Nope, he learned Java for this trial, but noted that he's written the functional equivalent of rangeCheck "hundreds of times" over the years.

And it turns out that Judge Alsup is a hobbyist programmer who noted that he's written code that's functionally identical to rangeCheck "hundreds of times". Sorry, Oracle, you should have shopped around for a dumber judge.

Not sure why we're discussing the copied implementation in the context of the API judgement, but it's all bad news for Oracle.

100% of press believes them 110%.

You said "auto" == you are a Yank == your "auto racers" go: while(!assploded) { go(left); go(straight); }

[Director of Public Prosecutions boot boy] Smith said the tweet lacked surrounding context and therefore had to be treated as a genuine threat, rather than a joke.

Really? Because nobody else who read it or was involved in the case ever claimed to have taken it seriously. Not the airport 'security' goon who searched for it, not the "special budget" coppers who arrested Chambers. They all said "Well, we know that it was a joke, nobody actually felt threatened, but... er... we saw it, so now we have to set an example." or words to that effect. Sotto voce, they couldn't find any actual terrorists, and they had to do something to justify their budgets. They know it, we know it, Paul Chambers most certainly knows it.

After the conviction, tens (was it hundreds?) of thousands of twitards then posted the exact same words. Surely we all committed the same crime? But none of us was arrested. Why's that?

All the way through the various levels, the Judiciary has struggled to understand twitter, and groped for bad analogies to explain it. The fact that anybody outside of Chamber's set of followers could have seen the tweet and read it out of context was used to convict, despite the patent absurdity of that as a standard. Anybody could walk past a pub window, hear one joking sentence spoken out of context, and soil their pink panties, but we don't generally convict the speaker of terrorism offences because of that.

It's been an utter farce of a case, and at this point, it seems to be entirely about the police, CPS and now the judiciary saving face by digging themselves deeper into the mount of steaming contempt that's been rightfully heaped on to them.

It's one of the few cases that genuinely boils my piss, because it does effect every one of us in the UK every second of every day. We are being monitored, and we can be convicted for just about any chance remark, entirely dependent on the budgetary requirements of various tools of the State.

Are humans causing climate change? Eh, probably.

Does it bother me? Nope. Do I care enough to do anything about it? Not a jot. Here's all the fucks that I give. Want to see them again? Here they are. ><

Florian has (finally!) been outed as being on the M$ payroll, I'm going to go ahead and assume that Miguel is as well. I can't see any other reason for them to be so enthused about a technology that everybody with any actual experience of Microsoft's "wait 'til you see the next product!" brand of evangelism knew was going to be yet another Flash in the pan.

Careful there, Occam's Razor is a handy tool, but not a logical argument. Occam's Razor can be applied or withheld, but not violated.

Indeed, I scrap my hardware every 2 months so that I can be absolutely sure that I'm saving money and preserving the environment.

Did you factor the cost of the meter into your calculation? I'm not sure Geoff here did that.