The NRA got their start as a civil rights organization fighting those laws.

LIES.

Yes and no:

The NRA was founded in 1871 after the Civil War by Army and Navy Journal editor William Conant Church (pictured above) and General George Wood Wingate of the Union Army, who were both dismayed at the horrible accuracy of Union soldiers during the Civil War. The original purpose of the organization was for rifle marksmanship training. However despite this, the NRA is the oldest civil rights organization in the United States. [emphasis mine]

Concealed carry permits have not been linked with a reduction in crime.

The supposed rebuttal, to which you linked, cites a single study, which did not rebut the original assertion by John Lott. The large collection of people authoring it could not come up to any conclusion — in their esteemed opinion, there is no link between the carry laws and the murder rate. From your link:

We conclude that Lott and Mustard have made an important scholarly contribution in establishing that these laws have not led to the massive bloodbath of death and injury that some of their opponents feared. On the other hand, we find that the statistical evidence that these laws have reduced crime is limited, sporadic, and extraordinarily fragile.

So, if John Lott is right, relaxing concealed carry laws will help. If he is wrong, it will not hurt. What grounds are there, again, for the massive violations of the 2nd Amendment, that you and yours are demanding?

Thus, personal weapon is a perfectly peaceful symbol. Being able to print one — and keep it at home — is a good way to protect one's domicile, without begging the government for a permission to exercise the Constitution-guaranteed right.

Later, we'll create them. Vernor Vinge called it.

Whether GP was joking or not, you have to wonder if the pharmas won't try something analogous to clawing public domain works back under copyright. Which, as any dipshit can tell you, should never happen. Except it does.

When you understand the Halting Problem, and you understand what that has to do with bugs, THEN you will have a right to critique programming as a profession.

Unfortunately, to understand the Halting Problem, you have to first understand the Halting Problem. So it's rather difficult.

So, MST3K was a huge lucrative ongoing copyright violation?

Actually, I guess this non-car non-pizza analogy points out an interesting difference. I'm certain that MST3K's producers made fully sure that the rights to play the movie in syndication were fully paid up, no different than your local TV station showing the "Early Saturday Afternoon Matinee" show... they just did something interesting over it (riffing, goofing off, faux shell story surrounding the movie bits).

This makes the current "Let's play" YouTube case different in a couple of ways: it turns out that the "original" content (the Nintendo-provided bits) are actually BETTER than the "overlaid" content, which is usually either painfully or awkwardly antisocial, and MST3K was able to play and pay within the system, whereas the LPers haven't.

The old long-range AN/FPS-7 air defense search radar at the radar site we used to do our grocery shopping at sure left a ring of little dead birdies on the ground around its tower. I think the little dudes would perch on the catwalk railing around the frog's egg and get lightly toasted by a radar sweep.

But that's a exceptional case, since that was several megawatts of S-band pulse power.

Is it the cold, lightless, lifeless, soul-sucking corner of the room that the router is located in?

Maybe it's the cold, lightless, lifeless, soul-sucking nation that the entire room is located in.

Or maybe these kids are just damn poor gardeners. It takes talent to botch it so badly that the seeds don't even sprout.

In a way, yes. You didn't parse it right.

The phrase means "on-going push to ensure Nintendo-owned intellectual property content is shared across social media instead of these opportunist copyright-violating scoundrels'."

Dey own teh Intarwebz. Just ask 'em.

You cannot solve a problem with the same mind that created it.

Copyleft would like to have a word with you.

While abolishing software patents is the right answer, it's not a feasible short-turn answer. And your silliness about "funding the enemy" pretty much underscores your naivete. Patent offices will continue to be well enough funded to work entirely to the pigopolists' interests. But if you don't play the game (and play it to win), you automatically lose.

Carving out refuges of protected technology with positive (defensive) intent is the a far better answer than your idea -- the technological equivalent of retreating to a shack in the wilderness and mailing package bombs.

What you say is true but unpersuasive. The surest way to win is to make sure everyone else loses. And that is why negativity works.

If the "W" on the score card is the only thing that matters, almost anything is acceptable.

And, on a related side note, I've seen behaviors that make me believe that for some people, it's more important to make someone else lose than it is to make one's self win.