We keep launching stuff into space, and launch cost is always a concern. This isn't new business, this is existing business. Even if only structural components could be space-source, and not the electronics or optics, it can still be a financial win.

That depends on the destination for the final product. If you're building something for use off-Earth, using space-based resources from construction allows you to eliminate launch costs for the weight of that thing.

This of course presumes that the launch cost of your asteroid harvester is less than the launch cost of what you're building with the materials. Then again, if one Earth-launched asteroid harvester can get enough raw materials for more than one space-built asteroid harvester, you're on your way. Or to put it in a more Slashdot-memetic way:
1 - Launch asteroid harvester.
2 - Use harvested materials to build more asteroid harvesters, plus other neat space-based stuff. Repeat.
3 - Profit!!

If you had ever been to the UK you would know it has a lot of empty space. For example, the coast road on the West of Scotland is a lot less populated than the great ocean road here in Oz.

To school?

Agree, way too many people who should know better still conflate consciousness with intelligence. An ant's nest exhibits intelligent behaviour but it can't contemplate it's own existence, Watson displays the same kind of "mindless" intelligence and consistently outperforms the best human trivia buffs.

I noticed that too, did anti-science spammers get a pay rise recently?

Burning coal is "doing something" and it is negatively impacting everyone..

You just described WinRT aka Metro.

Deep sea vents were discovered when I was in my 20's before that we used to think abiogenesis had something to do with lightning hitting a mud puddle. The evidence that life formed around such vets on Earth is strong but inconclusive. Fatty acids from clay in the vent spontaneously form primitive cell membranes (in vents and mud puddles). Sulphur provides chemical energy, porous rock around the vent provides a sponge like scaffold for life to take root and extract passing nutrients. Most importantly the vents are predictable, the deep, still water stabilizes the temperature gradient. Convection currents cycle the fatty cells through the gradient allowing different chemical reactions within the membrane to synchronize themselves to the thermal cycle (much the same as plants match the cycle of night and day). If that really is how life got started then it's likely that primitive cells are still being spontaneously created near these vents today, the practical problem for scientists researching this idea is finding them before evolved life such as shrimp eat them.

Europa has all these conditions and like Earth it's ocean is also oxygenated at the top. Oxygen is vital for multicellular life on Earth, collagen (the stuff that holds individual cells together as multicellular critters) cannot form in an oxygen poor environment. Oxygen in Europa's ocean is replenished differently than it is on Earth. On Europa's surface strong radiation from Jupiter knocks the H2 off the ice and out into space, the free oxygen is returned to the ocean via plate tectonics. Personally I would think it very odd if we didn't find single celled life in Europa's ocean, at the very least it would force Science to radically rethink the conditions that lead to abiogenesis on Earth. What I'm interested to find out is whether life on Europa uses the same self-replicating molecules used by life on Earth, but I doubt I will be around to hear the answer..

Harvard have large investments in coal companies, the obvious answer is to stop burning coal and use something else, but that would leave some of their richest alumni holding "stranded assets". If we use deliberate geoengineering to balance the unintentional geoengineering of the coal industry, who will pay for it? - You can bet it won't be the coal industry, it will be the consumer and taxpayer.

Harvard could make a significant contribution by divesting from coal and telling everybody why, but it has declined to do so. This press release is just a timely distraction.

We all know Monsanto are pricks in their dealings with small farmers who refuse to buy their seed, but what "damage" has been done to human health or the environment by GMO plants of any kind? - Resistance to roundup and cabbages that glow in the dark is not "damage".

Aside from that, scientific claims cannot be "proven in court" and your well known non-belief in AGW has nothing to do with science.

Agreed, geoengineering the climate is not a popular idea among scientists.

The purpose of the ISS was to spread the cost of a space station among many different countries, so that no one of them had to foot the bill for their own. One of the reasons the USSR went bankrupt is because they could not keep up with US cold war expenditures, including the space race.

Which makes it truly bizarre that Russia would be thinking of going into space alone again. Putin doesn't appear to remember any history at all.

Maybe we'll get to see pop-ups with pixelated messages of thanks!

In Victoria this would probably be enforced under the "civic compliance" court or the sheriffs office, for example private entities such a toll roads can issue infringement notices for such trivial offences as a late payment of a toll. It looks like the UNSW is using contract law, fines are a common feature of contracts, more so in business to business contracts.