Console A is terrible! Why would you ever want to use that? Console B isn't much better. PC Gamer Master Race.

As a non-lawyer, I'm going off other posts on this topic from other non-lawyers: They'd just file the case in CA to help ensure CA law was used for case. Also, since the one filing the case is likely to be the guy in CA, it'd be a lot easier for them to file locally. Some sort of Long-Arm statute would likely come into play, and the more restrictive set of laws would be enforced.

Nobel prizes in Physics are awarded for discoveries, not theories or proposals.

Likewise, a lot of drivers more or less don't give a damn and will practically run them over, or off the road, or door them.

Or do give a damn and do those things on purpose. Or will throw things at them. I've only had one or two cases in several years of daily commute cycling where I suspect a driver was maliciously trying to edge me off a road, but in some regions its apparently a frequent hazard, and if anyone brings it up, a lot of victim-blaming happens (e.g. cites story of a time they saw a crazy cyclist similar to yours, then claims the person being harassed by a motorist was probably doing something similarly bad, or attempts to charge the guy for inciting the incident in some fashion (see previous link)).

I try to call out cyclists behaving badly, but I find it isn't all that common. When I'm out and about I notice a lot of cyclists behaving perfectly well -- it's just that the odd one or two that don't are the ones that stick out and you notice. The same is true of any vehicle operator -- it's just that people have gotten so used to seeing several dozen traffic violations every day (e.g. failing to signal, running red lights or stop signs, improper turns, failing to leave appropriate space, various parking offenses) without even touching speeding (which would bring it up to likely some 95% of the traffic on the road -- people failing to exceed the speed limit are more likely to be noticed and considered out of place than people speeding). That one cyclist being crazy (and I agree they exist -- I've seen some pretty egregious cycling behavior before) sticks out more since cyclists in general are more rare, but I suspect fewer cyclists in total behave badly with regard to traffic safety (probably because of the inherent additional danger to cycling).

Well, if officially you do remember the password and provide it, and officially the keyfile is on a disk, and officially they have that disk, then when it doesn't work, you can claim they did something that damaged the disk or the keyfile on it, and there's nothing more you can do. The proof that it was destroyed is that it didn't work. The proof that they did it is that it worked last time you used it.

Hence "specifically" -- technically, you requested those things (or your browser or e-mail client did). You can get headers for e-mail (you'll still get some lossage there, but there's not a lot they can do outside of the filters already in place). All the ads you requested and they delivered. Maybe indirectly (clicking on the link to the ad-riddled site), but there's nothing on their end that they can do to know what traffic you want intentionally, and what you don't actually want but still sent a request for (lest they risk being sued for *not* sending things requested by end-users). Use ad-blocking software, or simply stop visiting those sites that have all the ads on them which you despise

To sum up: the website you're visiting put those there, not the ISP. The ISP just faithfully transmitted them to you at your explicit request.

Only if they also charge you and additional fee specifically for the privilege of receiving it.

Hands-free sets don't help (or drinking from a travel mug while driving, for example, would have been banned long ago). The conversation with a party not in the vehicle is what is causing the problems. Note also that passenger conversations differ substantially from cell phone conversations, and prove far less distracting.

No. Passenger conversations differ substantially from cell phone conversations, and prove far less distracting.

There are plenty of cases handled daily that have questionable ethics behind them that aren't covered, because they're common. It's news because it's unusual.

This reads like it should be an Onion article. He's using Twitter for what it is typically used for -- self-absorbed useless posts. Why is anyone surprised? If they were all about how awesome his new $400 million yacht is, then I could see the issues. This is just that he came back to Twitter, and started using it normally.

I have. Granted, the master cylinder was leaking, but it is something to check the levels on every once in a while so you don't have a lack of braking power due to a slow leak suddenly becoming a fast leak. As I understand it, you'd also want to get the fluid flushed occasionally. So brake fluid maintenance remains even with an electric. Makes perfect sense to me.

Probably at the behest of the content creation industry. The MPAA wouldn't want you to have too much of the movie at once. Then you might be able to save it and distribute it.

But Apple isn't the same entity as the intermediary. Apple is involved with both endpoints by providing the hardware and software, but there's a cell tower, whatever service provider you have, whatever network connections are in between, whatever storage exists to ensure delivery even if the end point isn't currently available, whatever service provider the other person has, and another cell tower on the other end. Assume I trust Apple. I still don't trust all that stuff in the middle, particularly the cell phone and cell tower broadcast that anyone near that tower can pick up.

Which is exactly what you go on to describe with regards to trusting Mozilla, but not Verizon or Google. Is it that there's an extra Apple storage point in the middle? So in your second example, if I trusted Mozilla *and* Google, but not Verizon, I don't need to bother with the extra security, just use SSL? And what if I trust the code Apple wrote, and the general security surrounding the encryption keys by Apple, but I don't trust that a third party never has access to the server Apple is using? Does that change things?

Sea Ice: Floats in water, doesn't affect sea level when it melts.
Land Ice: Sits on Land, raises sea level when it melts.

There's a difference between these two. The additional sea ice is also caused by the land ice melting, which is raising the freezing point of the sea in the area (review Freezing Point Depression if you don't understand why).