Heres the deal :
Youre going to get the following advice :
1. Hire a professional to run/manage/accountant/payroll etc and you can never do anything properly.
2. Youre an idiot - stop dreaming!
Both pieces of advice are flat out wrong.
To start an actual business you dont need professionals, funding or being extra smart. What you do need to do is not listen to idiots and learn. thats it.

Heres what you do :
1. Start your business. That is - go out into the world and find someone willing to pay you CASH MONEY in large chunks for doing something. Thats at least $2000 cash on delivery of x product.
2. Put that $2000 towards your business expenses. Now go find a lawyer who incorporates businesses federally with $2000 AND make sure you have enough of it left over for a mailboxes etc address, domain name, google apps subscription for mail, web address, business cellphone and rental meeting room in a office rental place. This is your "Start up capital" or "Seed round".
3. Now go develop that product yourself. Send it to your client. be prepared to gain $0 from this transaction since your client will likely dump you after seeing that first product.
4. Develop the product some more while looking for other clients.
5. If you find any, congratulations ! You have a business!

This is how I started several years ago. Bottom line is in 2 weeks you must be break even and in the first month you must have enough to meet payroll. If you do youre fine.

Deep sea vents were discovered when I was in my 20's before that we used to think abiogenesis had something to do with lightning hitting a mud puddle. The evidence that life formed around such vets on Earth is strong but inconclusive. Fatty acids from clay in the vent spontaneously form primitive cell membranes (in vents and mud puddles). Sulphur provides chemical energy, porous rock around the vent provides a sponge like scaffold for life to take root and extract passing nutrients. Most importantly the vents are predictable, the deep, still water stabilizes the temperature gradient. Convection currents cycle the fatty cells through the gradient allowing different chemical reactions within the membrane to synchronize themselves to the thermal cycle (much the same as plants match the cycle of night and day). If that really is how life got started then it's likely that primitive cells are still being spontaneously created near these vents today, the practical problem for scientists researching this idea is finding them before evolved life such as shrimp eat them.

Europa has all these conditions and like Earth it's ocean is also oxygenated at the top. Oxygen is vital for multicellular life on Earth, collagen (the stuff that holds individual cells together as multicellular critters) cannot form in an oxygen poor environment. Oxygen in Europa's ocean is replenished differently than it is on Earth. On Europa's surface strong radiation from Jupiter knocks the H2 off the ice and out into space, the free oxygen is returned to the ocean via plate tectonics. Personally I would think it very odd if we didn't find single celled life in Europa's ocean, at the very least it would force Science to radically rethink the conditions that lead to abiogenesis on Earth. What I'm interested to find out is whether life on Europa uses the same self-replicating molecules used by life on Earth, but I doubt I will be around to hear the answer..

Are you sure about that? Here's New York State's law:

S 130.05 Sex offenses; lack of consent.
[snip]
2. Lack of consent results from:
(c) Where the offense charged is sexual abuse or forcible touching, any circumstances, in addition to forcible compulsion or incapacity to consent, in which the victim does not expressly or impliedly acquiesce in the actor's conduct; or

S 130.55 Sexual abuse in the third degree.
A person is guilty of sexual abuse in the third degree when he or she subjects another person to sexual contact without the latter`s consent;

Seriously? Nobody is holding a gun to your head and the EU member states are free to leave any time they wish.

Really? All of Europe you say? Even Great Britain? Finland?

Are you an American? If you are I wish you'd STFU; you're making the rest of us look bad. WW2 was a team effort. Could the Allies have beaten the Germans without the Russians? Possibly; we did in WW1 after the Russians quit. The butcher's bill would have been a lot higher though. The west (particularly the United States and Canada) got off pretty easy. As far as "Europe would have been under the Soviets", that's debatable. The example of Finland suggests there are limits to how far Stalin was willing to go to gain strategic depth. Germany certainly would have gotten a much rawer deal without American involvement, though ironically enough it was the United States that originally proposed turning Germany into a pastoral state after the conflict.

Yeah, well, the same problem is brewing in the United States and I haven't heard a single mainstream politician from either party come up with a proactive way of dealing with it. And guess what? There's no provision for a State to file bankruptcy like Detroit did. What happens when one of the 50 can't meet its obligations? Nobody knows but we're apt to find out in the coming decades....

That's because the EU is really an economic concern trying to masquerade as a country. It originally started as the European Coal and Steel Community. It has always been about economics. A handful of rich and powerful countries benefit from a common market and currency. Countries that would probably be better off outside of the Eurozone won't leave it because the rich and powerful therein benefit. Well monied interests calling the shots is hardly a uniquely American phenomenon.

