Why the hell is Texas in the running? I mean, it makes perfect sense to reward a state that makes it as difficult as possible to sell a vehicle with Tesla's sales model.

And by American I presume you mean South American since potatoes were originally from the Andes regions of Peru and Bolivia.

Fuck him too. I weigh 285. I can walk a 6:25 1/4 mile. I have 11% that probably isn't body fat. And I have been a Type II diabetic probably for the last 9 years. Fuck him for shaming people with a disorder period, regardless of the type.

It's strange how your Metro is nearly 10MPG higher then it's rated economy, while your Prius is 10MPG lower than it's. Plus I also bet your Metro didn't get anywhere near 52MPG city driving where your Prius is designed for it's best economy due to regenerative braking.

And ICANN makes laws now? You "refuted" that there is a ICANN policy, not a law.

So what is this ideal password keeper? And how to do you access it whenever and wherever you're located?

Check local laws. Many companies chose to provide only the information you suggest in order to essentially eliminate any risk of a defamation lawsuit. But that doesn't mean that they can't say more. If the statement is factual and can be supported or demonstrated with evidence, it very much could be revealed in a reference check. So I wouldn't say that is "the worst" as "the worst" may be much, much worse.

Plus, the above doesn't even consider your former employer breaking the law, blackballing you, whatever. If that does happen, you'd have to find out, then sue, and then win. And that takes money...something most people looking for jobs probably don't have much of a surplus of.

If it takes 12 hours to charge a cell phone, I'm not sure how much water you'll be pumping in the same time period.

There should be no legal prohibition against me buying a car directly from Tesla, GM, Toyota or any other car maker if I want.

Is the opposition coming just from the dealers? Or is it coming from the established manufacturers by way of dealers?

Many industries sell only through distributors, dealers, or otherwise "authorized" retail outlets. The company I work for is in the HVAC industry. We only sell to our dealers and never directly to the end consumer. I don't know of any major HVAC manufacturer that sells direct to consumer. It's not that there are laws that prevent direct sales of furnaces or air conditioners, rather that's just how the industry chooses to sell. However if an new manufacturer decided to sell direct a new type of furnace or AC that was "better" and therefor a legitimate threat, I wonder if you'd see types of legislation from the established players to slow if not stop the new competition.

The next level could be a new version of watermarked paper, which knows when it has been accessed or photographed.

Can you explain how paper, with presumably some type of magical substance applied to it, would know the difference between a human eye reading it vs a camera lens? Both are operating by receiving light that has been reflected, or more correctly, not reflected, off the ink.

I suppose you could use some type of photosensitive chemical that could detect a flash...but that would easily be defeated by just not using a flash, plus likely would destroy the document should you look at it outside or by a sunny window.

It sounded to me like what they were testing was successful (did the legs deploy, did the engines restart, did the vehicle slow down, etc), but that it wasn't a full test with the goal of being able to reuse the rocket as it was a water landing. And due to rough seas, the rocket was destroyed once it was in the water.

Of course then they'll run into copyright issues, so probably best just to sell the units.

What copyright issues? I don't even think you can copyright a specific shape or model. Patent or trademark possibly, but not copyright.

Where do you understand that from? AFAIK cable companies don't insert ads into the local networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, etc). They do insert ads into "cable channels" but those ad slots are specifically designed for the cable companies to sell ad space for. There may be a default commercial that plays for the national feed, but it can be overlaid with a local ad if the slot sells.

Networks don't want Aereo as it will rock the boat and introduce competition in markets that have long been dominated by oligopolies. In most areas, you have one cable company that services the area, and if you're lucky, the local telco might also offer television service. You also have Dish and DirecTV.

Most networks opt to charge the cable/telco/satellite company a fee instead of forcing them to be carried as a must-carry station. If a more convenient or alternate source of locals were available, it could result in lower revenues from fees. So stations have a reason to want to keep availability scarce. Networks obviously have a vested interest in keeping the stations happy, so they fight the fight. Cable companies also join in as they may also own the local tv station. Or the TV network. Or are the content producers. Or all the above.

It's all about maximizing revenue while stifling competition that may take a portion of their pie.

So a simplified summary of the issue is:

Aereo: We're not a cable company, we don't have to pay royalties.
Networks: Yes you are, you have to pay us
Aereo: No we aren't. Sue us.
Networks: Ok
Lower Courts:You're like a cable company.
Aereo: Are you sure?
SCOTUS: Yes.
Aereo: Crap. We'll be a cable company and pay the royalties then.
Networks: You're not a cable company
Aereo: C'mon man!