Get off my lawn.

Yes, that was my point. My recollection was untrue.

Oh, nuts, please disregard what I posted above. Somehow, I got it into my memory that-- in addition to what my GP posted-- Google had also opted to use the dot at the end of your email address as a replacement for the + functionality called out in the RFCs (and explicitly disallowed the plus.) But looking back through early news discussions of gmail, I can't find mention of that, so likely it is a fabrication of my mind.

So what happens if...
1. Alex registers "alleycat@gmail.com"
2. Alexandra registers "alley@gmail.com"
3. Alexandra decides to give her pet's veterinary the dotted address "alley.cat@gmail.com"

... And those who thought this was going to be a ternary joke.

While you may be correct in stating that a 32-bit wide bus can address 2^32 memory positions, I fail to see how that makes TFA wrong. TFA has naught to do with bus width. Under discussion here is 2^30 being 1 GiB, vs 10^9 being 1 GB. Why are you bringing 4 GiB into the discussion?

It can be both, and I believe it is. We are used to parodies changing the words and keeping the music essentially the same. This song changes the music, and keeps the lyrics largely the same, I believe that still meets the definition of parody that wikipedia proffers.

However, I was apparently incorrect in asserting that the legal sticking point had anything to do with parody. Instead the legal sticking point is that it is licensed as a cover, just as you alluded. (Though there seems to be some question about the wholly new parts that JC added, such as the duck quack.) The fact that the cover is parodical is not really a material fact. My bad.

The difference is, Glee ripped off JC's parody, not an original work. Parodies are expressly denied most of the protections afforded to original works. On the other hand, from your description I'm guessing VP was not parodying parodies, but rather parodying non-parodical original works.

Christmas pie, not curds-n-whey. You're thinking of Li'l Miss Muffet. (Reply w/ tasteless joke combining "Horner", "curds-n-whey", and Miss Muffet in 3... 2...)

Funny stuff. It's coincidences like this that make we want to anthropomorphise Irony.

Same here.

I followed your line of reasoning until that last line. If you assume this cash is held in a bank, then these dollars are still lendable (even multiple times over, if you assume we haven't also done away with fractional reserve, along with this presumed return to a gold standard.) Or, are you assuming that these wealthy people are squirreling all their gold-backed currency away under their mattresses?

C) Freedoms always come with responsibilities.
In fact, that really should be A)...
And, there is certainly room for regulation in a libertarian mindset, because you will always have to deal with the asshats who forget that freedoms always come with responsibilities.

Or, you could stop limiting yourself to 80 columns for your code...

I don't see the intent do defraud, here.