http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continents#Number_of_continents

The <enter> is not part of the RPN. More correctly, you don't need it exactly because you're using RPN, which works on a stack. Values get pushed on, operations pop values off the stack. 2 4 + 5 6 + * P works just fine.

You add 2 and 4 to the stack, then execute + (on TOS and TOS-1), so TOS is now 6. You then add 5 and 6 to the stack, exec + again to get a stack of 6 and 11, on which finally you execute * to get a TOS of 66.

A reverse-polish calculator stores numbers on a stack. Entering a number pushes it on the stack. Arithmetic operations pop arguments off the stack and push the results.

Manual page dc(1), ll. 22-24

% echo "2 4 + 5 6 + * P" | dc
66

Yes, they applied for a European banking license in Luxembourg, a country best known for its friendliness towards big financial players and its status as a tax haven in general, themselves.

Now why would they do that voluntarily? Hint: It's not because they think they should be regulated more strictly.

The question is what move that would be. To judge by the past, they would, in order of feasibility: -

1. rely on ubiquity of the .ppt format,
2. spread FUD about security issues and TCO,
3. pay bloggers, consultants and analysts to badmouth it,
4. announce the next version of PPT, complete with mock-up screenshots, scaring off investors, then never release it,
5. suffocate it with patent litigation,
6. buy them out and
   1. kill it off,
   2. assimilate it (but not invest into further development, because, hey, no competition again),
7. change office to be incompatible,
8. change IE to be incompatible,
9. change windows to be incompatible.

(Not comprehensive.)

All of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again.
(aka: Are you absolutely positive you are not new here?)

Isn't that kind of obvious? They want users to abandon XP. They're already cutting critical security updates because they're "not feasible", whatever that means, thereby violating their own sales promise and legislated minimum warranty period in the EU. If they can't kill XP any other way, you can bet my ass they'll FUD their own product soon.

People seem rather ok with XP, and many are reluctant to get burned by new Windows versions yet again, while Microsoft has a strong interest in getting everyone to use their new systems (and incidentally into "Trusted" Computing to enforce DRM on a hardware level for their new best friends).

If you value control over your own PC, I'd recommend familiarizing yourself with free systems now.

I could also be wrong.

If it doesn't matter on the net (where 90% of us consume 90% of their total), then where does it matter? Where could it have more self-aggravating effect?

(Also, I'm inclined to believe he's spelled Shakespeare pretty much everywhere.)

Shouldn't that be, "It hits you when you are most expecting it"?

I'd reckon the unnecessary checks and public panic to have been much more expensive than EUR 300m.

nobody will go to the new internet because it would suck

You're mistaken.

If you tell people the new Internet "2.0" is: -

1. more secure,
2. non-anonymous,
3. childporn- and terrorism-free,
4. well, 2.0
5. etc.

... that will get two-thirds of the population, because they don't want: -

1. to be at risk, whatever that may be,
2. their children to be at risk from online predators,
3. anyone to think they tolerate child pornography or sympathize with terrorists,
4. to be icky 1.0
5. etc.

Then, everyone else will follow because suddenly YouTube 1.0, Facebook 1.0, Twitter 1.0 aren't the places where stuff goes down any longer, you can't send mail to your friend on Internet 2.0, and have to go through three extra verification processes to buy something from Amazon 1.0, while it's true one-click buying from Amazon 2.0, now without a need for any kind of redundant registration.

In the end, your ancient free Internet will be a place where only people go who do have something to hide, at which point they'll shut it down as "a crackdown on organized crime", to protect the general populace.

FTFA:

It's not my intention to shift the blame around though. PA [PulseAudio] and the other layers of our stack should not be viewed as independent parts. If PA uses a new or previously unused feature of the drivers then we need to fix the drivers at the same time.