Yes, it does. But that's talking about the format the code is sent in, not the content. What about images? Are they text?

Agreed. You are using a Language to Mark-up HyperText, to display whatever you want.
It is not Marking up Language for the display of HyperText.

How is a video tag so different that an IMG tag?
I think the audio/video tags should be included in HTML5 though. But not the codecs!
Even the specification of the IMG tag in html 4 does not specify a type of required image format. It just gives examples of widely supported uses: "Examples of widely recognized image formats include GIF, JPEG, and PNG." (from html 4 spec)
In the case of images, the popularity of formats created the standard, not the other way around.

and with the weak job market it seems I can only move sideways into another support role

This is not always a bad idea. Even if there was room for progression at your current employer, if you do not enjoy working the helpdesk there, then you would not enjoy any IT position at that company. Helpdesk can be OK, if there is someone else successfully working to improve the issues that you constantly get called for. If you have an IT job with no user contact at all, then you are truly useless.

One problem in IT is that users and managers think that an IT department's job is only to fix problems. The real problem begins when an IT department thinks the same thing! Another is that people always expect managers to define their job, and managers are always looking for people that define their job. After being in IT for almost 10 years, I now enjoy it (working for a small company helps). I didn't enjoy it for the first few years.

In my opinion, IT is satisfying when you do this (not a complete list):
1. Decide that helping users means developing relationships with them, and convincing them that you respect them (This is called "customer service")
2. Decide that you are solely responsible for the company's use/lack of technology/systems
3. Communicate to your manager what your job function is for
4. Learn how your managers view their own job function
5. Be proactive, find solutions/systems, and financially justify them on "paper"
6. Work somewhere where your manager understands 1 through 5

That said, if you can afford school and you enjoy it, then do that.

Wish it was possible to mod this higher than 5.

What I sometimes see in my own church circle is that dying people can have a lot of people begging them to stick around. Point being that churchgoers usually have a larger, more dependent social circle (I'm not saying it's necessarily better).

Doesn't always work though. I think most of the oldest people at my church have DNR's. But we're 'spiritual' people, not 'religious'.

Also, given that these are are terminal cancer patients, some christians could get really confused and think that just because God can heal them, he just hasn't yet and "must need more time" (obviously a logically fallacy).

While it's true that people with a greater fear of death are more likely to explore religion and that it may attract them to explore a belief, I seriously doubt that would get them to devote their life to it. Fears are only motivating when we are immediately faced with them. I've met very few people that actually live with a constant sense of foreboding (actually none).

I'd be really interested in any data on this when is comes to deaths that are less premature/illness related.

Here:
http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.EmailMe

It should be obvious that exercising political influence is more important to Bill than owning another car.

-

This is a good point and entirely true. It's just that this makes it seem sinister from the start. It seems just as likely to me that the mismanagement of funds is at least somewhat caused by under-management rather than just political agenda (this is true for most large philanthropic organizations, including governments). Though I'm certain that at least some of the latter takes place and this may be the only point you were making. Also, the car was just an example (compulsory?). My point is that he can't simply do anything with the money. The spending has to at least appear altruistic; though it is clear that you well understood this.

My point was that his motivations are probably less altruistic than they appear, not that they are entirely selfish.

Understood and well stated. I was more clarifying than disagreeing.

When you say "maximise profit", let's be clear that the "profit" is for the Foundation to then eventually give away later at 5% per year. Being a "non-profit" foundation, means that no-one can take that money (including Bill) and get personally rich from it. It's the job of the Bill Gates Investment division to make money that the Bill Gates Foundation eventually gives away. That's it. Sounds more useful than just giving away a finite sum to me.

If you want to say that he "maintains control of his wealth", understand that means that he can control which cause gets the money, not go buy a Ferrari.

Yes, the Foundation probably even gives money to lame causes, and has conflict of interest with the evil investments of the investment division. But ethically handling that amount of money is really difficult, even in philanthropy. Just look at the job elected governments are doing.

And I seriously doubt Gates is worried about his tax liability. You only have to pay taxes on a single sum of earned money once.

I'm not saying Bill is a good man, or that it's even excusable, just that I don't think his motivations were entirely selfish.