Guess how many of those "happy customers" are to touch anything Ubisoft anytime soon? The answer is - as soon as it pops up on a torrent site with all the BS cut out. I'm not here to defend said customers or Ubisoft, but Ubisoft's arrogance is going to hurt their sales, that's a fact.

Heh, that's right, throw in whone countries, that are poorer than an average US citizen to dilute the statistics. When people talk about 1% they talk about 1% in their country. That's where the inequality strikes, because governance is done within that country and ability to influence the outcomes of political struggles is dependent on the resources one has.

Don't remember third-party Skype clients and look how well it turned out for ICQ and MSN.

Good luck "going and getting" something from a server location in Russia or China. That involves risks of data falling into the hands of those governments, but it's a question of who you fear more and who can hurt you more.

Legality of tax evasion schemes is flaky, moreso - it's quite hard to nail corporations for it, because they follow the letter of the law and game the system in order to minimize their taxes. Now telling FBI off and refusing to comply with a court order is entirely different game - penalties can range up to total halt of all services google provides on US soil and confiscation of every tangible item feds can get their hands on. You want change - go whine at government for insilling the rules not at corporations playing by them.

Actually it does. Raising a ship from the depth of the ocean by slowly filling it with inflatable baloons was non-patentable because this idea was shown in a disney cartoon, so fiction work does qualify as prior art.

Have you actually taken a look at the log format that journald uses? Text is stored verbatim in them, so you can even dig through them with grep. Binary meta-data being added to it makes wonderful things possible - getting logs by unit, time and other parameters without whipping out a mile-long regexp. So please read up on the topic you attempt to bash or you will end up looking pretty stupid to anyone with a clue. Just like you did now.

Well, hello there friend. It must have been very uncomfortable to sit in a cryo cam for all these years, but while you were gone messaging apps have become more relevant than SMS-es and any carrier trying to ban them is to have a fecal storm on the matter, with billions of users for WhatsApp, FacebookMessenger, Hangouts, Viber, Line and whatnot.

They claimed it's TextSecure's algorithm, but, client is closed-sources, so who's going to check? Also, big question is key handling - if server assigns them or even generates them or at least verifies them - then whole "end-to-end" is just theater. I would believe them if key verification was given into user's hands and client's code was opensourced to check that it won't start black carbon/copying all the messages to some "friendly third parties".

The problem with WhatsApp is that it is closed-source, so you can't really check. You'll have to take their word for it. Also, they facilitate key exchange, so the whole "end-to-end" stuff is actually moot, since user is taken out of the loop and server can, at any time re-negotiate the keys and verify that MITM as a person A, that person B is trying to get in contact with. So it's all, once again, a lot of buzzwords, and zero security.

a. Telephone
b. Personal Computer
c. Email
d. Internet

h. Cellular Phones
i. Smart Phones

All hit stage 5 of mass acceptance at work before hitting mass acceptance.

Well, let's go over this once more:
Browser only shows "filler" tiles, that other companies pay to have there. Like an ad sticker on a wrapping paper on your brand new and free car. Firefox does not send any information to ad agencies, does not help them track you or do a full sweep of your activity (looks at chrome).

If you are so against predefined content, how come you were so totally OK all these years with Google search coming as default and Firefox getting a ton of money for it?

Now to adress the "bloated" part. Show me a slimmer browser, that uses less resources while retaining the same functionality? Browsers have become an OS in itself for running webapps. Don't like it - use mailer daemon to mail you the webpages you'd like to see. Richard seems to get along just fine doing that.

As for Pale moon - I am yet to see any usefull changes. They cut out features they don't like, claim they are faster and better, but except for dropping CPU's without SSE no useful optimisations have been introduced. The moment FF shuts down, Pale Moon is going down just as quickly without a main project to hold on to and to port all the changes from.

And last, but not least - when was the last time you donated to developers, that work hard just so that you and every other person on Earth has a reliable, auditable, privacy-caring, open-source browser? Donated code maybe, or at least filed a comprehensive bug report with logs and a case to reproduce?

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion and choice of browsers. But taking a dramatic stance and feeling all betrayed is way out of bounds. I draw the line at browsing experience and user tracking - as long as Firefox doesn't do anything that hurts end-user, they are fine to pursue other means of monetization, as long as the money goes to developing a better software.

I judge by what's been actually done, not by hysteria, that a lot of people like to fuss up around any issue as long as it has trigger words that get them going. They see an article titled "Mozilla adds ads" and they start running around with a sign "The end is nigh" without even familiarizing themselves with the issue and coming up with "ad absurdum" arguments.

Sure, I mean who cares about the truth as long as we can run around screaming bloody murder and probably soiling ourselves in the process. The "ad tiles" are placed on quick dial instead of empty ones until users get them filled with their browsing history or just drag and dropb pinned stuff from their bookmarks. That's it. But everyone and their dog are starting to whine and threatening to go to Chrome or Pale moon, which is twice as funny as just the wining, because if first browser was built by an advertising company for tracking users and increasing ad efficiency, while the other is nothing but a measely fork, sucking on Firefox codebase and proud of removing a lot of features (websockets anyone? Nah, who needs direct calls from browser, let's all use proprietary Skype), while it is Mozilla that keeps improving JS and HTML rendering engines and yet still keeps all the customizability that was there to begin with.

Apple was forced to get read of DRM by court order, not by competition.