and typically the search results aren't relevant until I've finished my search phrase.

"I guess the shoe is on the other foot now!"

I believe the key element to the argument here is "shown on live television." If broadcasters are showing images in real-time, there may well be events in front of the camera that are beyond the broadcasters' control. Is it fair to hold them responsible for someone else's actions who just happens to be passing by?

On they other hand they do have a measure of control at least over where they point their cameras, so they can take reasonable measures to avoid broadcasting scenes where they might expect objectionable material.

If TV broadcasts were pre-recorded, then there would be no excuse for violating FCC guidelines. But those aren't the broadcasts under discussion.

Find one example of a natural process or phenomenon that creationism successfully predicts, just as countless archaeological digs have found in favor of evolution, AND if it can explain all of the geological and archaeological data that has already been found, then you can teach your theory of creationism.

That is, until some new evidence comes along which creationism can't explain. (Good luck with that.)

I wonder how much of the "infringing" material would have been classified as non-infringing if copyright terms had remained at 14 years instead of "indefinitely." They said that most of the material was music, movies, and TV shows; and very few of those works have entered the public domain since the 1920's.

Last week I got another edition of the yellow pages. Before tossing it out, I decided to look up a type of business I had been meaning to look up for a while. I found a single ad-style listing with no address. I tossed the book right out.

This morning I tried looking up the same type of business on Google Maps. It found 344 results and pointed out a few of them on the map, one of which happens to be just a mile and a half from home.

Looking things up on the Internet is not only more convenient, it's also more informative and apparently more comprehensive.

... and integrate security into the day-to-day activities.

Sounds like he's selling something.

let the OEMs sort it out, but I don't have much of a problem with the "random ballot" -- other than that it's going to lead to the best marketing winning, not the best software.

That's just how Microsoft became a near-monopoly: with the best marketing, not the best software.

The cat's brain is made up of 1 BILLION neurons and 10 trillion synapses. So with the nuerogrid chips, it will require at least a kilowatt to simulate.

Given that the fingerprint is due to "radio-frequency and manufacturing differences" and "significantly different for same-model tags," isn't it also possible that a tag's fingerprint may vary over time?

And if the idea is "to detect counterfeit tags," how can they do that if tags of the same model have different fingerprints?