There's already an invisible keyboard, and we all know how well that's selling and how it's replaced all our regular keyboards. Oh wait, it didn't? Dang.

So the article being given away for free tells about how people aren't giving things away for free anymore, and that companies doing that are destroying their business, etc. Eat your own dog food much?

Every attempt to make programming "not programming" succeeds in specially crafted demos, but still fails at anything larger than the tiniest apps. Take a look at google's own screenshot of a game made with this... it still looks like regular programming, only perhaps grosser and more confusing because the blocks stretch out in unjustified directions. At least with a font-based programming language you can use a fixed-width font.

It says the hearing was scheduled for july 9, what was the outcome?

This does prompt a good question: How much would it really cost to make a copy of the white house, including the known grounds and security stuff presumably inside, as accurately as possible minus the one-of-a-kind artifacts?

No one who wants to change the world refers to their potential user base as "dumb F***'s", there is no situation in which it's ok to do that, or that any rational person wouldn't think that this would come back one day. Couple this with the stolen code issues, privacy issues, etc. and Zuckerberg clearly belongs to the group of people operating their lives outside of the world of logic.

Common reasons that so many people/companies will hang onto XP for a very long time: XP works really well for what it does, and it's already there. There are no features in Windows 7 that are business critical other than somewhat pointless assertions about security (i.e. what OS is really 100% secure anyhow).

I think the most compelling reason not to move is that there's a lot more most businesses can do with their XP systems to utilize automation, etc. that have nothing to do with needing a new OS. I'd much rather build out those automations in XP vs. investing in a brand new platform that merely gets me to where I already am.

Finally, I doubt there are that many reasons to "need" 64-bit vs. 32-bit except for special instances where those people probably already have a 64-bit system in place.

What's sad is that in the day and age where Napoleon Dynamite is a big selling movie and cool, he's only ironically cool and for anyone who actually does do something in real life that's funny or etc. they get bullied forever and there appear to be no consequences for the bullies.

Nope, design patents are specifically for a look and nike has them on their shoe designs, for example. Fashion doesn't need copyright because they can stamp a trademark and/or design patent on it as you indicate. You can be sure that if there were suddenly no trademark or design patents, that fashion designers would aggressively be pursuing copyright on their works.

The PLATO system was created in 1960 at the University of Illinois. Initially it ran as a one-terminal system connected to the ILLIAC computer. By 1963, the system was running on a CDC 1604 with multiple simultaneous users. By 1972, the system had expanded to run a thousand simultaneous users on a CDC CYBER mainframe. Control Data Corporation began marketing PLATO commercially in 1976, resulting in PLATO system installations in dozens of cities around the world. Many of these systems were interconnected, enabling email and remote logins through the network. For nearly ten years, there were more users on PLATO than there were on ARPANET, the precursor to the Internet.

http://www.platohistory.org/about/

Fashion doesn't need copyright because they have super-aggressive design patent and trademark protections. Coca-cola doesn't have to worry about copyright on the coca-cola logo design on shirts because the design is a registered trademark, and thus is way easier and more powerful to prosecute than a wimpy ol' copyright. I am surprised that this would qualify as a TED talk since it seems to completely miss the point, but I haven't seen too many... are they all this wrong?

If you hit the bully first, then YOU are the bully in the school's eyes. They have no choice but to take this stance. So you have to provoke them to hit you first, and make sure everyone sees it, then make sure everyone sees you defend yourself back hard. No one will mess with you after that, but it's really hard to get setup and you'll still probably get expelled for fighting.

The best option is to rearrange your schedule, get busy with anything else, and know that high school is not a life sentence (except for the bullies, who generally end up repeating it or dropping out anyhow).

Hitting back only works if it's your first response. If you've already led on a ton of times, then hitting back seems like an escalation. It has to come out of nowhere in order to work. Also, don't hit back without really meaning it, you have to have the 'will of the warrior' and hit like your life depends on it. Unfortunately, you will probably get expelled if you do this now, because any bully willing to push someone that far is likely going to make an even bigger joke out of getting you expelled for fighting back.

So if you are willing to accept the consequences for YOU hitting THEM, and you are willing to go 110% of the distance in the fight, by all means go for it. Otherwise, just change classes or whatever and understand that high school will be over soon and you'll never see them again... until they are pumping your gas one day.

From wikipedia: The following organizations hold one or more patents in the H.264/AVC patent pool: 1. APPLE INC.

Magically, apple wants to enforce their HTML5 patents after trying to force people away from Flash? HAAA HAAA.