It depends. It's hard to look at imagery map tiles without seeing four different copyrights from private and government agencies. For map data, just looking through Los Angeles, sometimes the map data is (c) Google, sometimes it's (c) City of Pasadena, sometimes it's (c) Cybercity. Also when you route directions more people seem to be involved.

You can see in Google's licensing terms an enumeration of where they get their mapping data; a lot of this can be delivered under Google's copyright if their work, their "final map data" is a derived work or aggregation of business locations from infoUSA, park locations from the city government, subway stops from the county authority... even if each of these data sources is the copyright of their original creator.

Computing now is nothing like the profession it was in the 1960s (I'd be interested in the evidence for near-parity then, though, because I didn't see any women around when I joined the profession in the 1970s).

Malaysia is probably not representative of the situation in the west. Remember what I said about the proportion of women falling in such fields as women's rights improved.

As I said, you only need 4 to be unambiguous. If you use the canonical version of each tone it will sound as if you are sounding everything out very precisely (as an English speaker might for somebody whose English isn't very good) but should will be understood (as unambiguously as the language allows -- it still has homophones even when the tones are right). listening is more difficult, of course.

No. It can be assumed that a knowledgeable person would understand that, but I doubt most web users, however reasonable, would know that. Anyway, my concern is over analytics, which doesn't require the site user to log in.

My preference would be for the wide range of open source u*ix-style OS' to get together, hammer out a cross-os VFS layer and thus reduce the discussions of FS' to technical points on the FS itself, eliminating the OS from the equation. There is nothing inherent about mapping/remapping/versioning/distributing physical data in logical files to blocks of data that is the least-bit OS-specific.

There's things Solaris has that Linux doesn't, there's things Linux has that Solaris doesn't, there's things Inferno has that neither Solaris nor Linux have, there's things Hao Ya tea has that no OS will ever contain. Interoperability is best when essentially external components are portable, tea is best when hot and not Earl Grey.

Fairy nuff. ZFS has a lot of benefits over the standard Linux filesystems for certain things (just as all the Linux filesystems have their own niches in which they are the supreme overlords). It's rare for me to create a system in which I use fewer than 4 filesystems and if I were to try for a fully-optimized system that would probably go to 5 or 6. ZFS running reliably under Linux would pretty much guarantee me moving to such a model.