College is a choice, if students decide to squander it, banning laptops won't magically fix the problem.



Besides, students would just pull out their iPhones.

College is a choice, if students decide to squander it, banning laptops won't fix it.


Besides, they'd just pull out their iPhones then. ;)

Because clearly, what's good for America must be truly terrible for the rest of the world... er, what?

America creates the most billionaires in the world, and reaps the rewards (or doesn't, depending on your point of view...). Other countries only have themselves to blame if they feel left out.

But threat's like "I'M WATCHING YOU", are completely legal under the first amendment. The Cyberstalking and interstate threat's charges are going to be kicked out pretty quickly. I'd be a lot more interested in the fraud accusations.

As I understand it, this guy was very very careful at how he worded his "threats" to his customers. I suspect any half-rate lawyer will be able to get him out scot free.

But the summary does:

More male-targeted commercials emphasize cool gadgetry versus usability?".

Clearly, males are total saps for falling for the Droids cool gadgets and widgets that provide little in the way of useful features...oh wait.

Let's play this game. Assume Wikipedia was using a more draconian licence that restricted monetary gain. Then it would become a much less valuable as source material. If I was working on a research grant, I couldn't touch wikipedia, not even to check their sources, out of fear of getting sued for copyright violations. Do we really want more of that?

Monopolies? I like economic theory as much as the next guy, but I can't see any evidence that Amazon is a monopoly. Pray tell, what commodity or service is Amazon the sole provider of? Hmm?

I'm not disputing Amazon has a significant advantage, just your crazy economic ideas.

If forced to store conversations, transcribe them into a paper format, print them out, delete the digital copies, and keep a large paper archival system, for the government's perusal. Then use the cost of that as a tax writeoff.

There is research that shows that when a particularly violent new movie debuts in Theaters, violent crimes have a huge downward trend for the next few days.

Source: www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/business/media/07violence.html

Since NASA has no chance of ever establishing any more manned missions outside Earth's atmosphere, thanks to the weak political will in Washington, the continual myopic budget cuts for NASA, and the idiotic use of NASA as a jobs program for certain states by certain politicians (who I will not name, to avoid the obvious trolling that will ensue), this discovery may actually lead to future lunar missions in space. The Moon is just close enough to Earth to be nearly practical for the private space companies, and may be rich enough to be worth the haul. Especially with reports of China embargoing Rare Earth Elements.

Technically Google has committed no crime, and their tax avoidance is entirely legal. While it is normal to feel a moral outrage, I think your anger should be focused on those who created the loopholes in the first place. Washington.

No, according to wikipedia the project was actually extended an extra year to 2010. So it went above and beyond it's original mission.

Oh come on, it can't be that hard to match up spelling and search habits up with people, given enough data. In Google's case, they have lots. Lots and lots. Even if you use the proxy, you're going to visit an external machine sometime, at which case Google will have 2 key points of comparison, and Bam.

Now Google knows that people using the GoogleSharing Proxy are paranoid. Great, more information for the archives!