Because all Slashdot is these days is bitching about which programming languages suck the most.

It isn't...

NVM - I misread things (and confused copyright with patent).

That's an awful argument. By that definition nothing can ever be copyrighted (which may be your point). Music is, after all, just a unique set of sounds the instruments could already make - the already existed.

Is there evidence to support any of these assertions? Just because it's less "unlikely" doesn't mean it's "true."

That's simply not true. It's very easy to write an application using X11 that works reasonably well with a local view but performs *terribly* when running remotely. You definitely need to take these cases into consideration when developing your application.

Sure - you don't need to make special calls in order to get network transparency - but these days nobody does. RDP and other OS-level remote desktoping things will do that for any application - and often better.

I remember the glory days of X and showing coworkers how cool it was that I could work remotely from a machine with ease. But these days X11 just sucks compared to other remote desktop offerings - especially over high-latency connections.

Obviously it wasn't a REAL Linux distro then.

"Getting money our of politics" is the first step that needs to be taken before any other reforms have a realistic chance of succeeding.

This is not an end - it's a beginning.

A compiled binary doesn't care how well-written your C is if you are running it on the wrong platform.

They still do - particularly motorcycle cops.

And you buy that without evidence? What other glass-based material has grit and grime just "brush off?" Nevermind "doesn't scratch overtime by being worn down by grit and rocks."

It's *barely* cost effective for companies to line rooftops with solar panels which have clear glass, are tilted towards the south, and are maintained. And these folks think it will be worth the cost to bury them in roads and compete with asphalt for price? There's just no way. It's a really stupid idea. Line the side of the roads with solar panels if you want to generate electricity. Plant them in the ground with pretty blinkenlights if you want to cheat thousands of people out of money on indiegogo.

You're serious? Your retort to actual problems is "don't be so negative!"

I'm gonna go ahead and guess you're one of the rubes who've sponsored this moronic idea...

And it will work after grime, dirt, leaves, etc. all seap into things too right? Or are the roads where you live a *lot* cleaner than the ones I drive on?

"Designed to" does not mean "will work as planned." These two seem waaaay over-optimistic in their approach. I love the idea of these for parks and such though. But for roads I think they're just tilting at windmills. Not only do they have to solve all of the problems that having a tiled-roadway entails (uneven stresses, rocking back and forth, etc.) but they also need to keep these things optically clear otherwise the "solar freaking roadway" will just be a "glass roadway." Solar panels aren't great under the best of circumstances and these two have decided to put them in the *worst* of circumstances for some reason...

Does reporting it make it not bribery?

This is what I don't understand - how is that not the obvious solution to their problem? Why take solar panels and try to bury the things under a road and spend $$$ figuring out how to make that work "at all" when it would cost a fraction of the price to put up cheap wood scaffolding along-side the roads that could be angled toward the Sun?

This is just a monumentally stupid idea...