I forgot to add that I don't think that Flash blocking will be a long term solution. With the push to replace Flash with HTML 5 it won't be possible to block a single type of object to prevent annoyance and infection.

Although I agree with blocking flash, and do so by default, blocking scripts renders many sites unusable. It's too much manual work to whitelist each site by hand. AdBlock Plus is the only content and scripting blocking plug-in with a whitelist subscription that I have found. I enable it and it works without my intervention. That's how computers should function. They do the work so that I don't have to.

As for supporting sites, it's not my responsibility to make a company's business model work. Here in the US there is no guarantee for a business' success and citizens are not required to patronize companies to keep them operational. Any company is free to refuse me service if they choose. I am also free to do as I wish with the product once I have it. I've taken a copy of the local free paper only to read one article and then throw it away. I choose what I want to read and read only that.

Likewise, I choose what content I want my browser to load. Just because a site offers more data to me doesn't mean that I am compelled to download it. If a web site operator doesn't like that, they are free to not serve me. I will go elsewhere. I won't let other people dictate to me how I use my computer.

I think many web sites would find more success in providing additional content for subscribers. LWN.net seems to do well with this model.

This is why I block all ads and all your moral arguments and begging be damned. Ad blocking is sensible risk management.

Tell that to all of the people who use laptops for classes, or all the people who use netbooks, or all the people who use tablets, or all the people who don't want to wait over a minute to get to their desktop. When you add up those people, startup time for their desktop.

That's another non-issue. Cold booting is a rare event, even among non-technical users, now that modern operating systems support standby and hibernate features.

How bloody hard is it to copy a file? A text one at that? How hard is it to literally grab and drag a file from "Download" to where your local .opera directory is, or to directly save the file to .opera?

Harder than having the computer do it for you. Humans shouldn't have to do what the computer can automate.

No link to the article?

How many milliseconds does it take to load the JVM, initialize it, load the class files etc before the byte code even starts executing?

Does that even matter? Java is most used in long-running programs, not programs that are starting many times a second. The startup cost is minuscule. Focusing on startup cost is as pointless as these reviews of linux distros that concentrate on how fast the distro boots. No one is sitting there rebooting over and over saying "look at how productive I am now."

I think it's pronounced Better File System.

Russian Ark was a whole movie shot in a single shot.

I'm wondering why they restrict it to iPhone only...

Because it's not a VoIP application and requires a telephone connection to work. I'm sure someone will point out that it can integrate with SIP, but that that's a non-discoverable, for nerds only feature for which Google doesn't provide any web interface or instructions on how to use. Joe Average isn't going to be using SIP with Google Voice until it's officially supported. Google did buy Gizmo5 so they may make it happen at some point in the future.

I've been very happy with gandi.net.

But I suppose being an idiot isn't your fault, probably genetic.

Was this personal attack really necessary? You had a valid point which you then dilute by pointless name calling. I know Slashdot has a lot of teenagers on it, but can't we all be a bit civil?

They sold and/or rented these devices to their customers as a reseller. Are they responsible for GPL compliance or is the original manufacturer?

Yes, Telstra is responsible. The GPL governs distribution of works and it's up to the distributor to comply with the license. If Telstra distributed these devices they they are bound by the GPL and must provide source if requested. Likewise, the vendor who supplied these to Telstra must supply the source to Telstra if they request it.

You are either an economics major or under 25.

Wrong on both counts. It's been more than 30 years since I was under 25.

Employment is more than just business in the real world. It's a social activity and organizations are social structures rather than ideal friction reducing "infrastructure" that some academics think they are.

It may be a social activity for the employee but it's most certainly not for the employer. Businesses are all about business transactions either by design or due to legal obligations imposed by government.

In any case, we are discussing loyalty between employer and employee. A business is not a person and employment is not a marriage. Expecting to stay with an employer out of loyalty is absurd. Ultimately, the relationship between employee and employer is one of cost and benefit. Are both parties deriving benefit? If so, there's no reason to change anything. But needs and desires change. The business may change direction which could lead to redundancy in employees. The desires or needs of the employee may change which might facilitate them leaving for another business.

Speaking for myself, I have been thinking of making a career change within the next five years. I am creeping up on retirement age anyway, but have a desire to work with a non-profit for which I have been volunteering over the last several years. It would mean less pay but far more job satisfaction. At my age, with a paid off house, plenty of retirement savings and a vested pension, I am willing to make that sort of change because the benefit of accomplishment and happiness outweighs my financial desires. I can assure you that the situation was reversed when I began my career 30 years ago.

Should I stay with my company out of some misguided sense of loyalty? Am I arrogant enough to think that this company can't continue to function without me? Of course not. I am replaceable and I know that. I have a lot of company knowledge in my head but others can cover for me and a replacement can be trained. I will do what is best for me and, if I leave, make the transition happen in a responsible manner for all concerned.

I suspect that Lars is in much the same situation. He created something interesting and sold it to Google. I imagine that he's quite financially secure. Now he has other priorities and wants to pursue those things that interest him and this opportunity is what he decided to pursue. Should he be loyal to Google? If so, for what reason? The company will survive without him. There are plenty of smart people at Google with many more clamoring to get in. Meanwhile, Lars only has one life and I can't fault him for wanting to live it.

Maybe this is one of those things that can only be understood with age. As you become more financially secure and the kids grow older and leave home, your priorities change. You'll experience it some day, I'm sure.

The value of loyalty is completely gone in today's organizations.

It should have never been there in the first place. Employment is a business transaction for both the employee and the employer. Employees have long fantasized that it wasn't, but are now waking up. Why shouldn't both parties attempt to maximize their returns? For the business this usually means getting what they are paying for. For the employee it might mean better pay or benefits, or it could be for more intangible returns such as achieving personal goals, helping others, working on interesting things, that shiny new title, etc.