Check to see if they have a cookbook titled (in Chinese) To Serve Duck.

Err... no. There *were* other operating systems back in the days MS got busted for. Some of them ran on the same hardware as MS-DOS and windows, namely DR-DOS and CP/M 86.

Microsoft's apologists liked to float the myth that MS was busted for having a monopoly. That wasn't the case; they were busted for using anti-competitive practices that prevented the entry of competitors into "their" market. For example they would only allow manufacturers to sell DOS or Windows preinstalled if they didn't sell computers with competing products.

Google has never done that. If you are an Android phone manufacturer you can sell Windows phones as well. As a consumer you can change the search engine to Bing if you like; or if you prefer you can buy a phone that defaults to Bing. Manufacturers can and do sell tablets without the Google Play app store, or even with an alternative app store.

Having watched this situation develop over the years, I believe that the strategic significance of the Android platform to Google is this: Google looked at the developing mobile market and realized it couldn't survive if someone *else* managed to obtain monopoly power over mobile devices. An open source platform prevented anyone *else* from obtaining a platform monopoly.

That may be so, but someone suing them, particularly in a Russian court, isn't evidence of anything one way or the other.

I've had bad luck with Toshiba laptops in terms of durability and Linux support. In particular the ACPI DSD tables on Toshibas that I've had detect non-Windows operating systems and *deliberately* disable certain hardware like sound. It's fixable, but a PITA, adding extra steps every time you do a kernel upgrade.

For years IBM then Lenovo was my choice for build quality, but I guess from here on out I'm sticking with Apple. I'm very pleased with the hardware.

incredibly secure

I think that qualifier demands you back this claim with some sort of source..

Nah. Just use the literal meaning of "incredible". B-)

Usually the only network interface UBoot is configured to use is on the local network side, on a wired interface and the IP address used is non-routable.

Which means if they compromised a machine on your LAN you're hosed. They now have your router firmware firmly under their control.

Who needs an intercept in the ISP, lawful or otherwise, when they can have your router send them copies of whatever they want. (Not to mention using it to attack any other devices behind it and cooperate with malware on them.)

Actually if Scholz's star had a planetary system, that would not make any meaningful difference for the larger numbers especially considering the low accuracy. E.g. using your thought, it might take 109 years instead of 110 to reach a planet orbiting Scholz's star using a nuclear engine. So the distance would not necessarily be a lot smaller. It does have a brown dwarf companion, but again it would not make much difference time wise. Being discovered in 2013, it is not known if it has any planets orbiting it. Another question is if it gravitationally captured anything in the Ort cloud.

According to the article, there will be a satellite launched that will be able to provide more information on stars passing close by both in the past and in the future.

For those that wonder, Voyager at 125 AU is about .002 light year distant. The star was 400 times further out. Likewise, if we to launch our currently fastest spacecraft New Horizons (that is reaching Pluto soon in July 2015 at 33.77 AU) towards the star (when it was closest), it would take about 14,000 years to reach that star. There have been a number of nuclear rockets proposed, with the latest version from NASA in 2011 (the Magneto-Inertial Fusion planned for Mars missions). If that rocket reached its technological goals (by 2030), it would take roughly 110 years to reach Scholz when it was at its closest. These numbers are merely back of the envelope two digit accuracy, and are not meant to be precise but give ballpark figures.

If the macrophages do this with tattoo ink, they no doubt do it with other things, as well.

I wonder if using this cream to remove ALL the dead-macrophages-loaded-with-junk from the skin will result in effectively "younger" skin?

So instead of having the tattoo ink spread out in a relatively benign part of my dermis, instead I'll concentrate it in my lymph nodes.

I was under the impression that the macrophages would then be broken down and their contents recycled or disposed of - that this migration was just one step in the process. Is this not true?

There are a lot of macrophages migrating to the lymph nodes over a lifetime. If they just went there, died, and left their contents the nodes would swell with age and never shrink - yet this doesn't seem to happen.

Well, they started to become popular in the late 70s, or roughly 35 years ago, so there are no doubt grannies, even great-grannies running around with them.

Artisanal automobiles.

Oh, yeah, because he's hurt so many people with his ambition and ego. He's practically Stalin.

Because nobody's ever managed to do anything useful in Python...

So the argument you are making is that for their to be global changes in climate, their cannot have been local changes of climate?