I just got an iPhone 4. I really don't know why I waited so long. I suppose I was just happy with my previous phone.

But one of the key reasons I bought the iPhone was because of its MP3 capabilities. I have a lot of CDs and wanted to listen to them on the road, so I decided to burn all the CDs to the iTunes.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that buying the CD gives me something that iTunes music downloaders don't get. That is unlimited access to my music without DRM and without having to pay some online service for it.

I really like the Genius automatic playlist generator. I use it to all the time. If you're buying an iPhone, I recommend you also buy CDs so that you don't have the DRM problem mentioned in the article.

Manning sold out his own country for nothing more than self-satisfaction. I'm glad to see him getting charged with aiding the enemy.

I hope he gets the death penalty.

and Awe!

The US is operating a parallel operation, codenamed homonymous.

Their claims are belied by the fact that the footage is taken from 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Actually, since most 3rd party browsers use the IE rendering engine, they would be at risk as well.

Steve Jobs breathed life back into a dying Apple. It was his management that turned the company from a third-rate HW vendor into a juggernaut of ideas, concepts, products, and customer satisfaction. Sculley, Amelio, and the rest never could have done that.

But if Steve goes, whence Apple? I'm sure he has a large cadre of lieutenants who can make good decisions in his stead, but can they get along? Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs? Do they have his business acumen?

The problem of building a company around a single person means that person is the weakest link. When Steve decides to give up the mantle, will Apple be able to adjust to the absence and still succeed in the same ways?

I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.

Moving away from this discussion of criminality could spare us from rehashing the same old arguments. What this article was discussing was public perception, and in this sense, none of the characterizations we've proffered so far really match up.

Carnegie, Ferdinand de Lesseps, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt - these are men who are both highly admired for their achievements and just as highly detested for the manner in which they reached their achievements.

May I suggest?

There is another story of a beloved criminal, you know. Robin Hood.

The criminal believes himself innocent and has no need to redeem himself. It is simply a given that people respect and admire a rogue who marches to his own drumbeat.

As an applications developer, lacking this feature means that I cannot increase my budget to hire more programmers and produce a better product. Without the personal information I have nothing to sell to advertisers, and must rely on much lower advertisement rates and donations from users.

Users will suffer from lower-quality apps, and I'm sad that Facebook has taken this step. In a world of openness, this is a huge step backwards.

I don't want to go back to a "pay to play" internet. Please lobby FB to reenable these features if you also believe in keeping the internet free.

Your reference to Crime and Punishment is interesting, but Gates is more similar to Jean Valjean than Raskolnikov.

Long departed from the life of crime, he is still hounded by the amateur Javerts that skulk around /.

Behold the beautiful icons bestowed unto us in Windows 7!

Penitent: Lord, have mercy upon me, a sinner.

GNU/God: RTFM.

It's okay. Moderation is just a number.

Someone felt that my post that is critical of the pope was designed to draw flames. Should I hold my tongue because I fear the censorship of small minded people with power?