Even if they did manage to get the money out, it all had to go somewhere. Why is it not as simple as looking up where the money went and going from there to determine the culprit? Am I missing something obvious?

While it's great to see this sort of technology, I cannot help but wonder if we will actually ever have LCD contact lens in actual use. The issue I have is that anything displayed on the lens will never be visible to the person wearing the lens as their eyes cannot physically focus on the image. Imagine trying to view a screen that is literally sitting on your eyeball -- how would you possibly focus your eyes to view something that close?!

If Intel does do this, then it would be pretty lucrative for someone to step in and create a "socket-board" with the CPU's pre-installed onto the socket boards. Motherboard makers can continue to do what they have been doing... ABIT did almost just this very thing with their BP6 motherboard and paved the way for enthusiasts to build their own SMP machines

I'm sure everyone is also interested in seeing how the performance compares to drivers on other operating systems (Windows, Mac OS X). Is there a link to such a comparison? It helps to put things into perspective. (I'm too lazy to google it =)

If you are going to be pedantic about this just for the sake of being pedantic then consider this. Anyone could work hard on a serious intellectual problem for more than 4 hours. They could in fact literally spend their entire life (and even be considered crazy/insane) and not get anywhere. However, you seem to have confused working hard for more than 4 hours vs obtaining a useful result/conclusion/solution within 4 hours. What would Dirac say to Andrew Wiles -- a mathematical counter example in every sense of the phrase to your Dirac quote?

Though it sounds insane, they probably left out the some important details. When I was a mathematics graduate student, I too spent a LOT of time thinking about mathematics -- a lot of it was for fun. Did I spend 80 hours a week thinking about mathematics? Probably not, but likely close. However, it was not as though I locked myself up in a room and had someone from the real world slide slices of pizza underneath the door so that I could do mathematics. A lot of theoretical science happens in one's mind, and that can be done anywhere, anytime. On the other hand, you could not do this if your job was to be a surgeon or pilot -- it's not the same. Mind you, all that thinking does get exhausting even if only mentally. However, if you want to ever be a "star" in anything -- sports, medicine, mathematics, etc -- you have to "practice" (i.e. put in extra time). Maybe 80+ hours per week is a bit much, but it is not completely impossible in some areas of study. Of course, you could just go the "average" route and still be "ok" in the end.

That's his argument for having a tablet over a desktop... to which any sane person would have to ask: why not just get a laptop or netbook, or even an actual desktop. Getting a tablet w/ those accessories defeats the purpose of having a tablet.

From the article:

Perhaps the most common business "app" would be Microsoft's office suite. No one is going to be creating powerpoints, word documents, excel sheets, etc. on a tablet or a mobile phone. The tablet is just not designed for that. You need a keyboard and mouse (or the other option is some massive investment into training people to deal with no keyboard/mouse). Windows 8 stands to be the laughing stock of OS's if they do not address usability issues on the desktop. Until then, I only see it being acceptable on a tablet -- or on desktops with fingertouch input displays

The author pretty much defeated his own argument with: running genuine productivity software on a tablet is still something of a rarity -- it will remain for pretty much any application needing quick input from a keyboard/mouse.

If by "force" you mean the philosophy behind using GPL code, then that has been around long before Nvidia even put out binary drivers. The freedom here is not freedom to do whatever the hell you please, but freedom to take the current source and modify however you wish -- provided you contribute back by sharing your modifications. No one is forcing Nvidia to open their drivers -- they can choose to not do so as they have been doing.

If NVIDIA were the only GPU makers then your concern would make for a stronger point. However, there are other GPU makers: ATI and Intel for example.

This was already done by UIUC -- they have "caves" in the Beckman Institute that already do this, and I believe they even played Quake II in there.

Beckman Institute Cave link: http://isl.beckman.illinois.edu/Labs/CAVE/CAVE.html

Quake II in cave: http://www.visbox.com/prajlich/caveQuake/

The fact that the search suggestion appears is merely a reflection of the information that is currently out there -- whether factual or not. She should be going after the party(s) responsible for the character assassination (and Google can help, actually, to find the perpetrators).

There are several reasons why I think reverse class action suits or even fine-per-infraction would happen. If all you do is download, then the copyright holders would have to not only identify you (and IP's are not reliable) but also get around fair use (depending on where you live) in the case where you download content you've already purchased. If you're also seeding, then chances are you will probably get caught sooner or later.

To be honest, I do not think it is necessary. Most folks know what is right from wrong in real life. The fact that it is a game means very little.

Except for the fact that the jury botched their own decisions -- awarding damages on products that don't infringe, for example. Twice, at that. This is just as "unlikely" for most folks as your proposition.