Another possibility is that the winner is lying about losing. I know personally that I wouldn't want to be known for winning that auction.

That's not a confusing sentence at all...

And these are the people we want to trust making decisions about our healthcare?

They should just contact the NSA. I'm sure they've got copies.

Let me get this straight: you oppose all forms of compensated entertainment? So you consume no music, no movies, no fictional books, no games of any kind (electronic or otherwise), view no works of art...nothing at all? Or do you consume these things but just presume that people should never be paid for providing them to you?

I'm not about to shill for the copyright-manipulating media conglomerates, but IMO your viewpoint is either hopelessly extreme or ridiculously hypocritical. If people choose to entertain someone else, that effort has intrinsic value. Now exactly what that value might be is debatable and purely subjective based upon the value it has to those consuming said entertainment, but it surely has value to those who consume it, otherwise they wouldn't. You pay for people to fix your food at restaurants, or to build your computer components, or any number of other trades that require someone with a particular skill to perform a particular service. Why should entertainment alone be considered a pro bono profession?

"After my election I have more flexibility." -- Obama to Medvedev

And this, ladies and gents, is why the free market works when it's allowed to work unhampered by meddling from politicians. AT&T is a shit company. I hate their service and product offerings, but even more I hate their flippant attitude towards their customers. Along comes Google to kick them out of their complacency. If AT&T gets on the ball and delivers good service at good prices, it's good for me. If AT&T drops the ball and Google displaces them, it's good for me. Competition, folks. It's a win-win.

What? And destroy the current lucrative system of kickbacks, cronyism, and propping up otherwise unprofitable, unaffordable, unworkable systems and businesses? How will Senators and members ever get elected properly without the subtle system of bribes that currently grease the wheels of professional politics? Don't you know *anything* about how to get stuff done inside the Beltway?

Sheesh...you people need to get a grip and understand how power works in this country.

Isn't it funny how NASA -- the agency that for *decades* screamed that the shuttle's reusability was the *key* to why America should depend upon it for our *primary* launch platform -- is now willing to admit the whole "reusable" thing was crap and everybody *knew* it was crap. We'd have done far better to keep using things like Saturn V's.

Now I sincerely *hope* SpaceX has somehow learned from NASA's failure and perhaps *can* make the economics of a reusable engine work. One thing at least: if SpaceX *can't* make it work, you can be sure it can't just make up the difference with taxpayer money and call it a success. As a private enterprise, it can't.

Sorry, but I just can't see the feasibility of flying cars unless they're entirely autonomous. Getting a pilot's license is difficult for good reason, and is also part of why flying is so safe. I can't see how well it would work to teach everyone how to fly given that.

I don't understand why Sidhpurwala didn't have a back up contact in another time zone that could have been contacted when he was asleep.

Sure, but I'm willing to bet there are some people that have paid for OpenSSL support, and I'm willing to bet they will get compensation for this.

But still no lawsuit. Then again, this is what happens with proprietary software too.

To a certain extent, you're right, but open source lives and breaths on its reputation, and I'm fairly certain that the coders behind OpenSSL are employed somewhere in their capacity to actually write code. I'm not certain that they're necessarily employed to write OpenSSL code, but it wouldn't surprise me. On top of that, many employers of open source developers often offer paid support for what their employees are coding up.

And so to the extent of their reputation, and any paid support provided, they will be held to account.

"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence." -- Hanlon's Razor

Did he mention anywhere that he's apologized for what he did?

Did he mention anywhere that he's changed his position?

Did mention anywhere that he would try to make up for what he did in the past?

I'm pretty sure he didn't do any of that. Sure, he said that Mozilla would continue to be inclusive, but he said nothing about his own views.