I find the fixation on wanting to use proprietary hardware with FOSS drivers rather counterproductive. If you are buying a graphics card where the vendor does not give you the source for the driver, you have sacrificed your freedom right at the point of sale, where you bought the hardware, so you might as well accept a driver that is closed as well. If you really insist on freedom, you ought to demand hardware that has open specs as well. I am NOT however saying that the effort to write free drivers for proprietary hardware is not admirable. I am just saying that FSF fixation on open software (driver) without insisting on open hardware as well, a contradiction.

We'll have a fair idea of it now... in an unfortunately literalistic sense.

Can this fair rule reasonably be extended to engine designs of fighter jets produced by companies in other nations? Let's say Germany needed to buy F-16s. Shouldn't it insist that Lockheed-Martin make public detailed drawings and specs outlining the entire aircraft's design? Of course, the average taxpayer will have no use for it, but then again, the average tax payer will have no use for the source code running the webapp that helps him file his taxes either.

Here you go: http://www.changetheequation.org/vitalsigns/

Can I add Kapil Dev to that list?

Is it just me or does someone else here hate the fact that in Firefox, you have to close all your tabs before opening it in 'Private Browsing' mode, whereas in Chrome, you can just right click open a link in a new 'Incognito Window'?

I think you meant 'ugly kludge'.

Well, the author should meet some Cricket fans.

The GPL was an ingenious invention. However, this is probably a good thing.

I am sure it can be turned into a brick.

"This message will self destruct in 5 seconds..."

When it comes to desktop environments, everyone has an opinion! (So here's mine: nothing beats the OSX interface. Nothing. XFCE is a distant second.)

I was wondering. In a scenario where I find an iDevice prototype, what if I handed it to Gizmodo for a couple of hours to do a review with, without charging Gizmodo anything for it and then called the original owner and returned it. Would I still be likely to the convicted for a crime like the chap in this article?

Alright, I agree with you that whether the Conquistadors baptized infants before slaughtering them is irrelevant, for ultimately, they were killing babies! Also, your proposition that the Spaniards would not risking the sin of murdering Christian infants is sound and I accept it. Thanks for pointing me to De las Casas work. Didn't know about him so far. The work is on Project Gutenberg. Will look it up.

I have no historical misconception. Here is the extract from an essay from Bertrand Russell, no less: http://bit.ly/r3O0Ym (Check the last lines in that page)