"An agreement is yet to be signed." is in the OP's link and that gives us an idea that in the future there MAY be an agreement.
That article is from June 23, 2011. A final agreement called the Momorandum of Understanding (PDF) was written on July 6, 2011. It's an agreement between MPAA, RIAA, AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Cablevision, and Time Warner Cable. I don't know if it was actually signed on the lines, and I haven't heard of anyone leaving or entering the agreement.
Possibly. To add to your anecdote, a couple months ago my old Yahoo! account got cracked, and I figured it was because I had left a weak password on there (fairly susceptible to a dictionary attack with some variance). So I changed to a stronger password and enabled two factor authentication. Then last week my coworker also got cracked, and she reported that she had a weak password.
Maybe someone got a copy of a Yahoo! hashed password and user name table that they can work against with a computer cluster, or maybe Yahoo! is allowing tons of fast authentication attempts against single user names on their servers.
I ran a quick strings and grep on all the files, hoping to get some juicy comments from source code, but I didn't get much:
- ESM 2.0 8-23-04/VoterDTSSetup/CMISDTS.mdb: I HATE ACCESS 2000!!!! (Works in Access 97)
- ESM 2.0 8-23-04/SampleData/DatasetSmall/Voter.mdb: !!!! Does not check if a Vote Has Been recorded. Only checks status information !!!! (Should this change?)
- ESM 2.0 8-23-04/SampleData/DatasetComplete/Voter.mdb: RJD080299 Fixed stupid bug that counted down to 0...
..., and it could possibly bring down subscription rates for high speed internet,
Yeah, I don't see that statement as being true. Large web companies will only provide their on-site servers to large ISPs. The large ISPs have no reason to or history of reducing their subscription rates. If the servers were provided to smaller ISPs (such as GWI), then they could lower their rates and become more competitive. Maybe if the servers were provided to tier 2 peering networks, they could pass on the savings to small ISPs? I don't know enough about tiers or peering to know if that's a possibility.
- An average of 0.77 "+1s" per post
- An average of 0.54 replies per post
- An average of 0.17 re-shares per post
Her conclusion does not necessarily follow from the data. If all +1s, replies, and re-shares were under 0.5, then it would. But they aren't, so it doesn't.
I went to the paper, expecting to find a fairly high powered laser that is not a pointer, and expecting to call someone out on calling them pointers. However, they're only 5 mW, which is indeed a pointer. Cool that they can use such low powered lasers for this.
The FDA has regulations in the U.S. saying that no laser products over 5 mW may be marketed as "pointers":
Class IIIb lasers cannot legally be promoted as laser pointers or demonstration laser products.