If they "personalize" learning the same way Facebook "personalizes" ads. Then I don't blame them for not wanting it.

I've been to college. I know first hand it's the education.

I'm guessing the word "Trustworthy" in "Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing Investigations" is a homonym.

"Hyperlinks Are Protected By the First Amendment" If that's the case, then everything on thepiratebay.org is perfectly legal. Torrents and magnetlinks are esentially hyperlinks for the BitTorrent protocal.

Agreed, I've been running Chrome with graphics acceleration enabled for a long time and I never ran into any issues.

It's not. I've been to San Jacinto college, and their programming classes sucked. Advanced C++ my ass.

The Linux kernel could use that GPLv3 license right about now.

...instead of stopping the system if it doesn't verify (kill switch) or sending the results back to headquaters (spying), otherwise it's DRM. As long as the user has full control on what this thing does such as turning it off or changing what server it sends the info to or what it registers as counterfeit and what doesn't then it could be a good thing. But if this is used to lock the user out of his own hardware or prevent him from changing or modifying it then this is going to be a huge problem.

It's actually easier and quicker for me to use than an IDE. I usually use Bash as my shell and Kate as my text editor (Kate is similar to Notepad++ in functionality which is what I used before my switch to GNU/Linux). when I compile projects I either use a simple Makefile or CMake depending on the size of the project. I've done OS detection and resolution with Makefiles before.

Yes the guys who made CandySwipe saw Candy Crush Saga, so they hopped in their time machine and went back to 2010 to create the Candy Crush Saga knockoff. :rollseyes:

While I do agree with Stallman over them using a BSD-3 like license. I do like LLVM and Clang. And working together will benefit both LLVM/Clang and GCC which is a good thing.

If anyone should be held liable it's h33t.com, they're the ones ding this. Of course if h33t.com's content is user generated then h33t.com isn't liable either. Also aren't torrents similar to links. The content themselves aren't hosted on their servers either but via a bunch of bittorent clients working together, so h33t shouldn't be liable at all.

I agree

I said they were less corrupt. I didn't say they weren't corrupt.

Of course I don't expect this bill to go anywhere since it's mostly PR.