Otellini was on Barack Obama's jobs counsel. And yet notoriously supported Romney for president. Maybe there is a cause-and-effect here.

You're the corporate troll saying that it's OK to limit people's freedom.

If you buy a chair, does some asshole try to tell you what you can do with it after they've exchanged it for money?

Why is the minimum score -1 ?

Unless you can show that there's no technical distinction, a reasonable person would have to presume that Nvidia is on the up and up.

Nvidia doesn't sell LCDs.

Win95 product keys did not involve activation nor hardware locking, they were simple CD keys (i.e. serial numbers). MS didn't implement Product Activation (which is the concept behind this patent) until Windows XP's release in 2001. This infringement lawsuit apparently occurred in 2003. Knowing the pace at which legal proceedings move, and the likely event Richardson attempted to negotiate/settle with MS prior to going to court, 2 years for the lawsuit to happen doesn't sound that unreasonable.

Because there are limited sales opportunities to support the employee base required to develop and maintain the product.

Quite frankly, this is not my problem. This is an issue of Supply and Demand. If second hand sells are taking away so much of your business than the demand for your product simply isn't what you thought it would be and your business processes and/or pricing need to be examined.

Continuing the used DVD analogy; the markets for "The Hunt for Red October" far out weigh the market for a DVD on how to build a deck. Should it not be OK to resell the deck building DVD because the market is smaller?

I have a tenant in one of my houses who's trying to figure out how to get good enough QOS from the neighbor's unsecured WiFis (seven routers from a 5db antenna) so that he can drop his phone service. I haven't had the heart to tell him it's illegal.

A lot of children do not get the topic that is being taught without repetition. When they get it, the homework is done much faster so the hours of homework become a lot less.

Children should not be deciding what they need to learn. Mostly since home nay children are going to say "Yes, please assign us more homework". Teachers need to be better, yes. But also children need to learn. Many kids do not want to learn. And many adults allow these excuses for children to not learn. The acting out and pointing at ADHD, ADD, and everything else. This was not the case 20 years ago. Children that did this either shaped up or were sent else where. Today, these disruptive children are kept with the regular kids and bring the group as a whole down. What happened? I still blame the parents. For these parents are not doing their job of parenting. The parents will blame everything and everyone but themselves and their children.

You can't stop the signal Mal, you can never stop the signal

I thought the issue with the R4 cartridge was that it circumvented the RSA check by the console. Reverse-engineering or bypassing copy-protection systems violates the DMCA. It might be bullshit, but it's still illegal enough that EBay won't touch it with a 10" pole.

Clue: check the user name. FWIW, I think his posts are great.

Well Crichton he is a Scientist and also a Medical Doctor and Science Fiction writer who happened to write a fiction book called "State of Fear".
However, he also a scientist who gave a factual speech to National Press Club that I linked in the other message as well.
If you think we should discount Crichton, then perhaps we should debunk the "global warming" movement because one of its leaders, Al Gore, also is a politician whose highest degree is Bachelor of Arts in Government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore

Here is a speech given by the late Michael Crichton, (who wrote Jurassic Park and other novels and screenplays, and who also graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College, received his MD from Harvard Medical School, and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, researching public policy with Jacob Bronowski. He taught courses in anthropology at Cambridge University.) Here he criticises the papers done by IPCC and debunks other global warning myths.

Michael's detailed explanation of why he criticizes global warming scenarios. Using published UN data, he reviews why claims for catastrophic warming arouse doubt; why reducing CO2 is vastly more difficult than we are being told; and why we are morally unjustified to spend vast sums on this speculative issue when around the world people are dying of starvation and disease.

You make my point for me, thanks! All these cooling and warming myths are cyclical, and just not worth wasting money to try to "fix." Humans are just too tiny a factor in the eons the earth has been around, and the many tons of gasses in the atmosphere. Do you know that CO2 comprises 0.0383% of the earth's atmosphere? If modern society is producting a few "extra" tons of CO2, then doubtless some vegetation will quickly evolve to make use of it. I'm more worried about the "cap-and-trade" tax. Now there's a truly dangerous idea!

. . . Other sources such as volcanoes emit 100x less than humans do.

You need to reread the article you cite. It states "Human emissions of CO2 are now estimated to be 26.4 Gt per year," and earlier states "The consumption of terrestrial vegetation by animals and by microbes (rotting, in other words) emits about 220 gigatonnes of CO2 every year, while respiration by vegetation emits another 220 Gt. " so non-human processes contribute many more times more CO2 emission than modern humans.

But many scientist are sceptical of global warming. See List of Scientists Opposing the Mainstream Scientific Assessment of Global Warming it www.ipcc.ch reports are not without criticism. They do not claim to conduct original research. There is certainly room for discussion.