Many software patents fail the obviousness test or get by because of ignorant examiners. A disproportionate number of software patents are just doing something that is commonplace in the physical world but only now "with a computer" or "over the internet" as the innovative step. Then comes the standpoint that algorithms aren't patentable while many software patents are only describing an algorithmic process.

The USPTO also has a massive conflict of interest in being dependent on funding from application and maintenance fees. They milk the gravy train of software patents for all it's worth even if it isn't in the public interest to do so as demonstrated by all the NPEs that collect patents for the sole purpose of litigation. It's easiest for the trolls to do this with software patents because it requires little expenditure of effort to come up with something "novel" that will get accepted by an examiner.

Just think about this. Imagine the extremely religious and militaristic southern states with their own military and nuclear weapons. Now imagine that there would be virtually no one to contest the idea when they decide that the gays and atheists in the north-east need to be put to death.

You don't think the northeast would have its own military and nuclear weapons too?

Russia is militaristic to a far greater degree than the South and has nuclear weapons, and is extremely anti-gay (far more so than the South), and we don't see them running around killing gay people all over Europe.

What'll be really interesting to watch is what happens in Saudi Arabia. The entire country is run by oil money. Every citizen gets paid by the government in accordance with their family standing. Nobody actually works. Even the poor have servants imported from Africa that they pay with their oil money. Once that runs out...holy shit that's going to be messy.

While we're at it, let's blame him for Mondays, New Coke and the Star Wars prequels and call it a day.

Same thing with Orwell. I had a conservative friend try to tell me Orwell was a capitalist because he wrote Animal Farm. No, he was a socialist. He wrote Animal Farm as a criticism of Stalinism (totalitarianism with the drapings of communism). Also, as a comment on the self-censorship of English socialists who looked the other way with regards to Stalin's purges and other atrocities because they just really wanted this experiment in communism to work so badly.

Time travelin', eh?

Battle of Fort Sumter.

It seems from there that there's a big issue over immigration, and that's about it. Obviously, for a long time, Sweden has had a very liberal immigration policy coupled with a very strong welfare state, which resulted in hordes of illiterate immigrants flooding in and getting on the dole; eventually, the natives tired of this and voted for politicians who clamped down on the gravy train, and the immigrants are angry.

A difference of opinion on a single issue isn't a sign of non-homogeneity. Non-homogeneity means different groups of people having very different cultures, such as the Swedes and their Muslim immigrants, who appear to stand at around 14% of the population now, so if you mean that, then I'll agree that Sweden is no longer homogeneous, but it was until recent decades.

Oh please. According to your own link, "The study "Antisemitic images and attitudes in Sweden", conducted by Henrik Bachner and Jonas Ring, revealed that 1.4 per cent of the population disagrees with the assertion that "Most Jews are probably decent folks"." I never said you'd get 100% agreement on anything, but 1.4% of a population being anti-Jewish is statistically insignificant, and certainly not an indicator of a major problem or disagreement in the society.

Actually, my solution so far is just to arm the Kurds and support them, to at least create one decent nation there which isn't a theocracy or a dictatorship. Then take a wait-and-see approach with the rest.

Exactly, other countries don't like the idea of giving different ethnic groups their own states because this interferes with their power.

It's not just them, though: liberals here in the west hate the idea of different ethnic groups having their own countries, because they think we should all be mashed together and be forced to get along somehow. Just look at some of the other comments to my posts here in this thread.

The idea of a region where people largely agree about social / moral / economic systems has never been realized and never will be no matter what scale you look at.

I'm sorry, that's hogwash. Small countries like Iceland or Andorra do not have any huge rifts in thinking between different groups of people. There's lots of small European countries where people get along just fine because the population is small and homogenous. Infighting becomes more and more of a problem as countries grow larger and more diverse.

Every region will have misogynists, creationists, etc.

The Scandinavian countries don't seem to have too many problems with misogyny, and creationism is something that's almost completely confined to the USA and some third-world countries. There's no significant number of creationists in western Europe, except perhaps among some immigrants (and even that's doubtful).

If one isn't happy because others don't conform to their ideal systems of thought, I suggest that they will never be happy.

It's not about others conforming to your thoughts, it's about whether those people have the ability to force their systems of thought on you through the law. Here in the US, even if you think Creationism is crap, if you live in certain areas, you might find Creationism forced on you because the voting public in those areas demands it to be taught in school to your children. In countries where no one believes in Creationism, this isn't a problem, so no one has to waste time with it just like they don't have to waste time debating whether the world is held up on Atlas's shoulders and whether the Titans created it, or any other such nonsense. When you live in a country where most people are like you and share your culture, you don't have to argue about silly crap like this all the time, like we do in America where we've been arguing whether this idiocy should be taught in schools for well over a century now.

Trade has existed long before mathematics were formally codified.

Not really. The whole 60 seconds to a minute & minutes to hours is because the Babalonians used a base 60 counting system for trade - that's pushing math in trade back 5K years to when they BUILT THE WHOLE NUMBER SYSTEM AROUND IT.

Individual barter goes back earlier, but pretty much as soon as you get into "Trade", you need math to handle it.

You are a little out of date, Odin was downgraded during the pantheonic reorganization. Unfortunately due to a clerical error the one true God is now a central park squirrel named Skippy.

Foamy - his name is Foamy the Squirel

You think infighting is a good idea? To waste time and energy constantly debating whether Creationism is real or not, or whether women should have equal rights?

Cultural diversity isn't a problem. People in different regions can maintain their own, separate cultures and be happy on their own, instead of having to constantly fight with other people in neighboring regions about whose culture is better and should be dominant. What you're advocating is not cultural diversity at all, but either cultural imperialism or a morass where no one is happy because no one gets to actually have their own distinct culture.