No, I am saying we already have a sample population to test theories on. The gay community, which is predominately like the male population as a whole. They are in all strata of this population and as such act as a very good sample. One major difference between these populations, and the only hard physical difference in their relationships, is that gay men do not have to worry about pregnancy, and as such we see 40 times as much aids in the homosexual population. We see a tiny majority host the vast majority of STDs. The addition of these pills will put the whole population in the exact situation that gay men have been in for generations.

I don't really think it is fair to say that editor of TWoT did the series any favors. It is not that he was a terrible writer, but the books obviously suffered form a severe lack of decent editing. Perhaps if they had used a less personally involved person, they would of convinced him to cut out all the shit.

Still, if she inherited the copyright ownership, she inherited her way into the lease agreement. She has become the official head of the franchise. Just because a CEO changes does not mean that the company is no longer under any obligation to fulfill its contracts. And since she in the official in charge of this entity, it is far more like a ceo role than an individual. I am not certain, but if she was found to have officially stated this in her role as the head of the WoT universe, instead of just as an individual, I could see that holding some weight in court.

OK, but like you already said you already have options. You have already mentioned condoms, there is vasectomies (and freezing sperm), abstinence, etc. With this pill you might of died of aids before even meeting her, so it does not really seem like a solution. Besides, most people in monogamous relationships get a little on the side. I have heard, though not seen the actually papers, that something like a third of all children born in wedlock are from affairs.

And still to this day aids is a huge concern to homosexual males simply because they equate not being able to knock their partner up with safe sex. So we know with absolutely certainty that that will not happen, a large significant population will use this instead of using a condom; And many of them will die, but not until after they spread AIDs to even more people. There are no technical solutions to anything that are worth a damn. The onyl solution to pregnancy and STDs is common sense, unfortunately this "solution" will only act as a smoke screen for many.

And STDs will skyrocket. There is pretty much no reason you should ever have unprotected sex if you do not want to father a child. Imagine if this was available a generation ago, 80% of the population would of died along side all of those homosexuals. I might imagine that we have STDs slightly more under control now and the death rate won't skyrocket quite that much, but still...

The burial/cremation/memorial business is huge money.

20% growth is not flattening out, it is pretty much as much as you would hope for a big established player. It probably represents far more about how fast the economy is growing as a whole than actually effort by Google to grow bigger.

Secondly, Google can play the long game. FB itself did not add any ads to its site for a long time, instead focusing on growing its user base and making them dependant. The article mentions the move to tablets like it is a knock against Google, but they have most of the table marketshare with Android. They own most of our OSes now, and an even bigger percentage of us use their browser to browse the internet. Yet they are not Microsoft, they have yet to leverage this position for trillions of dollars in licensing fees, or more ubiquitous ads that they probably could, because like FB they are more interested in gaining even more users. FB is one site on the internet, one site that 99% of the people who visit use at least Google OS or Google Browser to do so.

How the f*** do you expect people to "rank them correctly within the genre"? What does that even mean? Where doe Dwarf Fortress stand in the genre of DF-likes? Where does Brutal Legend stand in the genre of Action, Comedy, Adventure, Open World RPG, Hack and Slash, RTS games?

You repeatedly said that "[consumers] would not be able to 'own' [copies of movies/etc]".
I repeatedly said the opposite, that voiding copyright law would not in any way effect ownership law. And that in teh absence of copyright the default state is everyone owns the IP, not that no one does.

Most of us do not know that technical jargon sentence, no, but must of us understand what happens when you melt and refreeze something like that.

This, of course it is only 5%. IT is easy for a program to write code with 0 white space, and variable/function names that go like this (a, b, ...., a0, a1, a2, ....). But People should NEVER write code like that. Yes I would save you at least 95% of the disk space it would otherwise use up, but no one would ever be able to debug or change, or add anything to the code. And it would simple never even work, you would never get a finished working program.

I think you are confusing the concept of ownership with that of copyright holding. They would own their own copy of the movie, either on disc or the bits on their hard drive and have the right to copy, change/edit, sell, or give that copy to anyone. They would in effect have a right to all ideas and concepts invented or discovered by man. A sort of shared heritage.

What are you trying to say? That without copyright laws that people would not be able to watch movies because they could not own intellectual property? You seem very confused.

I have found consistently that MPC "just works" slightly more often. Its interface and controls are completely crap compared to VLC, but its video playback is significantly better. As in, videos that will not play in VLC, will play in MPC.