So what does this Article 3 give you that the law doesn't already?

Nevertheless, they signed a treaty in which they promised to conduct such negotiations.If they no longer support the non-proliferation treaty, why don't they officially withdraw from it?

If somebody gave me the advice to keep windows and install the virus checker, then I'd ignore the advice and install Linux. At the end of the trial period, I'd hopefully be virus free, so that would be +1 to them under this system.

It's not so much the space travel technology, but the technology that would allow a truely sustainable human colony in a hostile environment. Show me that it's even possible to build a sustainable human colony in a domed city somewhere on Earth (without importing food, water, computers etc.,) and then perhaps it will be time to start thinking about living on Mars. Then you can start worrying about all the true space problems, such as shortage of water, excessive radiation, and wrong gravity and temperatures.

The robot missions are limited to using the equipment that they've taken with them. Woudn't a human mission have exactly the same limitation? There's a limit to what you can achieve with a pickaxe and a screwdriver. Anyway, I expect that a human mission would be so tied up in just keeping the humans alive, that they'd have little time or resources for any actual research.

"Every great scientific mind", I find that unlikely, how would you even enumerate such, and surely at least one of them has never even commented on the issue or disagrees? I don't see any Chinese colonies in space. How could Earth possibly become less inhabitable than every other planet in the Solar System already is? Even the deserts of Earth or the Antarctic would be more attractive than Mars or the Moon, and I don't see people rushing to build self-contained domed cities in such places.

Sure, not only will they be giving away the OS, but they'll be missing out on all the patent royalties that they extort from manufacturers of Android devices. I guess they are hoping that the benefits from possible future market share will outweigh current profits.

Stick to robotic missions, which are better value for money anyway. Humans are tied to Earth more strongly than science fiction would have you believe.

Not to mention their continuing use of underhanded legal methods to force makers of Android phones to pay royalties. A system that Microsoft had approximately zero involvment in developing.

At least one plant-based egg substitute already exists, see Orgran. However I think that one is intended for use in baking and mayonnaise etc., and not for making scrambled eggs.

It's a waste of time learning new ways to do things if the old ways actually work better and are more productive. I wouldn't mind going through a learning curve if there was actually a benefit at the end of it.

I have a licence, but it's expired. I could renew it by paying a fee. Does it count?

If you don't work, you don't get vacations :( Which has serious consequences, namely not having a valid poll option to select.

Yes, Linux would be fine for any number of users, many of whom need nothing more than a web browser. I suppose installing it would be too hard for most of them though (downloading an ISO, writing it to a USB stick and modifying a BIOS setting - tricky).

But if people insist that they need Windows, then they should accept the facts, and buy a new machine after Microsoft stops supporting their OS. Where do they get the idea that they can continue using a 10 year old operating system forever and expect a strongly profit-motivated company to help them for free?

Copyright claims on "Happy Birthday" are old news.