They do. It's part of that 16GB that they advertise. This is how pretty much all devices are advertised. Do laptops and desktops come with a separate disk for the OS? When they advertise the size of the hard drive do they subtract the size of the OS? How about other brands of phones or tablets?

These people are completely ignorant about what they are suing for, in which case they have no business suing, or are suing just to sue (or because their lawyers are hoping to turn it into a class action suit, settle, and rake in millions while a bunch of people get 50 cents each), in which case they still have no business suing.

No, it wouldn't be like back then at all. Back then, they didn't have to fight a huge company with lots of money for lobbying and lawyers.

When developing FOSS is a crime, only criminals will develop FOSS.

Technically, it's an internet, not an Internet. The Internet is an internet, but an internet is not necessarily the Internet.

There's also a difference between retaliation and defense.
Scenario 1: Bank is being hacked. They take down attacking server to stop the attack. That's defense.
Real world analogy: Somebody is mugging you. You punch them in the face to prevent them stealing your wallet.

Scenario 2: Bank was hacked. They take down the server that attacked them. That's retaliation.
Real world analogy: Somebody mugged you. You figure out who they are, go over to their apartment and punch them in the face.

Of course, in scenario 2 they'll argue that they're bringing down the attacking servers because there is probably stolen data on them, but realistically, at that point do you think the hackers didn't copy it somewhere else?

More conclusive than, "A Korean IP address was involved, so it must have been the North Korean government!"

I agree, but that sure as hell doesn't give them the right to be sexist, and disallow certain people from participating based solely on their gender. The Civil Rights Act, which has been law for 50 years, specifically disallows it. Just because it's in favor of a minority doesn't change it. And they weren't just favoring girls in cases where otherwise the merit was equal (affirmative action), they were specifically disallowing boys.

How would people feel if the sentence had instead read: "This holiday season, Google and the National Parks partnered to let boys program the White House Christmas tree lights," and instead they banned girls from participating? How is one direction of sexism moral, ethical, and legal, if the other isn't?

You don't need a CS background to see the red flags. You don't even have to get as far as the summary.
"Unifies Web Development" - red flag #1
"Single, Speedy New Language" - red flag #2

The problems occur when the person is not compliant, but is not violent either. Informing an officer verbally of what you believe your rights are is not reacting violently - and yes, I know in most cases of that an officer will just roll their eyes, but it's times when the officer treats peaceful noncompliance as violence that problems occur, and is the reason for these cameras. (I don't disagree with you that we should care about violence against the police, just making a point)

"Quickly?" In other words, you're riding along the right hand side of your lane, and as a car approaches intending to pass you, you quickly move into the middle or left of the lane to force them to quickly slow down to prevent passing. Doing anything "quickly" that obstructs others is a dick move and you know it. You're an asshole who makes the rest of us cyclists look bad. Only in very rare situations would that "quickly" move promote safety. It's unsafe to anger another driver, both to you and the next cyclist they come upon. You're not doing it to promote safety, you're doing it to express dominance, like a gorilla beating its chest.

Next time you try that, think about this - are you doing it to promote safety, or are you doing it to try to express dominance by proving that you can legally be a dick? Believe me, the other driver doesn't care how big your penis is, so be the better person and don't be a dick or a dumbass to cars when you're on your bike, you're making the rest of us look bad, and it hurts us when we actually want to promote safety or policy changes (who wants their tax dollars to pay for bike lanes for a bunch of assholes like you?)

Except everything in the Fundamental Principles in the Olympic Charter refers to sports and athleticism.

Sweet! I assume that, since you're more skilled than everyone else, that you'll be competing in the next olympics? I look forward to hearing about your gold medal!

Regardless of how you want to argue semantics, what the officer did was against policy, and it was against policy for a reason. What happened in this situation is the reason - because it could kill or do serious harm to somebody, especially if they have certain medical conditions. The existence of the policy proves that the officer should reasonably have known that this move could have killed somebody, therefore he is guilty of negligent homicide.

The politicians who are TWC customers found out that Comcast was giving away VIP support bypass cards but TWC wasn't, so they're retaliating. Temporarily, of course, until TWC promises to give them cards after the merger.

Unfortunately, in this case, both sides win. Does that mean humanity loses? North Korea gets to flex its muscles and show that it has the ability to censor the US for awhile. Sony had a movie that was going to flop, but now they just need to hold on to it for a little while before releasing it and they'll rake in the millions.