I'm going to need my laptop, but for the majority of computer related actives I do the iPad works well enough that the form factor makes it a much more accessible device that a laptop or netbook.

For example, this is posted from my iPad. While I'd rather be typing on a real keyboard, I do alright on the iPad, and the form factor is what is allowing me to sit here next to my mother and son while I post this (I wouldn't have bothered to boot up and mess with my laptop).

First off, it's great to be back. I've been missing you guys (just too much work).

I've had an iPad in my home for quite a long time, so far, and overall I am not a fan of it. I mean, I am really not. I would never spend money on an iPad (I got it for work. Long story). But, the one thing I do like, to my big surprise, is the form factor. I agree a physical keyboard is way better for typing, but all the other benefits of the smaller/lighter/thinner form factor make up for that, in most cases (as far as I am concerned, of course): at home watching TV or in the backpack/bag.

I can't wait for the first tablet-pcs to hit the market (Surface and similar). I'm definitely getting one, specifically for the form factor.