Elvis Presley isn't the King, he is the Lord!

Well, that's "by definition" one aspect of a scientific theory. You're right, because a scientific theory is a formulation of a model that maps to past observations, it can only ever be disproved, and never proved, as we don't rule out the possibility of as-of-yet unobserved irregularities that would disprove it.

The flaw in your comment is that you are comparing religious views to scientific theories.

While it may never be "proved", a more important aspect of a scientific theory is that it can be used to make predictions. And those predictions, if right, can serve to support it (and also give it some scientific value).
Take for instance Newton's gravity: at the time of its formulations, it was vastly sufficient for its applications, and useful to calculate projectile trajectories, etc. Then we started noticing that it fell short for certain applications, and Einstein's theory of relativity became a more accurate model for many uses. Now everybody knows that Einstein's theory of relativity isn't "correct", as some observations show. However, it's still very useful.

The predictive ability of a scientific theory is as close to "proof" as you get. Religious views cannot, and should not be compared to scientific theories. If certain beliefs make you happy, you are free to hold them, but if you want your beliefs to have any weight in society (for instance, policy or otherwise), I think it's reasonable that you be expected to show their value and how they may be rationally justified.

Wait a minute, are you one of those who consider ID to be a scientific theory?

Yeah, you said it twice. I think you meant "inherent".

Except if you're a Verizon customer calling another Verizon customer, it's free.
And if you're calling from another carrier, they're the ones getting money from it (assuming no roaming). I don't know what the agreements between carriers are, but I would guess that in such a situation, Verizon gets little if any cash from your carrier.

It seems to me that Verizon doesn't stand to win much from this "tactic".

Not sure where "back home" is, but I assume it's somewhere where they don't charge your minutes for incoming calls (e.g. Europe).

Back when I lived in Europe, I got by with a very low plan because I could still accept calls without worrying about my bill. Here in the US, my minutes are counted whether I'm placing or receiving a call, and 60 minutes would be very limiting. (the minimum plan with my carrier is 400min/month)

It's actually "Ba ba ba BOM!", and that's four notes.

There, ftfy.

Just put the fridge on the wheelchair, hook it to your brain. That way you can call it over every time you want a beer. (cue Soviet Russia joke)

Granted, 95% accuracy isn't amazing, especially in situations where you can't afford to make a mistake. This being said, I'm pretty sure that such a sophisticated device could easily implement some collision/stair avoidance (for instance).

I know I've tried putting my roomba on top of a table (or tried to make it go off the stairs), but it just stops when it gets to an edge. It also stops when its bumpers hit a wall, by the way. I don't know how much this wheelchair would cost, but I wouldn't be surprised if you could add the cost of a couple roombas without making a significant dent in the price.

That's really funny you should say that, because your example has nothing to do with TFS.

The point is that in the case you cited, the defendant actually was (allegedly) an uploader. Whether the original or not doesn't matter, she was making those files available for download, and they were being downloaded from her computer. And she could just as well have been sharing/uploading her own CDs, so whether she was the original uploader or not doesn't matter.

My understanding of this situation is that the video search engine doesn't actually serve the material, but links you to where you can download/watch it. This case is a lot more like Pirate Bay, where they provide "links" to the copyrighted material.

I haven't looked into this, but I would guess that probably wouldn't be much better than just the thrust provided by the fan, correct?

The difference is that those cards (if you're talking about collector cards, correct me otherwise) have value in their uniqueness. e.g. this Ronaldinho card with the low identifier 34 is one of only 50 similar cards printed. People buy several stacks of football cards, hoping one of them will contain a really rare card. I'm not going to buy several copies of the same CD just to get the really rare autographed picture!

Sure, there are lots of ways to monetize on artists other than selling their CDs. Concerts, t-shirts, posters, etc. are all good ways. But CDs themselves are not.

As a wired article recently stated: if the marginal cost of something is zero, the price will eventually be zero.

Forget bundling with CDs. Unless you want to sell "collector" CDs that have been signed (which I'm sure there's an albeit limited market for), selling plain CDs are not going to remain a profitable business.

I've scanned your signed picture and posted it on bittorrent. Enjoy!

I assume that by "symbolic" you mean that it creates a precedent (if there isn't one already) to add to the existing case law. IANAL (but soon to be law student), but I think an RIAA victory in this court, even if appealed, will make things harder for the defendant and anyone else in the same situation currently or in the future (until overruled).

I agree that does not fit the old saying of "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach".

However, what your statement does reflect in my mind is the attitude that a lot of universities have - especially the major research universities - of hiring professors with a much greater focus on their research than on teaching. Universities have incentives (both monetary and reputation) to do so, but in the end it is often hard to find a prolific researcher who is also good at teaching.

That's also why at certain universities, you find the professor doesn't even have time to teach, and most classes are taught by teaching assistants, who are either Ph.D. students or upperclassmen - and in my mind, that's not what your tuition is supposed to go to.

That's one of the reasons I did not go to a powerhouse research university, but picked a college with a reputation for having professors involved in their students' work.