I'm not too familiar with the supreme court decision however my guess is that because you are not forced to use library internet it is acceptable. That would not apply to a municipal network.

If local officials decided to add filters to their municipal internet "for the children" they could expect first amendment lawsuits that they will lose.

On the other hand a private isp could do that with zero legal consequences.

If I transport you back in time and drop you in the middle of some cavemen and Ug decides he wants to kill you he will not hand you a club to defend yourself with first; he will simply bash your skull in. Rights are a societal concept. For example I believe that all people have the right to be treated equally. While many would agree with me, that "right" is in fact a relatively modern invention.

Also if the Constitution simply codified natural rights and the right to own a gun was an extension of the right to self defense then gun laws today would be much more strict. There are many legal firearms today that are obviously meant to serve a much more offensive purpose. The whole Bill of Rights was designed with one purpose in mind - to keep government tyranny in check.

As for your idea that guns are the best self-defense tool, read this: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

When you say things like that I can see exactly why Bentham called natural rights "nonsense on stilts." Guns have not always existed and so therefore your argument is flawed right there. The right to gun ownership is conferred through the second amendment of the Constitution so therefore it is a legal right.

I've got a virgin mobile phone...where I am the network is so lousy that I cannot see anyone hitting the 2.5 GB "cap" without going insane.

While the signs are real, how often do they actually patrol with the aircraft?

Ah yes but when your employer fires you for joining one there will be no government to protect you. Go look up yellow dog contracts.

From the article:

"There was no ice at the polls, no glaciers, and a lot more carbon dioxide and water vapor in the atmosphere."

Dear editors, please do something to stop the spread of typoitis. This terrible disease continues to horrify the grammar nazis among us and I've had it with their moaning.

Nope. I was tempted to go find a pirated version just to see the gimmick in action. I'm certain I'm not alone.

And where did I attempt to make a moral argument about piracy? Piracy will always exist - morally correct or not. You can bitch and moan about it or you can attempt to do something about it. The percentage of pirates who would have bought a legit copy is meaningful because it lets you gauge how effective your anitpiracy method was. If your game flops and you want to blame it on piracy you better have some hard numbers to back yourself up with. It doesn't matter whether the pirates were in the right or wrong; if you make it easier to get a pirated copy, piracy rates will go up and it's your fault.

And what % of the 3130 people that pirated it actually would have bought a legit copy? Had they not provided a "pirated" version for free on launch day would a pirated version even have existed? The game obviously has a niche market (game development sim - not something I would spend money on). There's too many confounding factors to say that piracy caused the game to tank and if anything they got hoisted by their petard.

Hardly.

With only 3344 total users I'd argue that they either need to advertise more or make a better game. Furthermore the gimmick in the pirated version may in fact drive up the piracy rate.

Yup, not comcast. I'm seeing the same thing and I'm not using them.

That is the beauty of open source - you can do that.