People don't like dealing with change. Rather than trying to come up with a new system that works well considering the current realities, people try to make the current realities conform to what was previously in place.

Look at movies with flying cars, where so often the flying cars are restricted to 2d multiple lane 'roads' in the air. Seems like a ridiculous restriction to put on flying cars which would lead to almost the exact same set of problems we have with non-flying cars and traffic. It's just how people think (or is that how we don't think?)

It is easy for us on Slashdot to see how stupid this is. But you are talking about a country where a large portion of the population prides themselves in being ignorant and rejecting good science for 'alternative theories'.

Nope, a typo.

Although, since English came from England, not America wouldn't the American be the derivation?

Is that the device's lifespawn or the battery's? It is only implied in the article but it looks more like that is the battery's lifespawn. Somehow I doubt the battery costs the full $5000 your using in your calculation, since that is the cost of the bike. I believe your cost per mile calculation is oversimplified and misleading.

I believe if you use similar math on the hummer, a more total cost instead of just the gas price divided by the MPG you get somewhere between $1.50 and $2 a mile. Those numbers however still don't make for a proper comparison since we don't know the real lifespawn of the bike vs lifespawn and cost of the battery.

So really it just comes down to a few questions:
Is that lifespawn just the battery?
If so, can the battery be replaced, and for how much?
What does the electricity to charge it cost?

I was unprepared for higher education by the current system. I had to re-learn howto be creative and independant.

I guess what we really need is a more balanced approach. Something between schooling and "unschooling". Some children raised with 'unschooling' may end up having problems, but hopefully the influence of and knowledge gained from those experiments will help society in general.

A dangerous thing to say, as that not every child will necessarily have the ability to learn the subject matter in a reasonable period of time no matter how you present it. You may not mean it in that way, but easy phrases like that are easy to take out of context or misinterpret.

You may be right, it may be more of a Troll than Flamebait.

An attack without evidence. Several others have already gone into detail on how non-American companies run into similar treatment and it's likely Americans have this view since American media tends to only report on American companies. But that is irrelevant, the post attacks and stirs up controversy without contributing anything.

The point is, this isn't novel, original, or insightful. My examples of how easy it would be to prototype was to illistrate all the parts exist and have probably been put together in that form or nearly that form already.

Take for example all the plugins and applications that give status updates on what music you are playing to any number of communications platforms. Look at all the automatic posts already being made to twitter. Hey, some of the media players that have plugins that post what your listening to play video, and surprise surprise some post what you are watching just as they post what you are listening! Look at all the examples of attempts at integrated and omni devices including tv remotes.

The only place I can see you could really claim is anywhere near innovative is putting it on the remote. But really, when trying to capture data such as what a user is doing, where are the two places you look to hook in? The output and/or related metadata, or the user input and/or related metadata.

I really wish people would stop saying the equivalent of 'oooh oooh read the patent' without ever considering how unoriginal these minor variations being patented are.

The primary reason why the patent shouldn't be granted is it's a minor variation on existing ideas that takes no real effort to dream up or create. A 10 minute brain storming session could come up with dozens of ideas of equivalent value. Also, a prototype of the device could probably be created in minutes using a computer or smartphone with an IR port. Or look at a custom pvr setup.

This is hardly a patent protecting any real R&D. This is like patenting different configurations of three blocks of Lego. Oh yes, my patent is original! The top block is shifted one peg farther to the right! It's a completely new design!

How about roads? Power lines? Police? Never mind with education and healthcare, children. They don't get to choose, their parents do. You make it sound so straightforward. Also its quite obvious the complete deregulation of certain industries doesn't work. Telecommunications for example.

Hmm, strange, here I thought I had read that over twice and going back now there are references. Guess I missed them. I did have trouble finding a reliable 100% 5-year survival rate number that didn't have all sorts of conditions on it though.

By the way, I'm not on either side. I don't care how the democrats are or how the republicans are. Making those generalisations, dividing the argument into "us" and "them", I tend to stop listening as soon as you use those terms. How about arguing based on reason rather than "that's wrong because the bad guys believe that" or "they did it first" crap. These issues are about a societies trying to improve, it isn't two sided, there isn't a good side and a bad side.

Those are fine numbers, but you don't bother to list your sources, methods, etc.

I can make up numbers as well. I can do better even, I can usually find studies to back my made up numbers, just so long as I ignore a few details like methods.

Half would be an increase. Also, it tends to be less expensive in the long run to have better social programs. Beyond a certain point, cutting taxes and social programs only benefits short term greed, in a few years you end up paying for it.

Those switches are valid and work, however they don't allow you to use memory above the license limit. The kernel just refuses to use more than the memory limit. With a desktop license the PAE kernel detects all your RAM and is able to address it properly, however during startup it discards all memory above the limit read from the license data. The server editions of windows use the same kernel executables but don't have the licensing limit. Read the article for a clearer more detailed explanation.

This is also addressed in the article. A single process can only address 4GB of memory. In Windows the upper 1-2GB are reserved for system use leaving 2-3GB for user space depending on your boot flags. However generally in modern use, the memory limitation you are likely to encounter is the overall system limit, not the individual application limit.

Sorry if I come across as overly aggressive with my response, but please read the article before making comments based on assumptions that mislead and misrepresent the topic of said article. I'm tired of people making FUD easier by never bothering to read the topic.

Where I an employee under this program and a fellow employee found me downloading music I myself had created from my own server the correct response would be for them to yell "That's Stealing!" and publicly embarrass me?

Would it then be correct for me to say "lawsuit"?