And this needed a study? Well, I where I come from, our samll country has over 66 tribes; each one of them with a different language and custom. Guess what; I fluently speak 11 of those with no difficulty at all.

I even speak English better than those who have it as their first language (grammarvwise). I also learnt German, Mandarin and Spanish faster than any students in my class. As a result, I got the reward[s] of mingling with the fairer gender easily (and reaped the rewards!!), while fellow students from the so called 1st world were grassing. No neeed for a study here. It is obvious.

I guess there will be plenty of folks who will say something to the effect, "I know what porn is when I see it."

Question is: Whose eyes will decide this question?

Troll!

And how [exactly], would they do that?

Why not if they are happier than the so called developed ones?"

Is it prejudice, no?

They do it well.

That's where you lost the battle. If this work is truly yours, there's usually a way to prove. I mean, I can read code and tell who dveloped it -- from the style. I mean, you could even point to older work you've done.

I just don't understand how you can let a fella claim ownership to work that's truly yours. You could at least do half a SCO...I mean, at least attempt to sue the fella.

That's capitalism at work. Now maybe Google can come to the rescue by re-implementing all Java APIs in Dalvik (Android), after which they (Google), can push for wider desktop/server Dalvik adoption.

Didn't they tell us that Android, being Linux based is very very safe compared to anything we'd ever seen?

Question is: Were we lied to or those who were talking about ths subject just didn't know what they were talking about?

Are you a sadist? How can those two words in the same sentence? (emphasis mine...)

While I will not dispute this fella's findings, I wonder whether GNOME by default, is a pleasure to look at.

That is, is it beautiful? The last time I checked (3 years ago), it was one ugly piece of software, though it generally got work done.

He should inform the honorable judge that he's forgotten the decryption parameters or whatever they are called.

This way, he puts the ball back into their court. That is, to prove that he indeed still remembers these parameters.

That will be a tough one to prove.

While I have no question about mucus humans produce when attacked by the cold, I wonder whether that slimy stuff snails produce is called mucus as well.

For one thing, it's the reason I will never [consciously] eat snails. In fact, snails in my culture, are regarded as 'dirty' creatures.

...You're dealing with human beings, and human beings make mistakes.

That's why.

Here's why: Lawyers being what they are, will bicker over what exactly a mathematical formula is.

I will never forget an incident where in the recent Oracle vs Google case, Oracle's side tried to change the facts about a memory reference being symbolic or otherwise. Mind you, this was an expert! It was pathetic!

Subsequently, the court shot down Oracle's position with this piece.

The foregoing is sufficient but it is worth adding that Oracle's infringement case was presented through Dr. Mitchell. A reasonable jury could have found his many "mistakes" in his report merely to be convenient alterations to fix truthful admissions earlier made before he realized the import of his admissions. For this reason, a reasonable jury could have rejected every word of his testimony.

Oracle lost the case - For now.

...but I've failed on this front!

Question is: What am I not getting?