Hidden censorship is worse than obvious censorship. Shame on Google for hiding China's shame.

That is, if you didn't play it 10 years ago on the Xbox. Also, Psychonauts left me with a "hm, that was neat" feeling more than a "wow, that was amazing" feeling. But that's just me.

That's just marketing. Business as usual.

The threat is that if phone makers perceive a significant legal risk in using Android, they may opt instead for Microsoft's Windows Phone software."

What part of this is illegal? Isn't this how patents are supposed to work?

No sympathy. The greeks made their bed , well its time to lie down.

No, the Greek elite made the bed, with the help of Goldman Sachs to keep it all secret. Make the elite pay, leave the Greek people alone.

These "concerns" are all bunk. Just supply an html directory tree of all the pending laws, with each law signed with GPG. You're done. I bet it would cost them less to implement this than to keep Thomas running.

You don't even really need the GPG signatures. If someone edits a law for propaganda purposes, the original version should always be there for reference.

There are no legitimate concerns here. Only stonewalling.

The reason these giant IT projects almost always cost more than the original bid is that the purchasing entity (NYC in this case) frequently either hides or isn't aware of some of the items that will affect the cost.

Whose job is it to ensure that contracts are properly specced out? Who manages that person? Fire the manager.

Ok, if I have to spell it out from you, the DOJ used an entirely legitimate complaint against Microsoft as an excuse to shake them down. You can tell the DOJ wasn't really serious about protecting consumers, because in the end they did nothing at all to protect consumers. All they did is send Microsoft a message that they are not above paying the piper. Microsoft apparently heard that message loud and clear.

Since the previous antitrust actions were not intended to help consumers, then it would be unlikely for the DOJ to attempt to help consumers in the future. Therefore, you can expect no DOJ action on this issue.

Does that make sense now? I still don't see how anyone who speaks English could interpret my previous post to mean that Microsoft wasn't guilty of antitrust abuse.

You sound really stupid yourself, considering that the technical issues are irrelevant to Microsoft's abuse of monopoly. The problem is Microsoft using their monopoly position to force vendors to ship computers with only Microsoft approved keys. Secure boot is a valid and useful feature, but preloading keys will have profound anti-competetive effects.

How does anyone interpret my post to mean that the lawsuit against Microsoft was completely baseless? Really? I don't see it.

Evolution works if you leave it the fuck alone. Stop protecting the stupid and evil, and let them get what they deserve.

Evolution doesn't work on the individual, it works on the entire species. We are using the adaptations that evolution has yielded, (e.g. communication, planning, empathy, etc) to adapt to a new environment (urban post-industrialism). How is that not evolution in action?

We never had any uprisings back then....

Seriously? Are you just completely ignorant of US labor history?

What open source software reads Protools files?

Because Microsoft increased their political contributions by an order of magnitude after the anti-trust trial. It was never about protecting consumers, it was a shakedown pure and simple. Microsoft didn't pay the requisite bribes, and they suffered for it. Now they've learned their lesson, and you can expect pretty much anything they do to be ignored by the DOJ. Especially Obama's DOJ.

Possession is 9/10ths of the law. If they claim they never got the money, they shouldn't have given you the product. If they're claiming shoplifting, it's their burden to prove you didn't lose the receipt. So no, you're not completely screwed at all. Our justice system is quite well adapted to cash transactions.