Europe won't truly unite absent some sort of external and existential threat. It took such a threat to unify the United States back in the day and the American colonies had a shared culture, language, and no history of going to war with one another. Even at that there was a rather bloody Civil War and regional tensions that still simmer to this day...

The grandparent, in the stupid pissing contest EU vs. US thread. I really hate these threads; sure, we have quarrels, but we've also got a shared history, culture, and commitment to freedom. People would do well to remember that. They might also wish to remember that countries that share our values are most definitely in the minority on planet Earth; it's really fucking stupid to root for the EU to drag the US down or vice versa.

These idiots should get a bloody passport and go visit the "other side"; you'll find we're/they're not that much different from you.

Devil's advocate, how do you stop Google from operating in the EU? Google does have a physical presence in the EU, data-centers and all that, but strictly speaking they could run the whole operation from outside the EU. What do you do then? Block them at the network edge? Hardly seems compatible with free speech.

The troll mods may have had something to do with these gems:

Not only that, but the EUSSR doesn't seem to understand that an American corporation has nothing to do with European communists.

They should go and re-read their history books and remember how close all of Europe was to speaking either German or Russian.

My point is that the EU is a bunch of arrogant idiots who have no business telling an American company to split up.

Harvard have large investments in coal companies, the obvious answer is to stop burning coal and use something else, but that would leave some of their richest alumni holding "stranded assets". If we use deliberate geoengineering to balance the unintentional geoengineering of the coal industry, who will pay for it? - You can bet it won't be the coal industry, it will be the consumer and taxpayer.

Harvard could make a significant contribution by divesting from coal and telling everybody why, but it has declined to do so. This press release is just a timely distraction.

We all know Monsanto are pricks in their dealings with small farmers who refuse to buy their seed, but what "damage" has been done to human health or the environment by GMO plants of any kind? - Resistance to roundup and cabbages that glow in the dark is not "damage".

Aside from that, scientific claims cannot be "proven in court" and your well known non-belief in AGW has nothing to do with science.

Agreed, geoengineering the climate is not a popular idea among scientists.

"uber-feminist country?" Do you know a damn thing about Sweden or any of her neighbors? Have you ever visited or even bothered to peruse the internet on the subject of Swedish culture, customs, or her legal processes? It's awesome that you're willing to shit all over the criminal justice system of a country that I suspect you know nothing about, a country that Mr. Assange thought was just lovely until he happened to be accused of a crime by some of its citizens.

Frankly I don't know if he is a rapist or not. I do know that he's received due process of law in both Sweden and the United Kingdom and that there appears to be enough evidence to warrant a trial. I also know a thing or two about the judicial systems of the Nordic Countries; were I accused of a crime I didn't commit in one of them I would be willing to surrender myself and believe that I would receive as fair of a shake as I would get in my own country.

That's personal use; I do the same thing with my TiVo. What Aereo did would be analogous to you selling access to that dropbox'ed song to anyone willing to pay.

This is patently false. Prosecutors love to take down high profile political targets. Have you heard the name Rod Blagojevich? Tom DeLay? Duke Cummingham? Those are just from memory. Want a whole list? Here's a list of Federal politicians. Here's one for State and Local politicians.

I've read it; I've also read the US Federal Code and my own State's Penal Law. I don't commit three felonies a day. I don't commit one felony per day. That claim is massively overstated, just like everything else you've rambled about.

The most effective way the Feds have of getting the "innocent" is by jamming them up for obstruction. They ask you an incriminating (or just embarrassing) question that they already know the answer to, you lie to a sworn Federal Law Enforcement Officer, and presto, you're under Federal Indictment. This technique ensnared Martha Stewart, amongst others. Thankfully it's easily avoided by invoking your right to remain silent; alas, many people are too arrogant for that and think they'll get away with lying to the Feds. Repeat after me: "I do not wish to make a statement without consulting with counsel. Am I free to leave now?"

For better or worse Federal Law says you need the broadcaster's permission before you can retransmit their signal. In your examples you would be fine until the final paragraph where you strung a wire across the street. The apartment example is trickier, there are regulations governing shared antennas in such a scenario, meaning the landlord can mount a single antenna that each apartment has access to; you wouldn't need 50 antennas. Most shared antenna systems have fallen into disuse, because of CATV, but the regulations are still on the books.

To answer your last question, I think it became an Aereo rebroadcast when they sent the signal on a trip through the cloud. The single antenna argument was spurious but even if I bought it I would still think they were rebroadcasting. To contrast with TiVo, they charge their service, the guide data and so on; they've got nothing to do with getting the signal to you and what you do with it after that is arguably fair use.