I never said that kids don't need email. Not even close. I commented on the parents' behavior. Thanks for misquoting me.

I'm a parent. All of my school age children have email accounts. I made a conscience decision not to create Gmail accounts for them, because due to their ages it would have violated Google's terms of service. In other words, I read Google's rules and then decided to go elsewhere. It took me less than fifteen minutes to find an alternative email service that allowed my children to have accounts.

I do feel sympathy for the kids who lost their accounts, but I feel zero sympathy for the parents who created those accounts and are now whining instead of admitting their mistake.

Five years ago? Really? Try about a month ago. But why did you even mention this? Does it add to the discussion? Is a comment in some way less worthy if it comes from someone who does not submit comments at a specific frequency?

If you want to disagree with me, that's fine. But if you are going to do so in public, you should at least try to respond to what I actually said.

Let me get this straight... here we have some parents who created Gmail accounts for their young children, fully aware that this was in violation of Google's teams of service. Then they became upset when Google deleted the accounts. How is this Google's fault? Clearly these so-called adults are missing the whole point. They lied about their kids' ages, and got caught. And instead of accepting responsibility for breaking the rules, which would be the mature thing to do, they got mad at Google. It's disappointing that these parents set such a bad example for their children.

Polaroid was selling ultrasonic sensors and an experimenters kit that could be used for this purpose thirty years ago. While there are definitely applications where this type of technology is useful, I agree that a tape measure works great for most purposes.

1. Applications. A lot of the specialty freeware applications that I use for are only available for Windows.

2. Family. My wife and kids know how to use Windows. They use Windows every day at work and at school. If we were to switch to a different OS, then I would spend a lot more of my time helping them with problems and answering their questions. I don't want to add IT Support to my list of hobbies.

/Don

A battery pack that could be quickly replaced would be a better solution.

We're always hearing about threats to our planet from outer space. Asteroid impacts Gamma Ray bursts. Invaders from Mars. The list goes on. What do you think is our biggest threat from space, and why?

Writing as a parent of an autistic child, I am quite sure that you are correct. It's human nature for parents to try to find something to blame for their child's situation. This is compounded by society's general lack of knowledge about things related to science, biology, genetics, etc. The idea that something external, such as a vaccine, was the cause is very appealing. These parents and other folks will be very reluctant to let go of their beliefs about vaccines without something else to latch onto.

Actually, the judge only declared the provision of the new law that requires everyone to buy health insurance unconstitutional, not the entire law (link). The provision that prevents an insurance company from canceling your insurance because you got sick is not affected by this, for example.

This is just one round of a fight that will certainly end up being decided by the US Supreme Court. There's no reason to panic or celebrate (depending on your point of view) yet.

But the real question is... will I be able to use Google TV to watch Hulu on my TV?

I already have a Tivo, so I already have a way to record live TV, access Netflix, watch Amazon VOD, YouTube, etc. And with pyTivo I can watch videos that I downloaded to my PC from the web. All that is missing is Hulu.

I get your point, but need to mention that Xerox has been selling laser printers for many, many years. The book Dealers of Lightning claims that their profits from laser printing have easily paid for all of the research done by PARC.

Also, Xerox did not invent the mouse, and has never claimed to have done so.

There's a small wireless ISP located in the Big Sur area of California that seems to have been up and running for a few years now. Maybe the OP wants to build a system like Big Sur Wireless. Their web site includes a lot of details about their homebrew system.

My experience is that antibacterial soap damages lens coatings, but generic white liquid soap works fine.

My only gripe with this article is that it seems to imply that over the past 40 years only ten OSes have been "left behind". That's silly. Anyone who was using minicomputers in the 1970s or 1980s can create a list of at least ten more that are no longer in wide use. My guess is that the original author wasn't using computers 30 or 40 years ago. :-)

Not quite. Under some circumstances, a US patent application can remain unpublished for up to eighteen months after filing. See here.

So it's possible for someone to file a patent application, then choose not to disclose the application for a period of time. I am not sure if this happened in the RAMBUS case - I am just pointing out that patent applications are not always immediately made public.

The FTC had found that Rambus undermined competition by getting secretly patented technology included in industry standards, but the Supremes evidently didn't agree.

Actually, the Court's decision not to hear the case only implies that a majority of the judges did believed that there was a compelling reason to hear the case. Quoting from here:

The Court grants a petition for certiorari only for "compelling reasons," spelled out in the court's Rule 10. Such reasons include, without limitation:

• to resolve a conflict in the interpretation of a federal law or a provision of the federal constitution
• to correct an egregious departure from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings
• to resolve an important question of federal law, or to expressly review a decision of a lower court that conflicts directly with a previous decision of the Court.

Which of these reasons would have justified the Court to hear this case?