Check your math. The flaw exists in Android 4.3 and older. 4.4 has 39.1% share, and whatever version number version L is has 0.1%. The remainder is 4.3 and older.

Are you suggesting that the current version of Apple's iOS developer agreement does not contain the 6 items that the EFF highlighted?

I'm talking about individuals rather than nations. When someone goes and bombs an abortion clinic, for example, they typically do it because they think they are serving their god, they are doing it for their religion. The Islamists in Paris were following similar beliefs. I'm not trying to argue whether or not the official doctrine of any religion includes killing people. Self-proclaimed members of both Christianity and Islam would both argue for and against their religion allowing them to kill people under certain circumstances, I'm not trying to get into that debate.

I see that you, on the other hand, are in fact trying to have that debate. I'm not your opponent for that debate though, there are plenty of web pages that give arguments on both sides.

I think that was during his speech in the Philippines.

"I call on Islamic radicals to enter the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris and kill 12 people with automatic weapons." - Barack Hussein Obama II

My god, you're right. It's exactly what he actually called for. Good call on that, thankfully you're here to point out things that other people would have missed.

Thanks, self-proclaimed Archangel!

I'm missing the part where they say their goal is to spread atheism.

That's about as intelligent as saying that Kim Il-Sung's goal was to nationalize the lumber industry. You're stating individual pieces like they're the entire goal. The purpose of the fighting was not the removal of organized religion, it was a much larger issue that they were fighting for.

You seem to fail to understand that it was one piece of a much larger issue.

It's stupid to even claim that anyone has ever fought a war to spread "an Athiest ideology" in the first place. The defining quality of revolutionary socialism is not the lack of religion, it is control of the means of production. It is not an Atheist ideology, it is a socialist ideology. But you're busy trying to build a case that these people were fighting for Atheism as a religion. Sorry, I don't buy it.

Wow. Yeah, you *nailed* me there, didn't you? Yeah pal you're exactly right, I am absolutely offended that anyone would not be a bigot. Thank you for stating my position so eloquently, and you've got my permission to debate with yourself from here on out, because I'm not going to be a party to this crap. Your agenda is obvious.

Shinto has been around since before 600BC and is "the way of the gods", not "the divinity of the Emperor." And you're trying to tell me that the goal of the Imperial Japanese military was to spread Shinto, rather than their own influence? That the soldiers in battle were not fighting for their nation, but for their religion?

No. They didn't. If you disagree, cite a source that quotes someone engaging in a battle in name of atheism, for the purpose of spreading atheism. Not Marxism, atheism. Marxism and atheism are not the same thing. People fighting revolutions are not fighting to bring about atheism, that is not their goal. Their goal is an entire political, social, and economic ideology, not just the removal of organized religion.

But, really, you don't care about any of this, do you? You just want to throw out some phrases about how Atheism itself (as some sort of organized thing which you imagine it to be) is responsible for the greatest number of deaths throughout history so that you engage people in meaningless debates where you pull out examples of people who were atheist and try to claim that their actions were done specifically in the name of atheism. We both know that's bullshit, but looking at your other comments that's obviously your goal. Good luck fighting your war against what you believe Atheism to be.

Don't confuse people of a certain religion killing people, versus people being killed for a religion. I doubt that anyone ever ran into battle shouting "For Shinto!" "For Atheism!"

The famous killers who have been athiests have not killed people in the name of atheism. That contrasts with Christian killers who most certainly killed in the name of their religion, or Islamist killers who have done the same.

Because we're bothered that he's not found.

You think that's bad?? I'm still stuck on IE5 on my Mac!

I don't think the program necessarily is the art, as far as the artists are concerned. The exhibition isn't the software necessarily, it is the collection of all of the items that the software "decided" to purchase. That means that the drugs themselves are part of the art exhibit. The full quote shows that they are aware of the fact that the drugs aren't legal on their own.

So, in this context, it is legal for them to be in possession of the otherwise-illegal drugs. Or, at least they think so.

Oh, well why didn't you just say that you believe that it's obvious? That's all the proof I need.

Aaargh, what kind of a diseased mind sticks an apostrophe in the words "gets"? What's that short for, "get is"?

It's not? Let's check the definition of "charlatan":

In that case, I would say that a well-respected anything has an opinion more valid than a fraud falsely claiming to have special knowledge.

Letters to the editor.

Then Sony should have stood their ground and let those theaters take the heat instead. Other smaller theaters would have probably stepped up and shown it, and the public probably would have responded by going out to see a movie that they wouldn't have otherwise seen just to give a big middle finger to the attackers.

I agree, and it's difficult to find a practical reason why someone would need to walk around with more than 1 gun on them, or a long arm that isn't easy to handle. I live in Arizona, and it's not all that uncommon to see people walking around with a handgun in the open (and I imagine far more people have them concealed), but I've never seen anyone walking around with a rifle or shotgun outside of hunting. There's just no reason for it. Not that it necessarily needs to be illegal, but people just don't have a daily reason to do it. If someone was walking around with an assault rifle slung across their back they're more likely to get made fun of by people with a little P228 or .38 or something in their pocket.