No, I thinks this would be more like those ancient multimedia encyclopedias that came out on CDROM. Or maybe like those kiddie edutainment titles where you click on characters/object to make them dance, jump etc.
It's downright retarded. China is more of a threat than Cuba is to US. Why not a trade embargo against China?
6 cents a book at current prices seems more like Amazon's discounted books business model. So it's not exactly free. Hell even brick and mortar stores conduct cut-price "sales". And at war time, reading books would have been a luxury both at home and at the battlefield. So selling them at the cost of production or at lost is more likely investing for the future loyalty of customers.
The significance of your list assumes that Country = Country's Government. That might be more or less the case for most Western countries with a democratically government. But what about the Arab states. We have no way of knowing if the masses of those countries are actually sympathetic to IS cause (sympathetic until they actually have the chance to live other it). So while a certain Arab government might condemn IS, their support for any US military action might be just that, fighting words without any bite. Who knows if this will turn out to be a coalition of one backed up by a peanut gallery of nations unwilling to contribute a single soldier or even let their territory be used as an operations base.
I don't know if the patents legitimate or not. They could be legitimate (ie approved by some patent office and not yet invalidated by a court) and still be bad patents. But a high-profile IT company that starts filing patent law suits can only mean one thing, the company has peaked and is on its way down. So maybe you should start looking for your graphic card and cellphones elsewhere? (AMD suing Intel is a different thing, since it concerns Intel's supposed monopolistic business practices.)
"A country of merely 140 million, this may well be Russia's last chance to expand its borders until the end of history, so if that is Putin's goal then now is the time to play his hand as hard as he possibly dares to."
And that is what I don't understand. Russia is probably one of the most underpopulated but most resource rich countries in the world. Why does it need to expand its borders when it's already the LARGEST country in the world?
I can understand if China wants the South China Sea to be its private oil field or fish pond so it can feed its billions. I can understand the Germany of old starting two world wars in a bid to increase their Lebensraum (living space). Ditto with Japan and Britain in their imperial wars of conquest. But Russia wanting even more territory? Or is it natural resources? Maybe the Siberia is too cold? Then Putin should be extending his dick south, not west.
This is plain nuts. They might as well send a space force to take over Mars. It's much bigger and the inhabitants are less hostile if any.
The reports (the Atlantic article is an opinion piece about the local reports regarding the incident) are too sketchy at this point to decide if there's a good probable cause for the teacher to be arrested (besides his having written a presumably controversial book, which is not a good reason for somebody in a presumably democratic country to get arrested).
What it does reveal is the attitude of the local reporters who appear to be somewhat supportive or at the very least neutral to the police action. I know, a news report is supposed to be objective. But I don't see any mention in the quoted parts of the news reports about the teacher's free speech rights. The "first ammendment" comment is in the Atlantic article not the news reports. Since these are local news reporters they probably also reflect local biases. Possible threats to safety are given more importance than any free speech rights.
I remember reading a book by Arthur C Clarke (I think it's something called Light of Other Days), where surveillance has become so pervasive because the technology to do so has become penny cheap everybody assumes everybody will be spied on. When that point is reached, then you'll have to take it for granted that somebody somewhere has a revealing photo of you. Does the shower head have an embedded nano-camera? What about that coffee mug?
So maybe when that time come people will just try to look their best everywhere whether it's in the crapper, bed or kitchen. In bed people will simply avoid embarassing/humiliating positions unless they want to be known as the hideous kinky type.
Worse than having a leaked photo of your naked self is having a leaked photo of your warts, love handles and other ugly spots. If you're built like a body builder or a supermodel, your nude photo can well become part of your professional resume. Who knows, maybe some celebs are deliberately careless about their nude photos because subconsciously they want the whole world to see how beautiful they are even when they're not wearing designer clothes?
Ancient technology I know, but I feel really naked when I try to leave home without them.
Well it's seems Google is making a serious step toward a literally robotic future. That seems to be pretty obvious with its driverless car project. But when Google first acquired a fistful of robotics-related companies, some commentators speculated it was to allow Google to more effectively "mine" the data that would be flowing from what's effectively a mobile data scanner. Google already has Streetview and its book scanning project, so this, the reasoning went, is where Google's new robotic technologies will most likely slot in.
Now I don't know. Maybe Google is really planning to build a robot army.