Really? Your comment was modded up while mine was modded down...
I was being ironic. Obviously over the head of most /.'ers (cue eyeroll)

@1:40 "Usefull for disabeled people"...

But apparently not useful for PhD students who can't spell

So to sum this up, basically Hotz lost. Sony has specifically barred him from doing anything with the ps3 (besides playing it; unless I missed something?), and in return the lawsuit is dropped, but essentially Hotz won nothing. I say he, and all his donors, got the shaft.

Oh wait...wrong series

I say that for 5 years, every scientist in japan works on the problem of trying to separate radiation from water (or the air too for that matter). Surely with all their expertise and everyone working on the problem, a solution could be found that would be beneficial to them and the rest of the world. I honestly don't understand why we can't filter water to become non-radioactive. Scientists have come up with ways to do the craziest things (like viewing atoms)...so why can't we solve this problem? Are there just not enough people working at it?

That actually brings up a good point. Perhaps they are not introducing a -1 button so that the trolls of the internet cannot make certain search terms disappear. Imagine a large party of people get together and decide that search results for, oh say, abortion all receive -1. They repeatedly search and rate these sites as -1. Assuming the google algorithm is automated to search based on the +/- count, these legitimate pages would be pushed to the back of the search.

Does google really think that the average user is going to rate their search results? If a search is really that good, the user is going to immediately click on the link they are searching for. I do frequent searches throughout the day. I don't see myself using this feature after every search (or after any search for that matter).

Using 1,500,000 of those packets that come with your shoes. "Do not eat!"

Maybe this will be the rocket that attracts the attention of nearby space beings!

So true. If I received this message I would likely just lol.

NotSoSecurID

This is one of my favorite shows of all time, and I think that is partly because of the idiotic and insensitive nature of the hosts. It is entertaining because they are not afraid to make fun of each other or anyone else on the show; and they certainly never hesitate to point out their own perceived shortcomings of certain vehicles. Without being able to do this freely, the show would certainly be far less amusing.

I must say I was quite excited when I read the headline. After reading the actual article though I must say I am much less so. It seems like this is an argument over who can stream what content from where, assuming that the streamed content was already legally obtained. In this regard, if Amazon and the RIAA DO battle in court, I feel like very little will change in the ways of RIAA's current copyright laws. Furthermore, I suspect that the RIAA knows its bounds, and will avoid going to court outright against Amazon especially since their argument seems to be rather weak. I think the best we can expect is an undisclosed settlement between the two.