Whether or not it shuts down I'm sure the Active Duty military and civilian employees will be paid. As I recall that's the way it worked the last time.

Spend some time poking around the appliance stores on the web in the UK and Holland (most web sites are in English) and you'll see what he's referring to. There are tons of appliances with conveniences and performance you just can't find in the US for anything less than ridiculous prices. I have the same oven I had in Germany (Bosch); it cost 600 euro in Hamburg and almost 2K here in the US; same model feature for feature. There are some odd things as well like efficient dishwashers and radiators (with efficient room by room thermostats) which you just can't find here at all but are commonplace elsewhere. Or take the Ford Escort diesel I had, can't be found here in the US but awesomely reliable and got way better mileage than anything in the US (including the Prius). The US just has no tolerance for quality.

17,000,000 Commodore 64s sold. That's 17M. IPad has already sold +50M

My idea is that Chrome as a brand name needs to be phased in later- once there is a larger market for Android devices. Chrome could be used to define internet interoperability- that two devices which feature "chrome" are compatible in the way you'd intuitively expect and behind the scenes they use whatever amazing technology they've discovered with ChromeOS development. Chrome apps would be available exclusively over the internet and you could purchase any app in the family and it would know how to interoperate with all the other chrome apps- in a visually oriented toolkit. It would control other, unrelated devices in an intuitive way. Nobody can define the real feature set, without spending the R&D Google has. Deliver the technology but market it as a feature without seeming to cause a conflict with Android.

I would assume they will use Android to govern the "application" market for things which the user perceives as private, usable when there's no network at all, or rely on a lot of computer power and little network needs. ChromeOS, the technology if not the brand name, would be used to define a new level of compatibility and seamlessness with the internet. Chrome the name (rather than the OS) could be used to market this technology. Chrome capable devices could be given a physically distinquishing factor so if they had this feature you'd know they'd work together.

I have a Nokia- in face my last three phones have been Nokias. My wife has an Android (G1) and frankly, I don't understand why it's as popular with the non-geek crowd was it is. My Nokia, as a smart phone has two outstanding features which no Android seems to support- Skype over wifi and 3G and SIP. There is of course the Verizon bullshit version of Skype (lmao) and a couple of weird add-ons for SIP but seems like nobody's taking advantage of the platform for super cheap voice and talking in places there there's no GSM signal. The last especially since 3G and even cell coverage so just so spotty in much of the US. I'm clearly some sort of weird minority user but without either of these options an Android or any smartphone just seems like an overpriced, small screened laptop.

Re: Your signature. See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Wd-Q3F8KM Great example of transformative use and a wonderful classroom example.

1) That is why you use a panel system in larger classes. 2) I have used the socratic method just fine in tandem with group projects, etc, at the undergraduate level.

mmmm unguided erie guesses. Did you know that the Illinois Supreme Court will only take certified questions from the Supreme court OR the 7th circuit? (talk about ridic...)

What does that have to do with what the LAW is. Bad facts make bad law, sometimes, but there is a question of law here.

New York: Supreme Court (Trial) => Appellate Division (App Div) => Court of Appeals(Highest Court in State). Also you are not entirely correct, in some circumstances, Appellate decisions are binding to ALL lower courts, and in some jurisdictions, they are binding on only those lower courts over which they have direct review. (So the Nassau County Supreme court wouldn't be bound by 1st Department Decisions, but New York County Supreme would. N.b. In New York, this is not the case -- Appellate Decisions from any department are binding provided that the department with direct review does not have conflicting precedent)

This is not criminal. It's civil. All of the things you cite (except one) go to damages, not liability. Going to law school has made me hate slashdot so much more.

IAAL. I am assuming you meant to write "IANAL." A trial court ruling, while not binding on other courts (but certainly persuasive) may in some instances be binding on that same trial court, and as a practical matter, often is even when it need not be. Also, there may be an estoppel issue for the RIAA lurking here.

Rather than enter a special appearance to move to quash, they just waived personal jurisdiction. Nothing to see here. .....

IAAL. 17 U.S.C. 501(b) authorizes an exclusive licensee to sue for inringement. he has granted an exclusive license. thus he might not want to sue you, but his publisher can. Look through the Silvers v. Sony Pictures case -- unless his contract specifically deals with the right to sue for infringement....his publisher can.