If only the iPhone can be held wrong, where are there so many instructions on how to hold Android phones correctly? http://dontholditwrong.tumblr....

"I can only assume that T-mobile demanded that the FM radio be disabled, in order to get people to use up all their data listening to streaming music."

That does not explain why another carrier outside the US would not want to do the same thing.

I should be more precise and say "Does the supply of Uber drivers actually increase *relative to demand* with surge pricing?"

If the surge pricing does not increase supply but it does reduce demand, then it is still not price gouging. It is a pricing error by the supplier which they would correct once they realize they are making less money even though they are charging a higher price.

This is why price gouging laws are often associated with emergency situations: both supply and demand have shifted away from equilibrium due to the economic shock so would not respond quickly to prices.

The difference is that your claim that surge pricing is the same as price gouging is incorrect.

Price gouging occurs when you artificially raise the price away from the supply-demand equilibrium. Surge pricing occurs when you naturally raise the price toward the supply-demand equilibrium.

Does the supply of Uber drivers actually increase with surge pricing? If so then it is not price gouging.

corporation : person :: money : speech

The exemption on filing a 1023 for churches is under 508(c)(1)(a): https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...

" They are not the ones the GAO is going after...

This is about the FAA and the regulations they enforce when certifying aircraft are safe to fly, not about Boeing's CEO making more money or shareholders getting their profits by cutting safety corners. "

The GAO is not going after the aircraft industry merely because their charter does not permit them to directly go after the aircraft industry.

Nothing is preventing the aircraft industry from meeting these safety concerns ahead of any regulation... except the CEO making more money or the shareholders getting their profits. An explicit claim that current regulation is insufficient is at least an implicit claim that the industry cannot manage without regulation.

Steal the watch, pawn it, hire a hooker.

"Other smart watches have been hard to navigate, "

Heck, even "normal" watches are hard to navigate. This is what could get me interested in the Apple Watch.

"free software will have a great competitive advantage."

There's not even motivation to get enough labor to look for security bugs in free software, let alone for deliberate misfeatures. To get it done you'll have to pay someone to do it, and then you'll have a competitive advantage if you have done it with non-free software.

So you have only two anecdotes, only one of which has even the potential to be a failure of the system, and you're ready to throw the whole thing out?

... which is already refuted in the abstract, since they measured BMI at the beginning of the study not the end.

"Fiat money also has no real value"

Even in the worst case, the value of fiat money is backed by a) the willingness of the issuing government to accept payments in that currency in lieu of using their monopoly of force to take your possessions, b) the willingness of the issuing government to prosecute as a criminal theft the appropriation of another's fiat money, and c) the effort individuals are willing to expend in stealing.

Nobody is going to entrust their data to Microsoft US if one day it turns out they can't get your data back from whatever foreign country they shipped it off to.

Irrelevant. Microsoft US already stipulated that they could aces the records.