That does sound great. Someone wrote an app for that, but unfortunatley it was rejected. When the folks at Apple realized that it was for medical use and that someone might see the words "penis," "areola," or "clavicle" the app was not allowed to be sold in their store. Since it is not officially blessed by Apple you cannot use it even though you purchased the damn thing and presumably are an adult. Now be quiet, go browse the web like a nice doctor, and move along.

and become the testosterone infused jocks that we hate so much....

There is more to the project than just the source. First, some of the people are still working for Sun/Oracle. Their expertise is kind of important, and it is not so easy to just pick up the source and start making changes.

The other issue is the documentation. That is not so free. The mysql documentation is considerable and is a tremendous resource. Back in the day, it was the deciding reason that I went with mysql. If I went on purely technical requirements alone I would have likely chosen a different platform.

In related news anyone supporting current copyright laws have reinvigorated the economy after having to go out and purchase new pants. Cue the next great debate about copyright as we continue to try to shoe horn old ideas into the new world.

Though I suppose it is no more creepier than a will. Does said death-mail have legal standing?

My grandmother recently passed away. She had made a number of arrangements including her burial, the religious services, final wishes, and what not. It was a huge help and comfort for us. We had a set of guides to help us make decisions that we think that she would have preferred. Such decisions are difficult under normal circumstances but even more difficult right after she died. My father on the other hand made almost no provisions, and it was all the more difficult to get through the situation.

I no longer see this as creepy but as a healthy and respectful way to treat your loved ones and to help them prepare for what they will have to face.

I agree. The weird thing about this is that even if they do not try to apply any filter and provide full, legitimate access then they make it very easy for the other government to demonize the use of proxies in general as tools of teh evil Amerika. They are implementing something that people in these other countries already know about and use but putting a big ole "USA" stamp on it.

Apple has not managed to hide the suicide of one of their suppliers employees after he was on the receiving end of a good deal of intimidation. In today's media environment once the shine comes off of a star the media is more than happy to jump on the mud throwing bandwagon. If this gains any traction then there is a good chance that people will be more than happy to pile on.

why do problems with paperwork make it necessary to turn away patients?

It may not be necessary, but it is a cautious move. Information is important when treating patients. Their history is important. When making decisions on what treatments to provide the doctors consider the patient's history. If you do not have their history and a nearby hospital does then it seems like an easy choice to send the patient elsewhere.

From that vague wording it seems that using the XML::RPC module in Perl would violate the patent. You can use that module to separate your manipulation of the xml and the data that is represented in the xml. Then again, it seems to me that this is exactly what word processors have been doing since wordstar. The editor allows you to focus on the contents while the program manipulates the file under the hood. The fact that it uses XML is not really relevant.

Yes, he's just 25 and perhaps could have more experience. But anyhow he seems a pretty smart guy. And note that he is the senior partner in his own law firm.

Did you expect him to be a junior partner in his own law firm? The fact that he has his own firm just means he has a lot of money. This just snells like he is trying to take advantage of the situation to get some free exposure (In my opinion of course). That is not always in the best interest of the accused.

I know it is not fashionable to read the article or look at this from a different perspective, but Mr. Blount explicitly brought this issue up in the article. He said that providing such services to sight impaired people is something they have done for a long time and have no desire to end.

He is also not saying that this is a copyright violation. What he explicitly said is that the kindle creates extra value for the work. In return the people who created the material should share in that extra value.

It is fine to disagree with this statement. I personally think that market forces should determine the worth of the product. If you want to argue, though, you should argue against the points that he brought up instead of changing the subject and using a "straw man" argument.