"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities."
    -- Winston Churchill

Justice? I don't think they were ever about justice. Their name says it all: they're in it for the lulz.

Except this isn't really repeatability...they're both analysing the same data from the same experiment, just in different ways with different weighting. Repeatability will come with LHC data.

If everyone's hoarding them, then there will be very few transactions, which will only increase the volatility. If you want to stabilize the economy, use them.

I guess it's predictable that the FSF wouldn't be in favor of BSD-style licenses, but if they're going to mention things like the Apache license, they should include the BSD license. BSD is not mentioned anywhere in their guide...which is a shame. Whether you agree with it or not, it's a valid license, and should be included in the decision tree for choosing a license.

It's not really psychological, it's a side-effect of how humans assess risk. We assess a risk lower if it is: common (driving every day), self-controlled (driving yourself), failures aren't personified (hitting a tree is a different risk than a person driving into you), and if we've seen the event a lot. We assess risks higher if they are: rare (many people only fly once or less per year), something you can't control (someone else piloting), and if failures are spectacular (fireball from the sky). Add in being able to personify a risk (terrorist hijacking), and you begin to see why hijackers flying planes into buildings pushed so many people's buttons on 9/11.

To disable the global Menu bar, you do two things:
1) in /etc/X11/Xsessions.d/ move 80appmenu to another location (I created a "disabled" subdirectory and put it there)
2) disable the "global menu bar integration" plugins in Firefox and Thunderbird.

Yes, this is a shitty way to manage that setting.

I haven't done business with Sony Online Entertainment at all for over a decade, and I'm apparently effected. I subscribed to Everquest way back in the day, but dropped somewhere around 2001. I just yesterday got an email from them that my personal information had been lost. So, don't feel so superior...even if you started boycotting them over the rootkits, they kept your information from before then, and then lost it to hackers.

Being inflammatory, irritating and caustic, it provokes anger, irritability, boldness, ambition, envy, jealousy and courage.

I dunno, that's not a bad summary of Stephenson. The GP may be right...

So, I'm curious: Is there any organization that does direct label->broadcaster agreements (or acting as a clearinghouse for those sorts of agreements)? I believe (though IANAL) that a direct contract between a label & a broadcaster for a given netcasting rate would bypass the need to pay SoundExchange (since you wouldn't be relying on the compulsory license). Is there any organization doing that sort of contract work out in the wild net?

While I'm a fan of some of those arguments, a couple of them are horseshit. It would be good if the IPv6 fans stopped using the silly ones.

Built-in security: you're either referring to difficulty of scanning due to size (which few worms or attackers bother with anymore) or the notion of IPSec having its own header type (which is useless without a key distribution system). Neither is really worth writing home about.

Auto-configuration: Any actual operational network is going to need DHCPv6 anyway, so autoconf isn't a big draw. For example, any enterprise that wants to keep track of MAC->IP mappings is never going to use autoconf to assign addresses. Heck, if you just want DNS servers, you need DHCPv6. I really don't see why autoconf is a *good* thing. It's mostly just a pain in the ass if you want to do host configuration *right*, rather than the half-assed state that autoconf will leave you in.

native multicasting: this is available in IPv4 as well, and isn't used there either. Don't hold your breath assuming that multicast is going to amount to anything in IPv6.

Actually, hard drives are *not* supposed to be air tight. They intentionally allow airflow into the HD, but through a filter to keep dust out. If you want a drive that is airtight, it'll cost more.

http://www.acsdata.com/how-a-hard-drive-works.htm

As another poster mentioned below, patents from that period would have now expired. Why not post his notes to the 'net? Even if the car companies patented it, or bought the idea from him, those patents have expired by now, so they're not an impediment to anyone. Posting the notes would allow anyone else who wanted to to use them, and would serve as an obvious "prior art" wall against anyone else trying to shut them down.

Content multicasting (as opposed to the v6 network information multicasting) is possible in IPv4, and it works identically to how content multicasting would work in v6. If content multicasting isn't used in v4, what makes you think people will use it in v6?

One word: money. There's a price to keeping the hardware + people ready & waiting. They probably don't have the money to wait much longer.