Explicit language might modify what would otherwise be there only by an implicit doctrine.

In general, a licensor can modify their own terms. So, if you are using the GPL on software to which you hold the copyright, and you add some sort of exception, it applies. You can't do it to other people's software.

I am still having a little trouble with "we don't need our spies to spy". Maybe we do.

I am also having trouble believing that the kind of encryption we use on the Internet actually stops the U.S. Government from finding out whatever it wishes although IETF and sysadmins might be kidding themselves that it can. Government can get to the end systems. They can subborn your staff. Etc.

MS language is potentially worse than the default. And there is room for litigation to surprise us.

Yes. The last stuff I wrote that I couldn't compile today was in "Promal" or "Paradox". My C and C++ code from 1980 still builds and runs.

All of my web development is on Ruby on Rails. That environment has had a lot of development and I've had to port to new versions. So old code for RoR would not quite run out of the box, but it's close.

Popular computing languages do not in general have only one Open Source implementation, and do not get abandoned.

Development with a proprietary language is ultimately harmful to your own interests, whether you make proprietary software for a profit or Free software.

The one thing every business needs is control. When you make it possible for another company to block your business, you lose control. Your options become limited. Solving business problems potentially becomes very costly, involving a complete rewrite.

The one thing that should be abundantly clear to everyone by now is that making your business dependent on Microsoft anything is ultimately a losing proposition. They have a long history of deprecating their own products after customers have built products upon them.

All Open Source licenses come with an implicit patent grant, it's an exhaustion doctrine in equitable law.

The problem is not patent holders who contribute to the code, you're protected from them. It's trolls who make no contribution and then sue.

Of course these same trolls sue regarding proprietary code as well.

Revenues aren't profits. All that money needs to go back into the company to keep it afloat. On $89 billion dollar revenues, expenditures exceeded that figure; they lost $240 million last fiscal year. Million dollar fines would definitely hurt Amazon.

To brew the ultimate "ice" beer.

OK, this isn't the Velicovsky thesis, but it's reminiscent of it.

You're joking but I feel that the 2nd Amended does guarantee the people the same weapons to which the government has access. Now of course we can't have John Q Public running around with a thermonuclear device so I believe the solution would be that the government can't have them either.

ISIS is worth an estimated $2 billion and has been around since 1999 and would love to nuke any Western target but they haven't. That they haven't tells me they don't have a bomb. That they don't have a bomb tells me that it isn't that easy.

Am I supposed to be impressed? I was playing with Omnibot in the 80s and it could do everything this POS can do.

I was under the definite impression that Google did make a promise to deliver the most relevant search results. It's still on their support page:

"When a user enters a query, our machines search the index for matching pages and return the results we believe are the most relevant to the user. Relevancy is determined by over 200 factors, one of which is the PageRank for a given page. PageRank is the measure of the importance of a page based on the incoming links from other pages. In simple terms, each link to a page on your site from another site adds to your site's PageRank. Not all links are equal: Google works hard to improve the user experience by identifying spam links and other practices that negatively impact search results. The best types of links are those that are given based on the quality of your content."

I see nothing in there about cooking the results so that Google can make a few extra bucks.

It's aimed at government.

Also initially I read the name as SuckuTablet.