The GPL does not requite that you redistribute the source for free, it requires that you don't charge more for the source than the binary however.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#CompanyGPLCostsMoney

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowDownloadFee

He's not obligated to provide the SDK license, nor is he obligated to provide access to the AppStore. He's obligated to redistribute the GPL'd source code which he is. Hell, he could charge another $2.99 for the ability to download the source code if he wanted and that's all perfectly fine. Also, you are seriously confusing the concept of the why GPL'd source code is free. It's not free as in there is no cost. It's free in that you will always have access to the source and the ability to modify it as you see fit, so long as you also extend that freedom on to others.

Just because it's GPL does not mean it's also $0.00.

The submitter has done absolutely nothing wrong, and the original dev shouldn't have released the source under the GPL if he felt that the app should never be charged for. He should have released it under a non commercial license that explicitly restricted the sale of the software.

In general I would agree with you that the less competent should go, but that's not what the H1-B program is about. The H1-B program was designed to bring in foreign workers to fill openings where there were shortages of native workers with the appropriate skills. This is the argument used by companies like Microsoft and Intel to get the caps increased. They simply couldn't find people to fill these slots.

Keep in mind we are talking about the situation where a company is down sizing. Not dealing with promotions, firings, etc. If you have two employees that are up for a promotion and there's only one slot then absolutely performance is the only thing that matters. If you are being evaluated for competence or performance and need to be let go due to incompetence, again that's the only thing that matters. However, when the company is downsizing there is no valid argument that they can't find the skilled workers. There are more skilled workers than can be employed at that point, and the justification for the H1-B is now gone.

Microsoft just let 1400 workers go from their Licensing division in Reno, NV. Those are almost entirely non technical staff and would fall into the "financial services" folks they said they would lay off. It's also extremely unlikely there were any workers in that portion of the layoffs that had an H1-B.

Now, I would agree with the senator that if two people are being considered for a layoff and one has an H1-B and the other is a citizen, the H1-B should be let go. The reason being that Microsoft and the other tech companies argued that they desperately needed the cap on H1-B's to be increased as they couldn't find skilled workers in the US to fill the positions. At a time of layoffs, in the situation I described, that would obviously not be true any more.

Not sure, the article that I read said the temperatures would be around -128C. At that temperature and in that location it would be encased in a tomb of carbon dioxide ice, and the cold would be enough to crack the solar arrays and break the circuit boards. So you'd have to either be able to move enough to get out of the danger area, or perhaps generate enough heat to not be frozen solid. I'm guessing neither would be very easy to combat due to payload weight issues (getting off earth) and the energy needed to offse those extreme conditions.

It was named Phoenix as the mission was originally scrapped after the polar lander crash. When they revived the project they renamed it Phoenix. It's also unlikely that it will be revived in the next martian summer. The reason being that where the rover is, it will be cold enough for the solar cells and other components to be destroyed.