For the whole second half of the movie, the characters repeatedly pound each other. No matter how hard they hit, no one seems to be able to get hurt at all.
At some point superman coughs, and the bad guy gets dizzy that is about it.

You become numb after a while, there is really no excitement in the fights because they have no consequences, absolutely nothing is at stake in the fights. As stunning visually as they are, the fights are nothing but fillers.

They do not take away any right whatsoever.
If you go to a site with proprietary javascript/html/css/whatever, there is not a single thing that you can no longer do that you could before visiting the site.

You never had the right to distribute the content without the author's permission, so how can visiting a site take away a right you never had?

It is even worse in Venezuela,

The government printed money like crazy which caused really high inflation. So how does the government fight inflation? they add price control, which causes scarcity, and currency control which kills imports. Here is a video showing people that got wind that there was corn meal, chicken and some other products in a supermarket

Both GNU components and the Linux kernel come with a written permission to call it whatever you want. I can take all these components, distribute them even verbatim and call them "yomama", and I would be fully compliant with the licenses. The difference is that no one would have a clue what I am talking about.

For this reason it is correct to call it Linux, or Android or Ubuntu or any other name (subject to trademark laws of course). Just use the name most people are familiar with so they know what you are talking about. Calling these systems GNU is merely a courtesy, a form of respect you pay to the GNU project, not a requirement in any way, and not "the right way" but merely your preference.

Exactly!

People became more productive due to technology. Now you are able to produce enough for you and your family in 40 hours / week. Before this technology advancement, you needed to work 60-80 hours / week in order to produce enough.

What will happen if we are super productive as that professor claims? Have you seen the Jetsons? that is pretty much what will happen: you would work 2 days a week for 5 hours / day. Your job would not be canning tuna, but making sure that the machine that does it gets maintenance. We would spend our time, doing art, music, entertainment, or any other leisure related activity/job.

Consider this: we don't have to work to get air. All that it means, is that we can use the labor to produce something else. If we had to work to get air, we would simply switch some of the labor from their current occupation to air production, but we would not get the benefit from what they are currently doing.

Jobs are not a scarce resource, labor is. There is always enough jobs for everyone that wants one and then some, even if it means being self employed. The only reason there is unemployment at all, is because of bad laws.

In the original post, he added a hash signature, that supposedly proves he works for Microsoft (I have no clue how though). It has since been removed.

This was very stupid in my opinion, because with it, he could be identified.

Employment is a symbiotic relationship. The employer wins because he gets software (or labor in general) that it values more than the money it pays, the developer wins because he gets money that he values more than the time and work he gives.

A person is employable as long as the company gets more value from employing him than without him. When he posts something like this, for many, the negative publicity means the employee is no longer worth the cost.

He is no slave of the company, nor is the company a slave of his. It is a voluntary agreement between the person and the company, and either one of them should be able to terminate the relationship if they determine they are not benefiting from it anymore. Laws often get in the way of this.

As part of the agreement, companies often ask employees not to disclose internal matters. They are often asked to sign an NDA. If the person violates such agreement, he would be subject to legal action. If the company does not have such agreement in place, they should still be able to fire him if they determine he is not productive enough, or detrimental to the company (as in this case), but not go after him legally. People are free to agree to the terms and start the relationship, or reject it and look for someone else to do business with.

Sure, people vent about frustrations at work. But you do that privately with your friends, family or select coworkers. You don't post something like that about your company on the web, embarrassing the hand that feeds you in front of the whole world. I am sure he did not think it would end up on Slashdot, but who's fault is that except his own?

If I was his manager and knew who it was, I would fire him immediately. Otherwise I would be risking him "venting" again in the future and embarrassing me even further. He is probably in violation of his employment agreements, so legal action might also be warranted. If his criticism are valid, sure, I would take a look at how to improve them, but still fire him for making them public.
His retraction was too little too late, the cat was already out of the bag.

Brick and mortar retail is essentially impossible for indie developers. However, both google play and apple sell cards for cash in many stores for cash, so there is no need for credit card in the major markets.

We actually added SMS as a form of payment too, but this backfired because people really got worried about the game requiring SMS permission.

Frankly, the whole boxed game is dying, and there is plenty of piracy with boxed games, just as much as with online distributed titles, I don't really see this as a solution to anything.

Moreover, while piracy is rampant in android, it is essentially non existent in ios which has the same methods of payment, so obviously CC requirements are not "the problem"

Sorry to reply to myself, the last statement should be:

Don't just say "DRM is bad". If you want to get across and convince content creators like myself, say: "I bought game X instead of Y because Y has DRM". Email them, let them know this is was an important deterrent for you, and actually buy X.

I am a game developer. My game is available for ios, android, mac, and pc. So I am giving my perspective on DRM from the other side of the fence.

I do not add DRM to the game.
Piracy, especially in android, is rampant. I die a little inside every time I see someone stealing my work. Meanwhile DRM whispers to me "come and play".
Laws are useless. I could spend my day sending take down notices all over the web. 5 minutes after I take one down, 10 pirates post it in some other place. So I don't do this either.

So what alternatives do we have? lets see...

In app purchase? Hated by a lot of people. Maybe even more than DRM.
Subscription?: Hated
Bundling (humble bundle)?: You can do that once or twice, not a long term solution
Advertising? No revenue.

So yes, go on, oppose DRM if you like. As I said before I don't do it. But don't stop there, think which one of these other business models you do support.
Don't just say "I won't buy this game because of DRM", instead say "I will buy game X instead of Y because of DRM", as that speaks much more loudly.

Here is one citation

Here is another

Perhaps you prefer the new york times

Other sources are easy to find

Like it or not, the car was the solution for one of the worst pollution problems in cities.

Exactly! Consider what was going on before cars. People used horses to move around. You know what horses do besides transporting people? They poop, and then step all over it pulverizing it. Pulverized horse poop is orders of magnitude worse than anything that can come out of a car.
Consider also all the epidemics that went on for centuries without aqueducts.

Despite what environmentalist would have you believe, technology is actually making the world less and less polluted over time. Just looking at CO2 and ignoring all sorts of pollutants that it replaced, is just myopic.

If you wish to read actual economics, I suggest another nobel prize winner: Hayek, or the more recent Rothbard.

Your analysis on how coinage came to be is correct, and it was done privately, not by governments. Coinage did have a big impact in the adoption of gold and silver as currencies.

Mises, "human action" does a much better job than Robert Lucas about predicting and explaining recessions, and does not resort to imaginary math models that don't apply to real world. You can also get that for free, but it is a hard read.

Sorry, I don't read chicago school economics or Keynesians. I might as well read witchcraft lol.