Pitch it as a reality show ("Utopia: Moon") and you can probably get funding :)

And there is tension and torsion in the metal frame that holds up the flag, because with (as you mention) no breeze, they needed something else to hold it out. Because of the tension and torsion, the supporting arm vibrated a little at first, like a spring, and that makes waves in the flag material. They'll fade out eventually from friction, but if you already have the shot, well, there they are.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...

I will freely admit that granting immunity for the answer may not be _wise_. So, for a question as broad as "what were you doing on the 15th" I doubt anyone would be silly enough to grant blanket immunity. They'd be more likely to change the question to something much more specific, like "were you with the defendant on the night of the 15th", "were the two of you at the place the defendant claims", "was anyone else there", that sort of thing.

You can be ordered by the court to unlock, decode, or whatever else to make already existing data available. The fact that it is technically more difficult for them to work around encryption than a locked safe doesn't change the principle that material that already exists and was not created at the prompting of the government is not protected by the fifth amendment.

The fifth amendment (as interpreted by the courts) means that the government cannot cause you to create evidence which can be used to convict you. You speaking is creating evidence; you speaking in response to a question from a government official or writing an answer to a question on a government document is the government causing you to create evidence.

If you've been granted immunity, the fifth doesn't apply because it can't be used to convict you; you have to answer. If the evidence already exists (files in a safe, files in a safe deposit box, files on your computer) then the fifth doesn't apply because you're not creating any evidence; you can be required to hand that evidence over. (That's what subpoenas are for.)

So essentially, if _knowing the key_ would be evidence of a crime, you cannot be required to reveal that you know it. But knowing the passcode to your own phone is not evidence of a crime in any situation I can think of (_not_ knowing it would be more likely to be evidence of a crime, specifically posession of a stolen phone), so they can require you to give it up so they can access the files that already exist.

Many folks are against software patents because in the end all software is mathematical manipulation, and math isn't supposed to be patentable. Others are against software patents because they feel that in the end even the most complex software is made up of obvious combinations of smaller pieces, and those smaller pieces are obvious combinations of still smaller pieces, and the very bottom pieces are either trivial math or otherwise obvious and therefore the whole thing is. Some feel that since software is copyrightable it doesn't also need to be patentable. And some simply feel that software patents are too long relative to the development cycle and how long a particular software idea stays in use; some of those feel that barring subject-matter dependent durations, we'd be better off with none.

There's also the fact that people base their opinions on the data they've heard about, and the software patents that we hear the most about are the more egregious ones. It's entirely possible that there's patented software that is actually innovative and non-obvious and deserving of a patent. But I don't recall hearing a news story about anything like that in a long time.

Let's see. Assume body weight is 75kg, and 65% of that is water, for 48.75kg water or 48750g. 1 watt-hour = 860 calories, enough to raise the temperature of the water 0.018 degrees Celsius. The extra heat would then spread to the rest of the tissues, leaving the entire body an average of 0.011 degrees warmer.

Better?

Thank you for checking on that. I was basing my statement on wikipedia, which is obviously outdated at best.

Ah, that's a pity. Seems like alarms would be a natural category to add to that list; perhaps apple will do so at some point.

That seems odd. Waze can use the speaker even when it's not the foreground app and the screen has been turned off; it seems like it should be possible for the alarm app to do that too. Unless Waze got special privileges that the alarm app was unable to get for some reason (like, Apple only gives that to GPS apps).

That's true, but pid 2 crashing won't halt the system, because pid 1 can restart it. If pid 1 crashes, it's power cycle time.

They can get them, usually. It just takes time and money to negotiate for them. Eventually they'll have enough and then they can open up service.

Quickflix's biggest shareholder is an Nine Entertainment, which appears to be their ticketmaster and clearchannel equivalent. They don't appear to be a telco but they do seem likely to be in bed with them.

what they're asking for is "exactly what we wanted before, only we'll cloak it by requiring a shill^Wcustomer to ask us to do it first"

The legislators are very much involved. If the FCC makes a decision that the corporations don't like, their pet legislators will reverse it.