I'm pretty sure Battle.net's password complexity requirement is "8 characters, combining letters and numbers". I know any harsher demands would invalidate my battle.net password.

Oh really? From your link:

Why not?

I'm not familiar with either either Apple or Amazon App Store, but I was of the impression that the prices were roughly equal?

In which case, the Apple model is "Make a lot of profit from hardware AND content, because people will buy our stuff anyway."

However, Apple will soon assist by providing accessories to alleviate the problem. This time in the shape of tinted glasses.

This. Really. If you can't be arsed to walk down to a voting booth to make your voice count, I do NOT want you to influence my government.

Preventing people who can't be bothered go move their physical asses down to a physical voting booth is an effective way to achieve the same.

No, it does not. There's only one game mode, and it's multiplayer. However, unless making your game public, only friends may join your game, and you have a checkbox option that prevents even them from entering without explicit consent. But "single player mode" doesn't exist. My girlfriend has been playing "single player" all along, untill she needed help beating some boss, at which point I simply clicked the "join" button from my friend list, and poof - there I was, in her "single player game". Why is that possible? Because it was always a multiplayer game. She was just the only person in it.

Well, duh. Several lives are more valuable than a single life. To me, my life is worth more than yours, though I'm sure you'd disagree.
However, every life is worth more than a flat screen TV.
Btw, capitalism is doing just fine over here, despite lethal violence not being legal means for protecting property.

I'd imagine that from the point of view of any die-hard extremist atheist, it becomes really really hard to make fun of religious nuts if your beloved science isn't even based on the assumption of the existance of an objective reality.

Are you actually that stupid, or are you intentionally illustrating the only possible way OP could've failed more miserable at reading comprehension?

I kinda thought Linux guys in particular understood the difference between physical and digital goods.
A better analogy is having the gardener of the city park help you create your own garden, which is exactly identical, and you then decide to put a fence around it.
GPL is the gardener telling you in advance that he'll only help you if you never do such a thing. Not neccesarily unreasonable, but also not a no-brainer, and completely unacceptable if you planned to wall it off all along.

Because the nature of our sociology is a product of genetical properties, mainly intelligence?

You don't see lions going out of their way to mate with the weak and fetilize the infertile. The sociological difference between lions and humans are in no small part a product of a different genome.

At this day and age, what really defines humanity is not so much being bipedal and able to use tools. It's the fact that we've created civilization. That we're waging wars, creating art, asking grand questions about physics and philosophy, and share the answers we find with the coming generations.

Our genome was an enabler for our sociology, which is now affecting our genome.

So again, what makes you think you can seperate them?

He also doesn't care enough about the universe to manually guide it every step of the way, so he tossed in a couple of self-maintaining features such as quantum mechanics, and is now mostly just observing. God is omnipotent from the perspective of anyone trapped in the universe he created. He's not omnipotent compared to others of his kind.

Serious attempts at debunking the concept of God will only ever convince those who didn't need convincing in the first place. And the (admittedly vast) majority of religious people who are religious simply because they're trying to fit in with some religious social context.
However, there's those of us with a well above average understanding of science, who realizes that it absolutely falls miles short of anything even remotely resembling a conclusive evidence against God, and instead see a world too beautiful and complex to be a product of chance.

To be honest, I'd be perfectly happy with that as well, if we can additionally tie Victors choice to the winner of a major sports event. I don't care whether I caused or predicted the result, as long as the bookies will take my wager.