Did I just read that right? The Bible says the soul is in the blood? So if I get a blood transfusion, do I swap souls with the donor? No wonder Jehovah's Witnesses are so freaked about transfusions!

It's true that General Motors doesn't get a dime of the sale when you buy a used car, but they would if they could! If car makers could install a chip that would disable the car if it had a new owner--and get away with it--they would. The fact they can't has more to do with historical technical limitations than a desire not. Software companies believe they can get away it and for them, it's an easy technical challenge. I don't think software companies think they are more entitled to resale dollars, just as entitled and they happen to be one of the few industries that might be able to get away it.

The comparison to cars strikes me as similar to "you wouldn't download a car", to which everyone knows the answer is "hell I would!" The fact I can't doesn't affect the argument. I would do it if I could, and it would still be just as unethical to do so.

How does an increased player base increase the value of the game in general? Isn't that the same reasoning used by the 90's dot-com bubble companies? Look how well that logic worked for them.

Except that the original blog post where this was discussed states that ReFS will be extensible just like NTFS in the context of supporting features they will not be supporting out of the box.

So all those people he's speaking to in the video are members of the media? I'm not defending copyright law, but this seems to be a case where copyright law in itself is not the problem, it's the way it's being enforced.

But it is. They could put his speech in the public domain. They could choose not to sue for infringements. They could sell the speech and video of it for free. This isn't a judgment of whether they should, but copyright law hasn't mandated this scenario, it's just allowed it.

Well, everything seems to be in order. I agree copyright needs to be seriously reformed, but the reporting of this example seems to be much inflated to sound more nefarious than it is.

So why not build workspaces that allow more natural light? What about places that naturally have mostly consistant sunlight? Not every locale has moving cloudcover all the time. And isn't it possible that if you were given control of some fancy new lighting system that you would choose rapidly-changing light levels more because it's new and novel? I'm betting we won't see data about the actual percentage improvement in productivity over a period of months with this thing.

Being able to watch movies with commentary has really been an eye-opener for me. I'm constantly surprised how often a shot that was filmed in real life looks CG and how often a CG shot looks real. The trick seems to be in where CG is used. Special effects scenes where things your mind can't accept as real happen are bound to look CG especially under the right lighting and lens/focus conditions. We're so used to the way film looks from the last 50 years that high-precision, high-speed, ultra-lighting conditions look fake to use.

I've actually stopped writing posts that I thought would be a very good point to make mid-writing as soon as I realized the discussion was a day old and I would get no credit for making my point. I've also made decent but bland posts that I hadn't intended to make when I saw a post that didn't have any comments yet, knowing I was likely to garner a few points from my obvious reply, inclusion of an obvious link, or obvious summary.

^this

Because she had the mistaken assumption that the store wouldn't be selling a laptop that was useless, so obviously the only thing of significance that should be different is its cosmetic appearance. She probably also bought a car based on its shape and color and possibly how it felt to drive, gas efficiency, maybe based on safety features if she had kids, but probably not based on horsepower, number of valves, ease of repair, or how easy it is to get to the oil.

We techie people like to get all condescending with women regarding technology because they don't place as much importance on statistics and numbers like we do, but the truth is they just know those things aren't important to them. If an ugly lump of gray plastic in the middle of your living room with wires hanging out and as loud as a jet engine appeals to you then great, but don't expect that to be a selling point for everyone.

I understand she's going to be coming back and complaining that her laptop is too slow. It's the vendor's fault for not selling a fast enough laptop in pink. Don't tell her she has to make a choice between an ugly gray computer that's fast enough or a slow pink computer--tell her how she can make the pink computer as fast as the gray one.

Damn, I'm getting old.