are you kidding? iTunes much? App store much?

you are failing to take into account the risk of a negative response from a cop that just shot an unarmed fleeing person and planted evidence to justify the crime. You think there's no risk of negative outcomes for the camera operator in that situation?! What sort of dreamland do you live in?

Wonder if the lunar tubes would be diamond laden like on earth? Finance the building of lunar bases? Or just crash the "diamond economy"?

email has been considered a legal document under court precedent since it first became a tool of business in the late 80's early 90's. Federal official record retention laws have been in place for much longer than 2009. As an attorney and law firm owner she would be very aware of this, and even if she wasn't, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Hillary is only the currently most visible example of this, many other politicians are similarly in violation, the former PA governor is one example that comes to mind for me (I live in PA) The legal challenge here is really not much different than the challenge of legal corporate information stored/manipulated on personal devices.

The right place to air her rationalizations is in a court of law, not in the media. This is a clear criminal offense. The public rationalizations are a essentially an admission of guilt, guilt of a clear and direct violation of federal recordkeeping laws that are intended to protect the country and the people from political abuse. Prosecute her and the many other politicians that do this, that's where they should be explaining themselves, not in the media.

the Navy is interested in this because they would really like to get out of the carrying and storing lots of explosive ammunition on warships in hostile areas business. If all they need is bigger generators and this device to have essentially unlimited shots, and not carry ammunition, some reduced capability of the individual shots is likely acceptable.

The only innovation that Comcast/Verizon/AT$T et. al. have done is in exploring new frontiers of poor customer service, cartel like exclusionary practices against alternate providers, abusive/fraudulent billing practices and extortion to content providers. They are actually arguing to allow themselves to squash the innovation of other content providers, app authors, etc. The true innovators are completely in favor of net neutrality generally.

then you get charged with destruction of evidence, or obstructing justice, or some other cobbled up charge, even if there was no "evidence" on the device in the first place, you can't prove that after it's wiped. Yeah, if you lawyer up you might be able to get out of the charges, but your life is already heavily disrupted at a minimum.

If they make an Atom based phone that is running a full or mostly full version of Windows (not the semi crippled ARM port) as is current rumor, a "Surface Phone" so to speak, then that changes the game a LOT, suddenly app support is a non-issue for a bunch of things, I'm not talking about running full desktop apps on a comparatively tiny screen, but things that are sorely lacking on ARM Winphone like third party VPN clients, corporate asset management agents, in house developed (generally crappy and poorly maintained) apps, etc. Add some sort of dock or remote display capability then you have a laptop replacement for many mobile users.

we've all seen the commercial and otherwise implementation of what started as good ideas become coopted and ruined for other purposes, that's why.

Since when is a willfully installed piece of adware/spyware a "bug"? Using that term is someone's attempt to pass this off as a coding error when it was actually willfully installed by the OEM in their OS image.

I think people burned by napalm and other incendiaries that lived will disagree with you

and I'm not dumb, I know why. But it's an intellectual exercise question worth asking.

Why the distinction? Many more people have been killed by the explosive/incendiary chemical than any of the "chemical" agents. The deadliness and usability of the explosive/incendiary's is much more refined and targeted (today) too.

if anywhere near practical economically