In this study, we have used (insert statistical method here) to show that the quality of papers was declining.

First of all, school shootings are not that common but more importantly, as described, I am not sure this system will be able to save even a single kid.
This can make arrest easier but by the time the police arrive, even if it is ready and positioned right next to the school, the criminal would have already unloaded his weapon. Arresting criminals is a good thing but it won't get anyone back to life.
Perhaps, if this system helps getting faster medical assistance, it may save a few lives but it would cost a disproportionate amount of money. When we talk about safety, a human life is valued at about $7M in the US, it means that if deploying this system on a large scale costs $700M, it has to save at least 100 lives to be considered money well spent. Otherwise, there are better things to do with it, like improving road safety.

They didn't "disclose" anything, they just followed the legal procedure which is :
- the "copyright holder" (FirstCrist, Copyright) sends a DMCA takedown notice to the provider (YouTube)
- the provider blocks the content and forwards the notice to the subscriber (Al Hayat TV)
- if the subscriber wants his content back, he sends back a counter-notice to the provider, this notice needs to mention the real name and address of the subscriber or of his agent
- the provider forwards the counter-notice to the "copyright holder"
- the "copyright holder" has 10 days to sue the subscriber, if he doesn't, the content is restored

Legally speaking I'm pretty sure that Google is totally clean, the only wrongdoers are the ones who filed the bogus claim. Ethically, it is more complicated.
Anyways, I think that the YouTuber should have used a attorney. It wouldn't have fixed the ethical issues but at least, he would have been safe.

It was a PITA and very user unfriendly. I'm glad I don't have to mess with this like I did when I had a Nexus One (~256 MB total storage).
Problems are :
- SD cards are expected to be removable, and when you remove your card, apps are in a half-installed state : you can't use it and you can't uninstall it completely.
- SD cards are usually FAT32 formatted. And FAT32 lacks important features like users and mode bits (permissions).
- SD cards are often slower than internal memory
As a result, moveToSd features were often incomplete, mistake-prone, or both.

Also you can put a truckload of apps in 3GB. If you need more than that, you are a power user and probably have a phone with 16+GB of internal storage... or you know how to root.

I work with women, blacks, arabs, etc... And everything is fine for everyone.
Of course, a few of them were unhappy with their situation but it happens with white males too. These people tend to blame everything but themselves.

The women I work with are usually a lot more tech inclined than the average women, which is to be expected when working in tech. So yeah, they may readily talk about computers, video games and cars, but it doesn't prevent them from being feminine. They just have the culture that matches their jobs. Likewise, you should expect people working in libraries to read books and people making dog food to own pets.
Whether or not our minority coworkers get along is not about about accepting offensive jokes but rather a simple matter of social skills. If you show that you bring more fun to a group than racist or sexist jokes, people will want you in, even if you don't accept these jokes.

I think you are talking about Free.
The router is indeed completely controlled by the ISP and you use the company's website for settings. However, it not as bad as it may seem because :
- The public hotspot is independent from your home connection. The IP is different and you are not liable if something bad is done with it.
- You can disable the hotspot feature (but you lose access to others hotspots), you can also turn off WiFi completely.
- QoS is used to prioritize connections. The order is : VoIP, TV, Home internet, Public hotspot. As you see the public hotspot has the lowest priority so it is unlikely to impact you.
- If you want control over your internet connection you have "bridge mode", which I think is the best compromise between features and control. In this mode, you get a public, internet-facing IP so that you can connect your own router behind it and manage things like DHCP, DNS, NAT, port forwarding, etc... yourself and you still get to keep VoIP, TV and hotspot. You can't control QoS effectively though.
- It is possible to take full control of your line by replacing the ISP's router with your own modem. A bit tricky though, and frankly, not worth it for the vast majority of people.

You are right about Youtube and the global quality of their backbone though. It has improved a bit but Free still has one of the worst connectivity. If it is a problem to you, I recommend OVH (if it is available). As an ISP, it is geared mostly towards small businesses and has a very good peering.

How is it worse ? There is plenty of high quality contents made by professionals. YouTube is not just for cat videos anymore.
Of course, for these people to make a living, they need to monetize and it means you have to give something in return as neither producers nor Google are charities. It may be a bit of your person (that's what ads are for) or money. Google now considers the second option, which I think is a good one.

As for the time before YouTube was bought by Google, it was only better because there were plenty of unchecked piracy. Content owners didn't sue YouTube because it was a small company and there wasn't money to be made. The picture changed when Google, with its very deep pockets, bought it. But in this case, Google's only fault was to have money. Even if YouTube had stayed independent, copyright holders would have attacked as soon as it had became profitable, requiring similar changes.

In this case, I am waiting for CurrentC ;-)

The universe growing from a singularity, the fact that we don't know what happened before. I am an atheist but I think may be the scientific theory that is the most compatible with the idea of a creator.

Yes !
Terrorists, by definition, terrorize. Killings are just a mean to an end. As such, loudly announcing their presence before they attack may be an effective strategy. The goal would be to make people panic at the slightest hoax by making a few hoax-like events real.

I see what you did there... I think.

They changed the name from "Global warming" to "Climate change" for PR reasons, the underlying principles are still the same.
Global warming means the average temperature of the globe raises by a small amount. And people would assume that the only thing that would change is that temperatures will raise by a few degrees. Except that it may not match local observations (hey, this winter is colder than the previous one) and even if it was, it would be mostly viewed as something desirable (who likes freezing cold winters ?).
In reality, global warming would result in more extreme weather, sea level rise, a redistribution of local cold and hot areas rather than a steady raise in temperatures everywhere. Hence "climate change".

An expedition to Antarctica that didn't end well, a notebook left behind. It's all too easy to make parallels with The Mountains of Madness.
And just in time for Halloween too.

I believe it meant difficult for westerners like Zuckerberg.
I don't know Mandarin but I did a bit of Japanese and while the language itself isn't that difficult, the differences are what makes the learning hard. If, for example, English and French have 60% in common and English and Mandarin have only 20% in common, it will make learning Mandarin much harder for an English speaker, even if, in absolute terms, French may be harder than Mandarin.

How ironic... You tell us that Google is evil because of the way the data they collect might be used and yet, you point us to the one site that we should avoid the most according to your description.
And it's not only ironic, it's also a bad move if you really believe in what you have written. You see, imagine that Google and friends want to keep us stupid and that you, by the way of videos want to enlighten us. By pointing us to youtube, you allow Google to analyse the profile of the people you want to enlighten and, by manipulating the "related videos" and subtly filtering the comments, make an effective counter.