The US naval ship Windows NT crash meme is somewhat of a myth - there was a testbed ship (USS Yorktown CG-48) running an experimental ship management and integration system. The crash did indeed occur, but it had nothing to do with Windows NT and everything to do with invalid data being entered into the apps management system causing all linked systems to stop working. While everyone jumps on the "Windows NT" aspect of this, it would have happened under Unix as well.

That entirely depends on the jurisdiction - a similar case went to court in the UK back in 2000 - 2007 and the man won his case.

The woman appealed all the way to the European Court of Human Rights and lost her case completely.

The issue is that the man withdrew his permission for the embryos to be used - up to the point at which they are implanted in the woman, they are jointly owned and cannot be used without express permission of both parties. Embryos are also not legal entities, and as they are not yet part of the womans body, she does not get automatic final say over their use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

Would your argument work for you if the man was able to take the fertilized eggs and have them implanted in a surrogate who brings them to term? Surely the woman should have some say in that?

DLL Hell has long been solved as you can do the decent thing and use ilmerge to merge your application, its requirements and dependencies into one binary .exe. .Net versions are easy to handle, since you just need to target the runtime versions (of which there four of any note) and the compiler will compile all "newer" features available for .Net versions using that runtime down to IL which runs on that basic runtime - so all you need to actually target in a release is .Net 1.0, 1.1, 2 and 4.

But I would still take a web app over a native app for a significant portion of my tasks any day of the week.

Your data, you keep it private then. Anything you leave publicly knowable should be fair game imho.

How could that person make "balls-ton of money" when you say its a "non-profit"? They should be charging cost and nothing more.

Ok, so lets be pedantic then - substitute "artist" with "rights holder" in my post then. It's still a valid question.

The advertising "argument" is a fucking ludicrous one.

At what point did Pandora explicitly ask the artists if they wanted their work advertising? At which point did the artists explicitly agree to Pandora advertising their works?

When you build a product which is specifically built around using other peoples works to satisfy your customers requirements, at some point you have to pay the piper - so stop with the fucking advertising "argument", Pandora is taking money from subscribers and advertisers on the back of the works of third parties, so of course there should be recompense to those third parties where those parties require recompense.

Its a problem because the OS isn't checking the entirety of the app for correct signatures, just part of it. Which kinda removes the point of checking at all.

I can install the most recent Windows on Apple computers which Apple won't let you install fairly recent OSX versions on...

Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 R2 on a 2006 Mac Pro, which Apple dropped support for years ago and infact blocks you from trying to install Mavericks on.

At least one can say XP was supported for far longer than the 2006 Mac Pro was.

Do ESRI actually generate the data? If so, what's the complaint?

The Judge did nothing of the sort, the chimps were the ones named in the case by the animal rights activists, the Judge had to direct any motion at the chimps for the owners of the chimps to respond - and thats what he did here. He asked the owners to respond, via the Habeus Corpus motion - he had no other recourse.

The activists are claiming something that didn't happen.

Its amusing how all four of the points you raise are false:

1. The initial prosecutor threw the case out, but a second senior prosecutor took up the case on request from the victims.

2. Assange was not told he was free to leave Sweden, infact his lawyer was specifically told they wanted to talk to him again and he should contact the police before leaving Sweden.

3. No Swedish or Interpol law was contravened by the issuance of Assanges warrant - infact, this is exactly the sort of use they are for.

4. All UK courts where this case has been argued has actually both affirmed the legality of the arrest warrant, and affirmed the right of the Swedish to issue it. No UK court has ruled it illegal, and most certainly no UK court has said what you claim they have said.

How about you get your facts in order before claiming bullshit, k?

He is, the "embassies are sovereign soil" thing is a myth, not fact. Add to that fact that the Ecuadorian Embassy is a rented flat in a shared building and I'm sure the owner will dispute the fact that its Ecuadorian soil...

Assange fled UK jurisdiction to avoid being legally extradited by a recognised court of the land - so yes, he is a fugitive. So your example is complete rubbish because its not equivalent to the Assange situation at all - if the chief justice of Scotland appeared in front of a court in Iran and the court ruled against him, and then he fled Iran, then yes he would be a fugitive.

No he isn't, regardless of how much you want him to be. But it is interesting how many have bought into his PR bullshit while ignoring the fact that if the US wanted him, they had ample opportunity to get him from the UK in the years before he fled into the embassy.