I can't see how an Anglo-Portuguese version of the same word is any better. Does colonialism make local religion tastier?

That argument rests on an assumption that is by no means settled: you assume that "Bombay" is a corruption of "MAIAMBU"; a hell of a lot of scholars (and ordinary Bombayites) think it's a corruption of sixteenth-century Portuguese for "good bay". That particular linguistic argument has been going on for a long time and shows no signs of stopping. "Mumbai", however, is unambiguous.

A parallel situation: many cities in Eastern Europe and Central Asia got renamed with Soviet monikers, and many have reverted to their ancient names. Favoring one name over another is obviously a political statement.
Some people in the city we've been discussing feel that the city's ancient name has been restored; others feel that a new one has been imposed. It just so happens that this new (or ancient) name has been restored (or imposed) by a political party that I, with many, find repugnant.

Antinous -

"Bombay" was home to an amazing diversity of cultures, languages, and races, and could fairly be called the cultural capital of India.
"Mumbai" is the capital of Maharashtra and is ruled by a party (Shiv Sena) which would like to expel anyone who's not Marathi. My friend's family happen to be Punjabi, and suddenly having to call the city of their birth by the name of someone else's goddess (Mumbadevi) sticks in their craw.

I'm an American, and have never been to India; my instinct has always been to be PC (as I saw it) and call the city Mumbai. I've now heard another side to the story, which led me to do a little research, and it's back to Bombay for me (without nostalgia for colonial days, Flashman fan though I am.) You, of course, may choose as you see fit; my original point was simply that it _is_ a choice, and not as clear-cut a choice as it might seem.

By the way, "Bangalore" recently renamed itself to the original "Bangaluru" - which turns out to mean "boiled beans." Fair play to 'em, I say.

A number of commenters have mentioned "Mumbai/Bombay" as an example of wilful Amurken ignorance... Not necessarily. Sometimes a name has political significance.
Renaming the city from Bombay to Mumbai was the work of Shiv Sena, a fairly virulent Hindu-nationalist party. I was recently informed by a friend who was born there that in certain circles (her own, for instance) it is NOT the done thing to call it Mumbai - in fact it's a small gesture of resistance to continue to call it Bombay. (Anyway, what would we call the filmies, then: Mollywood?)

This reminds me of another case: Burma/Myanmar. I don't see eye-to-eye with the Bush administration on much, but I do agree with their continuing to call it Burma.
The military junta calls it Myanmar; Aung San Suu Kyi calls it Burma. I know which I'd rather say.

Disappointed a few people
When friendship reared its ugly head
Isn't that...
What friends are for?

We visited friends in Russia recently, and I was happy to see some nifty space-saving ideas in apartments there.
Nothing ground-breaking, but I found it pretty cool: the toilet itself is in one small room, and just next to it is the lavatory/tub/shower/laundry room.
One faucet serves both the tub and the sink - it has a long arm and swivels back and forth - and the same faucet has a push-button shower diverter.

Having the tub and toilet in separate chambers solves one problem and creates another: sure, you can use the toilet while your roommate showers, but then there's no place to wash your hands (except the kitchen sink... ewww.)

I was intrigued enough to take pictures:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mt_head/sets/72157607045663517/

Point 1 - American POWs have been waterboarded on many occasions (Korea comes to mind, as does Vietnam) and have confessed to the most outrageous bullshit propaganda you can imagine.

Point 2 - The US has released prisoners from Gitmo after having waterboarded them. Apparently what they confessed - or refused to confess - didn't rise to the level of a chargeable offense. Oops, sorry!

How can anyone who claims possession of more than two working neurons support this or any other coercive interrogation techniques? It seems clear to me that they are morally indefensible except for that classic "ticking bomb" case - but even that's not defensible, because you can't actually depend on the information you extract being reliable.

We have sold our souls for fool's gold.

In general, it seems to me that Soviet-era cartoons were much more... I think "charming" is the right word... than their American equivalents. Sweet without (usually) being cloying. Violence is rare to non-existent; children who go off alone in the world invariably meet with helpful, friendly strangers. There are unfriendly postmen (Pervoklashina) and frustrated witches/maiden aunts (Cheburashka), but they are either frustrated in their scheming or converted into friends.

I love the Bugs Bunny and Tom & Jerry of my childhood - but all of my Russian friends have a nostalgia for the cartoons of their childhood that's almost painful. I'm a little jealous sometimes.

We had new hardwood floor installed by a couple whose last name is Vinnikhan (they're Russian, but of Tatar extraction, I believe.)

Every time I talk with them, I have the hardest time remembering NOT to call them "Vinnipukh"...

Not to pick nits, but Las Vegas isn't quite in Southern California. Close, but not quite.

#18 -"deus ex machina"

I'd say it's a bit of a stretch to call that one technology-related - it's an old Latin phrase for a plot device in the even older Greek theatre, where a god was "flown" in on a rope and harness to wrap up all the loose ends. Sure, it's technology - but rope-and-pulley technology.

#42 - I also wish that pints were regulated here in the States. In general, however, there really aren't any (enforced) standards for bar quantities of any kind. Even shots, jiggers, etc. are "accepted" standards only, with no force of law - when's the last time you heard of a bar being fined for selling watered drinks? (Except in South Carolina, where until 2005 state law mandated that all drinks be mixed from airline-style miniature bottles.)

I suspect (not sure, though - the only work I've ever done in a bar was with my elbow) that the difference between US law and European is that here, the bar owner pays the last whack of tax on alcohol when he buys it from the wholesaler; in Europe the tax is collected on the sale to the customer - hence the requirement to measure what the customer gets and pays for.

If my understanding is incorrect, I'm game to hear about it.

#2 - "It's not the punks you have to worry about in Camden Town nowadays; it's the Crack dealers with their knives and guns that loiter on every corner.

(Yes, NIMBYism is alive and well in North London.)"

Well, call me a snob if you will, but I don't want crack dealers in my back yard either! I'm pretty sure that NIMBYism only applies if it's something widely acknowledged to be necessary (such as a sewage treatment plant), but which you simply don't want near your house (although moving it to some other neighborhood would be fine with you.)

I'd be interested to hear someone defend the thesis that crack dealers are necessary.