Our .NET devs like it. I prefer the more simple trac+svn (I do small Java projects with my team).
Why do you hate TFS?

[citation needed]

Who sad that? If they can remove an app from your phone, what makes you think they are limited at that?

I think they already have them. Or something very similar.

Depends. If inflation goes down, i.e. becomes negative, as shown in your graph too, you win.
Some say inflation will be negative in the years to come in the USA.

America is at war. I think America pissed off a lot of countries, and it gives me the impression that it is scared and full of fear.
I am European, and went to a trip to Las Vegas last year to have some fun. When I landed in Chicago we (all EU citizens who landed there) had our fingerprints taken, and they took a picture of all passengers. I think it's crazy. What does your government want to accomplish doing so? If you come to the EU you just land, (sometimes you don't even) get you passport checked and you are done.

BTW, I really enjoyed my stay, Las Vegas is a great place to have fun, get drunk and play poker, an most American people there where really nice.

Just because you think it's crap doesn't mean it's useless.

Looks like google is just mocking DuckDuckGo.
But the use of SSL on google does not offer you privacy: google still knows who you are and what you searched for.

CAS somehow forces an architecture on you. Other IAM proveders like OpenSSO do not, integrating with what you have without forcing you to adapt to what they propose.

Your post advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante

approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

Specifically, your plan fails to account for

( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
(x) Jurisdictional problems
(x) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook

and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
(x) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

i love how you comment was modded +5: Offtopic. This is slashdot :)

It's not. What they say is exactly correct: hat these attacks go beyond Internet Explorer and that simply switching browsers is not an adequate defense.
FF has flaws too. An adequate defense would be to install McAfee© VirusScan Plus, McAfee© Total Protection, McAfee© Online Backup, McAfee© SiteAdvisor Plus and McAfee© Anti-Theft File Protection.
There! *NOW* you are protected!

You probably already know that, but as you probably do with linux, you should not use stuff like IE with your Admin account.

Sure. But 2010 is shorter anyway (same for Y2K10), so why? Just write 2010...