This is really something to consider - lighting. When I read in bed a bit of backlight would be good, but when I'm sitting in my car (only place I can find peace and quiet) during lunch, no backlighting is required, but ability to read in full, partial sunlight or shade would be desireable.
You don't want backlight. You think you want backlight because for decades there was no way to make a decent display unit that wasn't either emissive (like CRTs, VFDs and LEDs) or transmissive (like LCDs), so you grew used to having the display throw light at you. What you actually want is a reflective display (like electronic paper) and sufficient ambient light to read by. Amazon sells covers with integrated reading lights for 3rd and 4th generation Kindles; they work beautifully, and don't require separate batteries, as they draw power from the Kindle itself through the latches that attach it to the cover. They do shorten battery life somewhat, but not enough to be a problem—you just have to charge your Kindle once a week instead of once a month.
I'm pretty sure that it's only a matter of years before we have full-color 600 DPI electronic paper with no noticeable refresh delay, although I don't know if we'll ever be entirely comfortable watching video on reflective displays, and there will probably always be applications (such as cell phones, or their future equivalent) where emissive or backlit transmissive displays are preferrable to reflective displays.
One thing that sold me on the Kindle was the "Free Sample" you can get with most books.
All books, actually; it's auto-generated. You get the first 10% of the book, up to a certain number of pages. The problem is that with large works (such as collections or compilations) with detailed ToCs, the auto-generated sample might turn out to contain only the cover, the title page, the ToC and (if you're lucky) the first few paragraphs of the foreword.
...the 2012 Jeep Compass practically flunked the EuroNCAP, while the 2012 Honda Civic passed with flying colors.
In any case, noone is going to have a clue what the truth is till Assange turns himself in for questioning. Fleeing to another country tends to make one look more guilty rather than less, but answering questions with a lawyer present (which is the key here - don't talk to police or prosecutor without your lawyer present, guilty or innocent) won't do much to make you look more guilty unless, well, you're guilty....
Have you been paying any attention at all? The prosecutor repeatedly declined to interview Assange while he was in Sweden and approved his request to leave the country. I suggest you read some of the +5 comments, which include statements by Assange's Swedish and British attorneys.
/. needs a "like" button.
Umm, jurors are randomly selected members of the public, not political appointees... and there are no juries in Sweden anyway (at least not for this kind of trial)
Well, you can start with the fact that the Swedish police informed the press of the charges against him, and identified him by name, before they had even spoken to him - which they still haven't. That may be business as usual in the US, but it's not the way we do things in the civilized world. They've violated due process six ways to Sunday.
DA's are often elected political creatures.
In the US perhaps, not in the civilized world.
I think you both missed the part where the prosecutor has repeatedly refused to interview Assange or to inform his attorney in writing of the exact charges, and the multiple violations of Swedish law and legal precedent and of the European Convention on Human Rights by both the police and the prosecution. TL;DNR perhaps?
What the gods would destroy they first submit to an IEEE standards committee.