All of that pre-dates the current definition of the second.

>"OSTP chief Arati Prabhakar's memo said that for a person on the moon, an Earth-based clock would appear to lose on average 58.7 microseconds per Earth-day and come with other periodic variations that would further drift moon time from Earth time,"

While there are relativistic (and other) effects which would cause physical clocks to differ, the second is defined in terms which exclude those ("unperturbed"). So there is no validity to the claim - the second is deliberately defined to be invariant (to the best of our knowledge), and physical clocks are corrected for such errors. For example, adjustments are already made for GPS satellites, which experience similar effects. Seconds tick at exactly the same rate everywhere.

Hillary can just wipe them out, like with a cloth or something.

>The license they chose to use includes terms requiring that they supply source code to the customers.

Specific citation needed. Here's the Affero GPL to help you out. I don't see where the licensor is obligated to do anything at all.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, they contracted with someone who didn't know how to plan ahead with a back-out plan.

>the amount is still significant, showcasing a high level of community participation in Google's security efforts.

Or, showcasing a high level of Google security flaws.

If that's the case (and you don't provide any citations), then it's cause for the government to step in and sue the lenders who were making those "fraudulent" loans. It's not a reason for the taxpayer to pay them off.

Don't forget teaching 3.9 million people that they don't have to keep their commitments.

So what? In what way would that be illegal?

>They may swap on whim. Isn't that illegal in some states?

Why would it be, if they're not claiming use of one or the other, and either type meets the published specs? Could you sue a candy bar maker if they switched from cane to beet sugar when the ingredients just said "sugar"?

>ordered Orange to pay 500,000 [Euro] in compensatory damages and 150,000 [Euro] for moral damages. ... Entr'Ouvert sued Orange in 2010

I'll bet Entr'Ouvert had legal costs which exceeded the award.

>Piracy does not deprive anyone of anything.

Bullshit.

Whoosh.

I'd bet you also argue that media or software piracy isn't theft. Hey, you can do whatever you want with the hardware, no one is stopping you. Perhaps use it as a doorstop.