Seriously.

Gen1 and Gen2 Rifts are nice rich-boy gadgets. But of EXTREMELY limited utility, as the side-effects of working with them are still as bad as they are.

Okay, let's be honest here.

The guy was put under an electron microscope the second this hot issue came up.

Had this not been as controversial as it was, I SERIOUSLY doubt that he or the issue would have had that kind of all-seeing scrutiny.

In many cases, skulduggery requires apathy and/or ignorance from the general public.

The Comcast/TWC merger had a few octillion candle power focused on it from all directions.

You had consumers going "FUCK NO!" by the millions.

You had reportage going "FUCK NO!"

Hell, you had POLITICIANS going "FUCK NO!"

Had he rubber-stamped this merger, all manner of people would have been howling for blood. He'd be removed from his position, and the ensuing legal and political inquiries would have essentially ended his life and neutered any prospect of future employment.

So, with pretty much EVERYONE standing over his shoulder (with club in hand), he was FORCED to play it straight.

No - in other words, the man knows how to live life without an electronic nanny in his pocket.

Fact: Putting the word "fact" before your sentence does not absolve you of the need to back it up with actual evidence.

A little less blame on the owner, and a little more blame on the carrier? How much genuine crap comes pre-installed on a carrier subsidized phone? I'm talking about genuine worthless crap, that does and gives nothing of value to the end customer, the owner who pays for the phone.

The phone is regarded by the carrier as a tool, with which to keep track of the chattel, or the sheeple. Again and again, the carriers are exposed for their overzealous data collection. And, for the most part, people aren't able to turn these "features" off, unless they are willing to invest some time in research, then risk voiding their so-called warranties.

Yeah, end users are mostly dumb clods, but the carriers are responsible for a lot of the problem.

An analyst is generally not a person eating his own dog food, it's a person trying to sell his insight of the market to third parties as investment advice. What it means in practice is that you're trying to make a lot of statements that make you seem smart in hindsight but don't compromise your credibility when they don't pan out. Like in this case, if the Oculus Rift doesn't launch in 2015 this won't even be a footnote. If it does launch, he can point to this statement and say "Look, I wasn't sure but I had a hunch this would happen". You don't need to make any elaborate theories of stock manipulation, this is simply one analyst trying to pump up his own career.

The pool of people who are knowledgeable about the practices, challenges, and daily business realities of the telecommunications industry (or any industry for that matter) is a small one indeed; good luck finding someone in that pool with the experience necessary to lead an agency the size of the FCC who hasn't worked for the industry at one time in his or her life.

It's kind of like winning a cockfight though. The whole contest exists only because the surrounding environment is corrupt and/or seedy.

In addition to being cool stuff, mercury also has a very long history of use in gold extraction. I don't know about the people who built this particular structure; but mercury-amalgamation gold extraction is known to have been in use in South America well before the Spanish showed up. Given the human enthusiasm for gold, that's another point in mercury's favor as a funerary good, along with being weird and cool looking.

(Large scale extraction is now usually done by cyanide leaching, since that's somewhat less nasty than mercury amalgamation; but small scale miners often still use mercury. As one might imagine, the 'now heat the amalgam with a blowtorch to drive off the mercury and recover the gold' step is about as good for you as it sounds, possibly worse.)

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

That's funny.

Basically, officials care about three things:

1) Did THEY get money out of it?
2) Is one of their pork projects rider'ed in on the bill?
3) Was primary authorship of said bill under the proper wing of the US Political Monoparty?

That's a matter of perspective. I've been there numerous times and have found that the Canadian side has the best views but the American side is less of a tourist trap. The Canadians have done a piss poor job of keeping development in check, in fact, there's a school of thought saying that the Horseshoe Falls are perpetually mist covered (historically they weren't) because of changes in the local wind currents brought about by development on the Canadian side.

Besides, the coolest thing there is the Cave of the Winds, and that's in good ole USA. No trip would be complete without seeing both sides, but there are plenty of people (myself included, obviously) that think the American side is at least the equal of the Canadian side.

You use a lot of big words, I don't think you know what any of them mean. What I argue is that there's structural differences that makes this a better idea to to centrally than at home, regardless of how good or cheap the batteries get. If it's cost effective for you to store the power in a battery and use it in the daytime it's going to be more cost effective for them to store the power in a battery and sell it to you in the daytime. The very reason they sell it cheap at night is that there's no cost effective way to store the excess power for later, if there were the low night prices would go away. You're on the wrong end of the Dunning-Kruger effect here, buddy.

It's not about finding a solution. It's about taking what somebody has worked on, experimented with, done usability testing, put in a product and convinced the market to use and have a second company come in and say thanks for all the hard work, in a month we'll have a cheaper clone doing the exact same thing.

...and not knowing of any product using any of the MS patents, even if they were unaware it was patented and by who. Particularly in the same business, it's rather hard not to know what features the competition is advertising. It's certainly hard to prove you didn't know about them. Submarine patents are a different story, but for example when they made Android they probably couldn't claim ignorance of any features the iPhone had. Even the business requirements and feature requests can be "contaminated" by other products, it's not a feature you'd have added unless someone else had done it first.

Of course sometimes you get unlucky and develop the exact same solution, but that also means you're reinventing the wheel. Do you want a medal? Or you might feel it's obvious and widespread now, but was it that obvious when it was patented? Ten years ago is a long time in the tech industry, things that I go "well, duuuuuuuuh" to today maybe wasn't. If they were, I'd like to go back and redo my investments. I'm sure you all remember the warm reception the iPod get, boy was that right on the money...

I think it's a rich person who has nothing better to do with his money.