How do you define success? Your open source language project doesn't have to be good to be popular (example: PHP), but it must have a certain audience that finds it appealing. Open sourcing the project is not a magic bullet; if nobody likes your product, you're out of luck. However, if you have carefully studied your audience and believe that such a step will remove the main roadblock for adoption for a large number of potential users, this is definitely worth doing.

I wonder if this is the correct term: "infected" means that the author had written a benign application, while an attacker somehow got control over his distribution channel and modified the app to his needs. Meanwhile, I believe that in a significant number of cases cheap apps are written and distributed by malicious authors. So yep, they're dangerous, and no, they're neither infected nor otherwise modified.

So what? You're a geek and should know better: if something is broken, you go fix it and do not lament that it's horribly broken when someone else gets down to fix it. Same shit here; the fact that it's about human society and not circuits or software doesn't make it different.

A most precise and excellently worded observation. My hat off to you.

Perhaps. Still, it hasn't stopped them from forking a whole operating system (Android) and selling devices that enable that thoughtless shopping experience. And who's to say that they won't attempt to enter the desktop/htpc/whatever game as well, forking Ubuntu or using it outright for better penetration of an existing market, however small? I definitely wouldn't rule out such an option, although I agree that integrating Amazon services into a media consumption device makes much more sense than integrating them into a full-fledged computer used for work as well as entertainment.

1) Remember, while most geeks will either be annoyed or even outright disgusted of this move, this is exactly the kind of thing that gets an operating system rolling for the wider audiences (IMO) and adds economical grounds for further expansion. Could this also be Amazon testing the potential of making Ubuntu a partner OS, since they currently lack a desktop operating system integrated with their online shopping "experience"? Maybe.
2) However what I know for sure is that this feature is likely to be US-only (unfortunately for those international Ubuntu users who prefer buying their music instead of pirating them), as is much of Amazon's stock. I mean, come on. I know that overseas shipping of physical items is hard, but working out the paperwork with the studios for selling a damn file? How hard can that be?

Why on Earth would someone want that? Check out SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and the Dragon spacecraft; both seem to be pretty solid machines, and they are cheaper. Actually, I will not be surprised to see ISS crews scheduled to launch in 2016-2017 training to use Dragons instead of Soyuz. On a side note, there are some very fundamental problems with the Russian space industry at the moment, and alas I don't see them being fixed anytime soon.

I predict a sharp growth of tinfoil hat making companies' share price.
Anyway, this technology is amazing. How long until we (as a species) can do the same from a distance? How long until such devices are then minituarized and cost so little that it is feasible to make them ubiquitous?

Already found that out; sorry that I didn't post an update. Also, that domain appears to belong to Thomson Reuters Financial. My bad, I had no idea that there may be any benefit for a behemoth like Amazon to host investor relations materials on a third-party website.

Excuse me my ignorance, but why is this supposed press release hosted on corporate-ir.net (that doesn't even appear to have a root index file) instead of amazon.com? A quick google search shows that there are plenty of such press releases from lots of different companies hosted on that site; however, I am still not sure if this stuff is legitimate.

Now they changed it to this. What have you done?!

I'm inclined to agree with your point. Thank you for your informative input.

As unbelievable as it may seem, it didn't slip my attention that this particular exercise was about hazmat disaster management. I don't even deny that it might be a clever way to attract and educate the general populace. My comment is solely about the fact that the same terminology could be used as a cover for crowd management exercises, and since those "dozens of other agencies" remain unnamed, I suggested that some of those are actually law enforcement agencies and have possibly already gone zombie-style as well. To clarify further: it is just my personal unsubstantiated speculation; it could well be that adopting zombie terminology for law enforcement is obviously a pretty dumb idea for anyone with a basic training in that area of expertise.

I fail to appreciate your sense of humor. Didn't it strike anyone in the government yet that zombie exercises would be a great way to disguise preparations for countering massive civil unrest? Or does that "dozens of agencies have embraced the idea" exactly mean that it did?

"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." -- Steve Jobs [source not specified 13 days]