Qt has recently introduced Qt Quick, a collection of technologies meant to help you create animation-rich UIs similar to those used on touch phones. The most important part is the QML language, which is used to describe the user interface of a program. QML is declarative and animation-friendly, and makes it easy to create fluid interfaces. On the downside, it is not mature yet and lacks most of the standard UI widgets at the moment (basically, you have text input and clickable areas). I wouldn't have recommended it for general application writing just yet, but the original question was not very specific on the requirements so it might be suitable already in its current form.

Acceptable, unless your legal system is based on a distrust of government and fear of persecution like in US. Then you would assume that the police who broke the law when gathering the evidence will only be prosecuted for show if at all, and will get a slap on the wrist at most.

Who knows, you might be right.

While I am no friend of DRM, there is a genuine ethical dilemma here. If someone (movie makers) is selling a product, should they be forced to sell at the same price to everyone? Especially when said product is not necessary for life and health? Note that this would harm people in the poorest countries because the seller would then set a price optimized for the more lucrative western market and would not be able to sell at a discount price in the poorer countries.

Outsourcing is a different thing - no one is being forced to do anything. It sucks for the local workers, but if the cheap labor abroad is treated fairly I do not see an ethical problem. Buyer's choice, just like you yourself can choose whether you shop at the local mom-and-pop store or at the big outside-town supermarket. Some people support the local store, others go there for convenience or buy there just those products which are better than at the supermarket, but most people just go to the supermarket because the prices are much cheaper. The corporations do exactly the same. Some feel social responsibility and hire local people, others hire locally only for jobs that are difficult to outsource, and the vast majority look at bottom line only. Supporting the community / local store is nice and often has long-term benefits, but I don't see why people not doing so should be condemned.

Everyone makes this about movie makers being the evil guys and the consumers being the victims, but isn't this essentially about consumers wanting to dictate to the movie makers the terms under which they can sell their product? I mean, it sure is nice for me as a consumer to be able to play my content anywhere I want, but I don't think that it is my god-given right. We can of course take the position that the public benefit (consumer benefit, faster development of new services, new innovative businesses, etc.) outweighs the rights of the movie makers, but that is a very complicated comparison. The state should not take away rights lightly.

Perhaps a WowWee Rovio (http://www.wowwee.com/en/products/tech/telepresence/rovio) would have worked better for you? Video is only 1-way, though.

You miss the point I think. They are not worried about the Afghani civilians at all. They are worried about the US ability to recruit Afghani informants.

It is insightful in the sense that companies typically ignore the law to the degree that they can get away with it, just like individual people do. And since an employee is usually at a massive disadvantage in the case of a dispute, a company can get away with quite a lot with regard to its employees. So, in that sense, they can do as they please. You can sue them, but then you have burned your bridges - it is not a viable strategy unless you are confident you can find a new job easily, or they are mistreating you so badly that unemployment is preferable by comparison. And by the way, prospective new employers do not usually appreciate workers who sued their former employer.

The last bit about standing up for yourself was somewhat unhelpful grandstanding without actionable advice, though.

UNICEF (and many other worthy causes) has a program for monthly donations. It may lack the warm fuzzy feeling of impulse donations, but it saves you (and them) a lot of time, adds up to much more money for the charity in the long term, allows the charity to predict their income better, and you can plan for it in your own budget. http://www.unicefusa.org/donate/monthly-giving/ for the US folks, http://www.supportunicef.org/ and click "Donate Now" for the rest of you.

(Feel free to reply and suggest other worthy causes that accept monthly donations)

How much to give? How about the same that a home internet connection costs where you live. Appropriate for Slashdot, eh?

Disclaimer: I am in no way associated with UNICEF other than having a monthly donation set up.

If you read the articles (yes, I know... this is Slashdot) you will realize it is not a problem with companies, but with computers and cell phones in general requiring the conflict materials. For some reason, the summary included a few random names and left out others, e.g. Apple most certainly belongs in the list as it produces both computers and cell phones.

What you can do, is name the companies who do try to behave responsibly and control where their raw materials come from. Quoting one of the referenced articles: "Cell phone manufacturers like Samsung, Motorola, Apple and Nokia have long had official policies against the use of conflict minerals in their products."

You know what this means: Next Star Trek movie will have a new ship in the historical Enterprises display...

(Yeah, I know the name has been known for a long time, but just came across it now and couldn't resist.)