Anyone can comment on facts, but conjecture is more fun.

I didn't say that he doesn't enjoy it.

Picking on ZFS for being slow when ported to a different OS and running on atypical hardware is like criticizing Stephen Hawking for being a poor juggler. It's focussing on the wrong thing. The goals of ZFS are, in no particular order:
- Scalability to enormous numbers of devices
- Highly assured data integrity via checksumming
- Fault tolerance via redundancy
- Manageability/usability features (i.e., snapshots) that conventional file systems simply don't have
Oh, and if it's fast, well, that's gravy.

... it might be nice if the government had the ability to copy-edit the Internet, or at least slashdot story summaries...

I've never understood exactly why Google shoveled so much money into Android, and from what I hear from Android developers, they're not sure either.

Google sells ads; they're very good at it, and they have excellent margins. It's hard for them to find another business where they can make money as efficiently, so maybe they shouldn't bother. When they started developing Android, perhaps Google was worried that there wouldn't be good smartphone platforms that they could use to sell ads on, but that's not a worry now. Google doesn't care much whether you visit their sites or use their aps on an Android-powered phone or any other kind of phone; they get paid either way. If Microsoft or Baidu is willing to take over some or all of the cost of developing the software necessary for Google to serve ads to mobile users, Google would probably be delighted to let them.

Of course... that's how Microsoft makes all of their money--from superior products. That's why so many people haven't bothered to upgrade to XP--because Vista was too good for them.

Well, other than astroturfing on slashdot... Google has ads everywhere. They've branded the bejesus out of everything they've ever touched. (Not that I blame them--it's good marketing sense--but I'm simply flabbergasted that someone using a computer claims they haven't seen a google ad.)

... new legislation in Arizona is already being written to address the issues of extragalactic planets mixing and mingling with our stars, taking orbits that could be used for native planets.

Hello, and welcome to slashdot.

Owners of a content distribution channel for content are attempting to exercise their right to control how that channel is accessed, albeit in a stupid and pointless way! Horror!

World's toughest server farm that you know about.

It's not nearly as secure now that we all know that it exists and where it is...

There's a long tradition of young folks picking up nasty viruses from anonymous strangers in NYC; now their computers can too.

God forbid that someone would be willing to pay money for something of value created by someone else!

(what exactly do you think Microsoft is "getting away with" here?)

Yup.

Whoever wrote the summary should have read the article...

Here's my summary:

Microsoft: "Hey, smartphone makers, you're using some of our patented technology."

Smartphone makers: "Can't disagree with you."

Microsoft: "So, you should give me some money."

Smartphone makers: "Yeah, I guess."

Microsoft: "If you were already paying for them by buying a windows license, then we'd already square. But since you're not, then just give me a few bucks per unit. Cool?"

Smartphone makers: "Cool. Just don't tell the folks at slashdot, because they'll twist this around to make it sound like you're trying to intimidate us into not using Android, rather than us trying to license technology from you that we want to use in our phone."

Microsoft: "Yeah, and then somehow tie this in to their precious desktop linux."

Smartphone makers: "(snort)"

The same kind of law that makes it illegal for some loving long-term monogamous couples to get married, while others can, for example.

Seriously, looking for logic, proportion and consistency in legal statutes is pointless at best, maddening at worst. A large number of laws are written by people with interests to protect, or beliefs to promulgate, rather than any notion or desire for justice.

Really?

That would be quite a breakthrough, but I am skeptical. Depending on policy-based security requires that you also have a language for policies that make it impossible to write bad policies.

I'd be thrilled with a programming language that makes it easy to write secure code, much less a language that makes it impossible not to.