Go google the Sherman Act. If the government can prove that there was collusion between the different publishers to agree to change to the agency model and raise prices, then they are a cartel that engaged in price fixing. Since the publishers already settled, apple is the "hub" of the conspiracy and the only one left to go to court. So the determination of whether apple was guilty or not basically depends on the actions of the publishers at the time. The DOJ seems to think they can prove these horizontal agreements between competing publishers was apple's idea.
astrophotography and radio telescopes.
because I want to watch a youtube video while browsing reddit and sending an email.
I've been using it to sort through your shredded mail for weeks.
The problem is not banning libel/slander. The problem is that in the UK they don't have anything like anti-SLAPP laws and its much easier to punish people with legal fees using defamation claims. I first heard about this situation from popehat.com, a blog that runs articles on internet related legal issues. http://www.popehat.com/2013/04/15/in-which-a-london-solicitor-threatens-me/
yes, companies will be running around looking to put all of their data and user interactions on google's servers. That's a realistic solution. Or I'm being sarcastic.
office is a separate piece of software, not windows 7, and personally my copy of office runs like gangbusters on it. Windows 7 took some adjustment from XP, but it runs great and tends to have a lot less random problems like my xp box did. I'm quite happy with it. Pretending 7 has quality issues and pointing at office (which, interestingly enough, also runs great afaict) is nonsense. Worse, I like the ribbon. I took me 2 days to figure out where things were now and I find the ribbon much better for reaching tools and dialog boxes I would have a hard time doing in the old style of office. All your complaints are, as far as I can tell, totally in your head.
try paying for your groceries in gold bullion. Then tell me gold has no value.
Of course you can be fired. No-one said otherwise, and obviously from the news it happens. There's a protocol for reviews and being let go. Gabe is the owner of the company - of course he can't be fired. But aside from setting up the protocols and making some "ultimate" decisions, the actual day to day running of the company seems to operate in the "flat" way. It isn't hyperbole - its a totally different organizational structure.
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1074301/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.pdf I think you should read the handbook before deciding you know more about their hyperbole than they do.
Apple's business model was to raise everyone's price and contract so that no one could sell cheaper than them. It was good for apple and good for the publishers, and you want to tell me its "A Good Thing" for consumers? It is outright price fixing. Amazon's behavior has legal tests you can apply to see if its monopolistic behaviour that's illegal, but you'll find that it involves other distributors (like apple) not being able to get content, which certainly wasn't the case. It isn't illegal to just sell something for less than your competition. It doesn't take a set of binoculars to see that you're missing the point entirely, and defending Apple's actions that were truly bad for the consumer. It was anticompetitive (to put Amazon and their thin margins out of business) and also illegal by fixing prices.
back in the day factories had to train people to develop these skills, and it cost them money. factories pushing those costs onto education, which is paid for by the future employee or the government is funny. Of course they'd like colleges to teach exactly what they need - it will save them a lot of money!
I would call this speculation unless you have some sort of citation for this.
This kind of "oh they won't do that again" serves the other side, not ours. They'll just sneak it onto another bill, if they have to. Only calling them to account for their actions will work.
if facebook is making $1 off of my inconvenience, facebook should pay me at least
.50c of that money. They're basically sanctioning spam as long as the charge rates are high.