Many other elements are critical trace elements, but I dont see people complaining about using nickel for things like steelmaking.... Simple stating this is dumb without telling people why doesnt help. It's been shown that Mo is used in lubricatanrs for a century or so without problems. Simply saying that a few extra kT is suddently going to cause a problem without saying why doesnt cut ice. After all, we use a lot of moly - no issues so far. We use a lot of copper as well - another trace but that's not a problem, and we even recycle most of it stopping it from entering the biosphere. But the Amazon is still there... ditto zinc, boron, manganese.... So unless you have reason why - other than shouting DUMB - I fail to see why using a small amount compared to current use is such a problem.

You are aware that we've been using moly disulphide in lubricants for a hundred years or so - I hardly think that this will cause a problem since we are already in fact mining and using the stuff. Simply taking it out of a mine, cycling it through some components that then get discarded and recycled will if anything increase the soil availability of molybdenum.

Since they are still north of the Equator they will be - they only become the aurora austrialis if you are viewing them looking southwards.

Partly. The Criminal Justice Act 1994 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1994/ukpga_19940033_en_7#pt4-pb2-l1g60 provides for example in s60 the right to temporarily search anyone or any vehicle without suspicion if violent disorder is anticipated. The main search laws etc are in PACE, and these generally do require reasonable grounds. http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?parentActiveTextDocId=1871554&ActiveTextDocId=1871558

I could sign in any of my capacities of company director, Chartered Chemist or as a member of the BCS - most people belonging to organisations that grant postnominals by letters patent will be able to countersign.

The British people have never tolerated a register of where they live open to all officialdom - only in WW2 was it tolerated and it got kicked out shortly afterwards. Identity (of which there is a national birth register) is a totally different thing to address which is why passports have never had your address on them.

It is checked - I'm one of the people on the list of those who can countersign and I guess that about 20% of them are verified, might only be a phone call but they do check. For one guy who was coming from shall we say a country of interest they turned up with the application and wanted me to examine and confirm I had filled it all out.

You most certainly can. French national ID cards are perfectly valid and I know someone who travels on those documents regularly.

BTW My "idea" is not hilariously backwards as I never claimed that Microsoft was valueless because it doesnt make stuff. I pointed out that however other people can perceive it like that which is the point of the argument. Many people will not invest in something that appears intangible and ephemeral, regardless of how good or useful a software house can be.

South sea bubble, the Dutch Tulip craze, Railway mania, the Posiden bubble, 2007 Uranium bubble, and of course the NASDAQ in March 2000.... Wanna bet on how dumb investors really can be sometimes?

You mean in the eyes of the market, which in terms of evaluating what a company is "worth" is what counts. I never made such a claim at all - I proposed it as a theory... Software and IP etc while obviously valuable isn't something that you can get hold of.. it seems ephemeral, just ones and zeros. A company that is generally percevied to make "stuff" even if it is outsourced, is often held to be intrinsically more valuable than one that doesnt - the rights and wrongs of that are another entire debate. However I still think that people like Apple to some extent as they "make" things - there is a series of big shiny, well received boxes bought by high income people regularly. Against that Microsoft makes a few games consoles (that overheat) and a thing called the Zune that no-one really knows what it's for, apart from the fact it's a high priced failure. Now is that worth more than the deep penetration Microsoft has into the enterprise server market, the database market, the email and collaboration market, and lets not forget Office... well it's the markets... Reality is always playing second fiddle to peoples perception - that's why you get bank runs after all - not for any real reason but because herd mentality takes over.

Microsoft doesnt make anything... not real stuff. You can buy an Apple computer, but not a Microsoft one. Perhaps that has some bearing on the perceived value and owrht of the company - I'm just throwing the idea out there....

Actually the crime is committed the moment that you throw the brick provided it meets the tests in the Criminal Damage act. (assuming UK law here). By the time the glass is smashed then you have committed the offence.

UK law defines a crime as being the actual act "actus reus" and the intent "mens rea". Since he did both of those whilst in the UK, I'd say we have reason to prosecute quite legitimatly. The target is immaterial really - and for the purposes of the law to some extent it is irrelevant. People have been for example convicted of attempted murder in the UK when there was no possibility of any harm even occuring as the "person" wasnt even real so to that extent the target in the USA could be considered an abstraction.