How can you say that tax cuts for the upper 2% of income earners is wealth redistribution? Do you understand our system of "progressive" taxation? People who earn over ~375k are taxed at a rate of 35% on that money. People who earn less than ~35k are taxed 15% on that money. Until "the wealthy" are *actually* taxed less than the poor and the middle class, there is no argument for calling it wealth redistribution. Their money has been taken unfairly since long before healthcare reform. I'm sick of people complaining when the wealthy FINALLY get a break on taxes. The point is, wealthy people pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than less wealthy people. This is not fair and not equitable. The only fair system would be a system in which everyone pays the same percentage of their income. It's absurd to penalize people for being successful.

A few years ago when I was an undergrad, I did a class project on the C64 just for the hell of it...the assignment was for my Theory of Computation class, and I happened to be taking an embedded systems class at the same time. I ended up implementing a Turing Machine simulator on the C64. I used a C cross-compiler on my PC to develop it, tested it on an emulator, and eventually burned it onto a ROM chip which I put into an actual cartridge that ran on a real C64. It was a REALLY cool project that involved quite a few different aspects of CS, and I ended up taking first place at a undergrad research poster competition at a CS conference.

If this is true (and it sounds like your story might be just you being silly), he had a pretty crappy lawyer. If the police had a warrant that said "stuff related to copying Sony games," even if they found a thousand joints worth of THC-containing plant, it wouldn't be admissible in any court...

You might want to look up the randomized computational complexity class BPP. There is 2/3 - 1/3 split on when it answers correctly. I believe that it answers correctly 2/3 of the time, and the other 1/3 time is indeterminate. All you need to do is run it a few times (these algorithms are very fast, and average the results. The summation of these attempts very quickly approach many nines of accuracy after a relatively short number of attempts. In fact, before the (relatively) recent discovery that primality testing is in P (the discovery of a deterministic poly-time algorithm for testing whether a number is prime), the best algorithm was in BPP, and in fact, that is the algorithm that is mostly used today because of it's speed.

Remember, Windows NT wasn't even developed on x86 (it was done on MIPS and Intel i860 and backported to x86). In fact, up until Windows 2000, NT had support for x86, Alpha, MIPS and PowerPC right out of the box. NT was originally designed to be very portable and its kernel design facilitates this. It's just a matter of will.

Flybacks are fun. Especially when you accidentally zap yourself with one!