Just curious. Why mess with a body the so affects our world?

Also, if you mine an asteroid are you then changing it's trajectory and potentially putting it into earth's path?

I'm more apt to be OK to mining other bodies in space, but the Moon, I'd want to see some serious studies done on the affect of mining on the moon effects on the earth.

Of which Google is part of the 12 companies fronting the money for these patents.

I do the same thing, but I think they will turn their attention to usenet at some point in the future and use Child Porn as an excuse.

IE see State of NY. They made all ISP's discontinue access to USENET because of Child porn.http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html only 88 newsgroups found with child porn, yet all 3 ISP's used it as an "excuse" to cut off either completely or all alt.* newsgroups.

Just saying, don't think usenet won't be focus'd next, and they will use child porn as an excuse.

Really? I'm at a loss to this statement specifically.

And no I really don't want the gov't to control all weapons (btw weapon could be knife/bat/any blunt object/etc. just saying). I know the Do we really want this was for something else, and to that, Yeah I think it's neat. Have no issue with this.

For fairness, I own 1 black powder rifle for hunting, 1 shotgun for hunting. I do have a pistol permit in NYS (pita to get in NYS and I can't carry in NYC) but no pistols.

Can't you stipulate your app only works on ICS and certain phones? I know I have 2 droid phones 3 7" tabs. 1 Samsung Galaxy original 7" and 2 chinese ainol (srsly $70 shipped from china, perfect for my kids). I've upgraded my Tab to ICS with CM, the chinese came with ICS. However, many apps won't show up in the play store when I search on the chinese tab, many do, but many don't.

So i DL on phone/Tab, use backup program, ES Explorer to stick APK on my server, and get it on the Ainol one. Never had an issue.

And why do other developers are able to have an app that works on all these diff devices fine without issue. From my cheap chinese stuff, to my expensive stuff, can't remember an App that hasn't looked fine/worked on any of them. Only 2 are hacked, my SG1 and Tab. Other 3 remain stock.

I work in Gov't, state level. EVERY SINGLE laptop is encrypted. You plug in a USB, before you can move data to it, it has to be encrypted (you can move data off to computer without encrypting). You burn CD it get's encrypted.

They just this year started encrypting desktops also.

What I don't understand is why is it not a Fed Gov't rule that every agency that has portable media (tablets/laptops/usb/etc) has to be encrypted? This should just be standard now. Esp after having 48 incidents in 3 years? WTF, after first incident they should have started working on a plan to encrypt stuff.

And MS's way of wanting say in features in future updates to android put on phones/tablets that have licensed from MS? Or having veto power over features? For things that their Patents don't even cover.

Also: Microsoft is also demanding exorbitant licensing fees for the use of Android. Indeed, shortly after Microsoft sent Barnes & Noble a proposed licensing agreement on or about January 6, 2011, Microsoft confirmed to Barnes & Noble that it was demanding licensing fees [redacted] for each NookTM and [redacted] for each Nook ColorTM. It is Barnes & Noble's understanding that these licensing fees that Microsoft demands for the use of the Android are the same, or higher, than the licensing fees that Microsoft charges for its own Windows Phone 7 -- despite the fact that Microsoft only claims ownership of only trivial and non-essential design elements in Android-based devices, as opposed to an entire operating system.

Sure we don't know those numbers, but $15 was what people were saying. At 2.25% that's around $670 per device. Last I checked xbox is cheaper then that, by alot. And I would say MS patents are more trivial then Moto's patents.

And who says that Moto hasn't offered 2.25% to everyone when they first start negotiating. If that's the case, they aren't being discriminatory.

Again, starting point, negotiate. What the Frand requires. MS/Apple skipped that part and went right to lawsuits. Apple didn't have a friendly judge in their backyard and got "unlucky".

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20120930131752509

Basically said they can't enforce the ban they won in Germany. If that's not the definition of overruling, I guess I'm confused. Sure Moto would have to put up bond to damage MS may suffer if they win.

Are you really saying that Google with Moto doesn't have a deep portfolio folder in communications?

I think you have the 2 confused. MS has barely any in the communication area from what I understand. MS is getting Android with other patents (I think 1 is the Fat 32). MS has none in the communication field. Moto has many, Moto cross licenses with many others who do, so taht 2.25% is much less for those other companies.

Since MS has none in this area and I bet Google thinks the patents MS has are software/prior art and not standard essential, Google feels OK. Now MS did get a judge in their backyard who is rulling in their favor (look at same Lawsuit between Moto/Apple in Wisconsin what happened there, and this judge saying he can overide Germany rulings).

You also say about negotiating starting High, MS didn't even negotiate, they got the letter and immediatedly went to ITC/Judge. How is that negotiating in good faith. At least the Judge in Wisconsin saw Apple's ploy for what it was. Wish this judge wasn't so MS biased.

Can you please point out to me MS patents that are critical to Google?

Um MS started this. Read up at Groklaw. Basically Moto sent a proposal around 2010 I think, I forget exactly. They wanted 2.25% (as a starting point for negotiations, esp since MS doesn't have any FRAND patents, normally companies license at a much lower rate but that lower rate is due to cross licensing of standard patents or other patents essential to the device from both sides).

MS didn't enter negotiations, they went to ITC and complained, and then alleged that Moto is not metting it's FRAND obligations. Then Moto sued in Germany. Germany ruled in their favor initially and imposed a ban. MS went to a seattle judge, who basically says he can overrule the Germany court, lifted the Ban, and says He'll set a fair and resonable price. I believe he ruled this way because his case started before the Germany case. I still think he's on Crack that he can overrule a foreign country judge, but w/e.

Now I wish this judge wasn't as biased and would be like the judge in Wisconsin. Apple did the same thing against Moto against these Frand patents. The judge in Wisconsin saw that Apple was just using the lawsuit for leverage or if didn't agree with the price the judge set, use that price as a negotiating price after the lawsuit. She dismissed with prejudice. MS is doing the same thing. Yet Seattle judge, back yard to MS, blah blah blah.

But Moto didn't start this war. They wanted to negotiate first, MS didn't want to pay/negotiated.

It's also about the Foreman bringing in other things into the Jury Room during deliberations that weren't part of the trial/judges instructions. IE the prior art must be interchangable to invalidate a patent (among other things, but to me this is a big one). Please see PJ's update at http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121109045047165

Just from my experience, i'm computer forensic investigator but not for police. However, i work with many ex cops and state police.

Few days once in a blue moon fine. But hypothetically the state police have had a bunch of these cases that I'm aware of. When I'm doing my thing if I run across CP i have to stop my investigation and turn it over to state police immediately. Am i'm not just talking about the CP you can Hash value out(known CP DL'd or w/e). Talking in my 5 years here, we've had 4 dealing with actual like abuse, personal pictures. And i don't deal with anything closely related to CP.

I'm sorry just even thinking about that/picturing it is horrifying to me anyways. If i had to see images all the time on that subject. Forget that.

Most Police departments that I'm aware of have some sort of policy regarding this. I mean you do have to investigate it, but yeah therapy is pretty much mandatory.

Not sure about swapping in and out, would have to check on that.

I get ya. And totally agree about asking for refund first.

So:

1. Start company
2. Sell lifetimes at $500
3. Close company
4. offer 1/2 refund
5. Profit?