"The Courts have said that an un-read, e-mail stored on a server, is like an envelope containing a letter. A warrant is required to do anything other than examine the header (i.e. the face) of the letter.

Once read, it is no longer like a letter, it is business correspondence, and a warrant is no longer required."

That hasn't reached the Supreme Court, has it?

In light of their recent rulings in support of protections from electronic surveillance, I expect the Supreme Court will overturn the lower courts which have been giving the OK for warrantless email access.

No, your email account password is the envelope. Nobody should be accessing your email account without either a warrant or you giving them the password.

Of course, emails can be read without your password by employees of the email provider who have access to the relevant servers. But your letters can also be easily opened by postal service employees who get their hands on your letters ... that doesn't mean you need to seal your letters in a titanium case welded shut (ie. the equivalent of strong encryption) to have a reasonable expectation of privacy and protection by the 4th amendment.

A picture is often more useful than a verbal complaint when the police are evaluating whether a given parking situation actually is a violation, and the exact location where it occurred.

And for citizens armed with a cellphone camera and Twitter, it's faster for them to post a pic than to sit on the non-emergency line for several minutes, first on hold for 5 minutes, then some more minutes to describe the vehicle and the location.

Help people get a new start in another city with more job opportunities, don't bring in more people when unemployment there is so high.

Suppose they don't have the 1988 source code?

If they rewrote the next version from scratch as they claimed, it's not surprising that they didn't put much of an effort into preserving the 1988 version for the next 25 years.

Maybe they don't have the source code from the 1988 version any more. They claim they weren't using that source code for subsequent versions of the game, and they couldn't release a patch on the Internet if they found bugs after it was released, so there wasn't much perceived value in preserving the source code. And they certainly didn't expect to have to preserve it for 25 years.

Of course Gates would be expected to lose, and it would be a shocker if he didn't lose.

But he lost in only 9 moves. He should have been able to last longer than that.

... phone bloatware is only for old people.

>Then why don't they call it the seahorsecampus? These guys make everything so difficult.

Hippocampus is derived from the Greek words hippos (horse) and kampos (sea monster).

If you know the input will always be less than X characters, you have TWO boundary conditions, not one:
1. No characters
2. X-1 characters

When Delta sold seats at large discounts, some of those seats would have gone empty if the discount glitch didn't happen, and without the discount Delta would have eaten the costs of flying with those empty seats anyway. For some flights, selling the heavily discounted seats may even have been a net gain financially for Delta.

But with the furniture retailer, they had bigger real losses from the discount glitch because without the huge discounts, the items would have remained available for somebody else to purchase at full price.

So Delta is willing to bear the losses because their losses from this were less severe or perhaps nonexistent, whereas for the furniture retailer the losses are too large for them to accept without trying to recoup what they can.

In the US they generally don't use chip & PIN. The stolen PINs involved are for bank ATM cards without chips, not PINs for credit cards with chips.

But the land used for that corn is often suitable for growing other crops for human consumption.

No. If there is prior art, don't grant the patent, with or without a working model.

Under the rule I proposed, the patent holder can't sue before the working model is demonstrated. While the patent is provisional, its 20-year expiration clock is ticking, the information is public, and others can't be sued for infringing it. So there would be advantages to the public and disadvantages to the patent holder for acquiring a patent before the working model is ready.