the other half used free software...

Sad are the days without moderator points.

as other posters have said, this is just not true:

- I wasted 2+ years of my evenings playing WoW. on Linux.
- I played Skyrim, Oblivion. on Linux.

Those are/were some of the biggest titles out there, and they have always been playable.

OSX is also not more secure - it's can only be less secure since there is no way for you to assess the security, or fix the security yourself. Ultimately, more eyes means better security, period. If there is a difference in security, it's beneath the level that you as a non-security expert would be able to describe.

And yes, you can still run windows 95 on that 486. But you can't run the latest version of Windows on it. You can however run the latest version of most Linux Distributions on it (and there are even specialized versions of those latest distributions out there for those systems).

So again, you're repeating incorrect assumptions. Perpetuating the logical fallacy. Congratulations, you prefer the way of the dodo.

haha! That was a rhetorical question. There are many a commit in the kernel sources with my name, but, thanks for the thorough and gratuitous explanation ;^)

EXACTLY

Let's just *always* give the OS away for free...!!! .... reminds me, what was that Linux thing again?

The terrorists have won.

> My car is around 20 cubic meters,

Not unless you drive a medium sized truck (not pickup). Assuming your "truck" is 2m wide, you have a 5m long chassis and 2m high ceiling in your truck. That's enough to haul 20 cows or so around comfortably.

A normal car is about 1.6m wide, 4-5m long, although usually 2 of those are the hood and tail, and not more than 1.5m high in most places.

Evening that out a bit, and your car only is about what, ~8m3.

Most car loads are under 1m3, people highly overestimate the storage size a car can fit in their trunks, even SUV's only store about 1.5m3.

Three car loads of that, and you're still under 5m3.

You're completely overestimating sizes. Your hamper is probably more like 0.1m3. Really, 100l is big for a hamper.

In essence, you can't sue them for -not-hosting- content, but, because the safe-harbour provisions fail when content is actively policed, they can be sued for full copyright damages by anyone, without first having to file DMCA takedown notices.

So, a copyright holder can establish a pattern of abuse on youtube where their copyrighted content is posted without permission, sit back, watch UMG take down other stuff but not the copyright holders' content, and -not- file DMCA takedown notices for a while, and then file a massive copyright infringement claim, with a relief request that effectively shuts down youtube entirely.

The only way out for youtube is to terminate the agreement with UMG.

Oh, also, UMG wins both ways. With youtube gone/sued, they'll have a great time in the press declaring it a rogue platform, as now confirmed by the courts.

I'm also wondering if this doesn't make UMG liable for damages as well - they are an intricate part and could potentially be a co-defendent.

Asus x101:

- It's all tested

- It's 200$ (well, 199)

- There is no windows sticker.

DISCLAIMER: well, this is pretty much an advertisement. sorry.

It's because they were under their allotted budget, so, they had to spend more tax dollars in order to get the same budget next quarter.

You didn't think this was actually about making people more safe, did you?

prior art for "slide to unlock" - go to your local hardware store and get a "door chain" type locking device.

prior art for "hit over the head (...)" was posted in floppy.c from Minix: http://www.raspberryginger.com/jbailey/minix/html/floppy_8c-source.html#l00979 [raspberryginger.com]

However, just for kicks, I'll take one if you do indemnation for repercussions of using the patented invention.

tell me how this is worse than having the software sit around, and claiming that "you didn't use it for 3 years" is more convincing than "we found an error and fixed it".

you're suggesting that leaving the invalidly licensed software on the machines is a better course of action? LOL

Seriously though, hit "uninstall" and claiming in a court later that there was an accidental issue, you discovered it and fixed it, seems a LOT smarter than telling the court that "for three years after sent notice, defendent continued to operate illegally licensed software".