<quote><blockquote><div><p>Are we to expect a slew of articles about 80 year old discoveries now?!</p></div></blockquote><p>Look at the bright side: none of the articles will be dupes!</p></quote>

Not for another 80 years, anyway.

Are we to expect a slew of articles about 80 year old discoveries now?!

SMAs have been well known about for decades, well written about for decades, just what is the point if this article?!

<quote><p>I think part of the basic issue is that this is a law that should have no jurisdiction in "the comfort of your own home".</p></quote>

Does that apply to all laws, or just the ones you chose?
Do I get to chose which ones apply in the comfort of my own home?

<quote>I'm not saying reading music for fun is a <i>bad</i> thing, but it's different from hearing it played and neither is a replacement for the other. Like someone else said, it's like looking at the code for a game vs playing it.</quote>

Completely wrong.

It is, however, akin to reading a book rather than watching a film or TV adaptation thereof.
If you know how to read (words or music score) then your enjoyment is limited only by your pure imagination, and what you imagine will be far better than anything someone could record.

(FWIW, reading the soursecode of a game would be akin to reading the TeX source for the music score).

'cos that one time you post and your location is half way round the world as you are on holiday, kinda gives a massive clue that you are not going to be round for a bit and your property ripe for a visit from the guys with the stripy jumpers.

...for anyone doing a search on the term analyst.
Or searching for information about shitake mushrooms.
Or looking for the latest football results for Arsenal.
Or cocktail recipes.

So Google supposedly (via Twitter) issue a denial.

I remember a very recent denial Google issued -
"No, we're not collecting WiFi data with Street View"
"Wait, I mean, we're not storing the WiFi data we collect"
"Erm, OK, but we can't do anything useful with it..."

Absolutely!
Wave offered absolutely nothing that we can't already do in many different (and more efficient) ways.

I got in right near the start, played around, found it pretty pointless and noted it offered nothing new.
Nobody was able to come up with anything it could offer that doesn't already exist.

No wonder it failed.

*pfft*
Laws are made to be broken, dude!

Sorry to be pedantic, but the TS-1000 was the US version of the ZX81 - the ZX81 (invented by Sinclair) was the original, the Timex was the version branded for sale in the US subsequently.

Speaking as the former owner of a ZX80, ZX81 amd ZX Spectrum... :-)

Is this patenting having the html on one server and the rest (pictures etc) on other ones?

No, it is absolutely NOTHING like that at all. I suggest you RTFA and RTFP and come back.

If it is that

It isn't.

...who fears government having sole access to technology that its own citizens would be jailed for?

The autonamous technology is already out there. Look at the DARPA Grand Challenge. And, it's not just big corporations but universities and small organizations. If you are talking about the guns. Well, you may not trust the government with those big guns with the checks and balances. But, who would trust you and others with those guns but without those checks and balances?

So, you talk about future dictators having more tools of torture. Do you think they are not doing great with the tools they have now?

I'd rather return to the "No Standing Army" policy of individual state militias that can be called up to defend our borders in the event of a real declared war.

I kind of like this idea but it is not practical in this world. The US is a big target for many reasons. The top guy always is. Can a militia get up to arms quickly enough? Can they militia men have the training that regular army can have? No to both. It would put us in a loosing situation against our enemies. This is no longer practical.