in their whitepaper they referenced my 'axfuzz' tool I wrote years ago and even used a modified version of it in their testing. Hope they didn't judge me on that code, it was a pile of crap that I kept hacking together until it finally worked, with no thought to proper software design.

Keeping in mind a Xbox or PS3 is effectively a computer, plus attaching a laptop for playing a movie, 90% sounds pretty reasonable.

It's not that easy at all. They use virtual machines, encryption, parts of the game resources encoded on invalid sectors on the game disk etc etc. Some of the copyright protections have taken months to crack by experts at machine level debugging, and still haven't been done correctly. The guys writing the games are just good high level language programmers, artists and game-engine-re-users... hardly device driver debugger experts.

Bad company 2, modern warefare and portal are some of the best games I've played. The main reason being I was able to complete them in a reasonable time without the feeling of having wasted my life.

I recommended BC2 to someone recently. I used the argument that I actually bothered to finish it as evidence the game was worth playing.

I don't play multiplayer games at all, I am too old and couldn't be bothered wasting my time only to lose. Spending hours on a game only to lose or without any sense of achievement is pretty depressing.

This is a good point - many people treat a pirated version as a 'demo' they only give 4-5 hrs before moving onto something else until they find something worth dedicating their time.

Most of those requests are for orkurt (about 200). Orkurt is really only big in Brazil... so if you exclude those, the numbers are pretty similar to every other country.

Another example?

The only reason these "hostile" eyes are looking in this case is because they were able to get the source code, similar to what publishing your source code achieves.

If the only eyes looking other than your own are hostile eyes, that would be an argument *against* publishing your code.

The partial answers need to show up in Google, so that people actually click through. If they had a proper pay-wall, Google wouldn't see the answers either. If they showed different content to the google search indexer, they would be removed from the index. What they are currently doing probably wouldn't be allowed from a smaller site, and they are skating on thin ice, but Google bends the rules for sites that bring in more google adsense revenue.

Most likely their backup plan is to sue. They had their lawyers go over the EULA with a fine tooth comb (Opera mentions this) and they seem to think there is no problem. Opera mini renders on the server side, not client side, thus not competing with the current browser, apparently.

If Apple rejects it, Opera lawyers up (see Microsoft and the EU with regards to Opera). They may even require Apple to give iPhone users a 'browser ballot' - Opera may even be hoping they reject it.

Well, they are linking to the "downloads" section (check out the downloads section, its the same url). It makes sense that the "downloads" should be serving stuff up as downloaded rather than embedded content.

There's a far better resource here anyway:
http://wigle.net/gps/gps/main/ssidstats

        1967466 9.481%
linksys 1767274 8.516%
default 543979 2.621%
NETGEAR 499542 2.407%
Belkin54g 230670 1.111%
no_ssid 215863 1.040%
Wireless 201520 0.971%
hpsetup 154749 0.745%
WLAN 99567 0.479%
DLINK 85869 0.413%
ACTIONTEC 82937 0.399%
home 80043 0.385%
        70417 0.339%
Free Public WiFi 56769 0.273%

http://wigle.net/gps/gps/Map/onlinemap2/

Combine it with a GPS and join the thousands of people already doing this and contribute to this site.

Why do only "runaway slaves" make this mistake? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maroon_(people)

Indeed, this is very old news, it's been done many times before. I recall reading and applying this article for Windows many years ago:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301696.aspx

there's also: http://www.ntcore.com/files/SmallAppWiz.htm and http://www.phreedom.org/solar/code/tinype/ (again for windows) and many more.

Dead heat? IE9 is sitting at about 600, FF is at about 750. The bars for IE8 and Opera 10.10 are throwing off the scale of the graph. If it only showed the top 8 or so browsers, and a graph from 0 - 1000, the difference would look pretty big.