Many tech savvy users write Android applications, for instance. Others play Minecraft. Others contribute to OpenStreetMap. Others even use the Netbeans IDE, lazy them.

Which is what AlphaBro wanted us to uninstall.

6 - This is not "https proxying" at all, but you are at one end of a "remote desktop" session between your phone, which does not have html rendering capabilities, and the remote machine at Nokia that does the rendering, which obviously would not have any chance of doing its job if it hadn't access to the unencrypted data.

Actually, when Oracle added restrictions to Java's test suite in order to limit fragmentation, I heard quite a lot of "endless bitching" here on slashdot. And Google's restrictions are much more severe than Oracle's, so now I expect to see much more bitching here.

Yeah, you can still download the source code for the glory of reading it. And then you can't compile it unless you comply with Google's Oracle-like proprietary and restrictive license.

Those statistics include all kinds of Microsoft mobile OSes, including Windows Mobile and Windows Phone 7, which have been around for a long time, and in particular, one is as old as Bada, while the other is much older.

Even being dead, Bada still managed to sell 20% more than Windows Phone in Q3 2012 ( http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2237315 ) .

Samsung Bada phones cost about 20% less than Samsung Android phones based on equivalent hardware (see the Wave 3 vs the Galaxy S Plus for instance). People who buy phones for their out-of-the-box features might be interested in the saving.

As soon as you obtain a copy of it, you can copy, modify and use Red Hat's stuff without paying. It's free as in beer. It's completely compatible with open source.

In less free countries, Red Hat can not distribute patented code under the GPL license. Try to play an MP3 file on your Red Hat-developed Fedora distribution, you're in for a surprise.

Free as in freedom implies free as in beer. Having to pay a fee to obtain freedom is completely incompatible with open source.

Why would paying somebody to do a job make it more acceptable to reproach him with harsh words? A employee-employer relationship is a peer to peer exchange between somehone who has money and someone who has a skill, which if anything should require even more politeness, given that it usually happens between two persons who have no affective closeness.

On the other hand, friends are frank when they get angry. If you look for instance at what happens, say, in an amateur football team (no money involved) when one of the members makes a mistake that puts the whole team at disadvantage, you'll see similar reactions, and nobody would ever think of writing a slashdot story about it.

One can disapprove the use of language that Linus often makes, but the concept is orthogonal to whether he's paying the people he yells at or not.

In that case the adapter comes for free in the box, no € 19 involved.

Indeed, they let you charge over microusb without extorting from you 19 € for the privilege.

Says Austria. It's written in the second line of the summary.

It's 100% true that governments use the EU as a justification for unpopular laws. But this tells more about the governments than about the EU itself.

Wait, until now you've said that the EU has the power to force your government to pass unpopular laws, and now you say they do "nothing important"? If you send, as you call them, assholes to the EU, that's because you elected them (usually, the national parties try to shovel into the EU parliament their members who didn't manage to get elected in some national assembly). Next time be more careful.

They're laws that are used to regulate the import of foreign products, usually in order to defend the local ones through import taxes. Look at the countries outside the EU, and you'll se that they have national laws doing the same kind of stuff that the EU does for its member states.

Now we agree, the britons should decide once and for all what they want to do when they're grown up.

My country, too, which is in western Europe, is known for letting wiretapping data fall into the wrong hands. We have had cases of politicians looking for information to use against their enemies, of wealthy people keeping an eye on competitors, employees or even customers, or hackers publishing stolen data which wasn't locked down carefully enough.

Wiretapping is important, the evidence collected through it helped identify many criminals (and save many innocents). But it must be done only under the warrant of a judicial authority, and it should be performed only by trusted (and accountable) professionals. That's what the constitutions of many europen states say, and the reason they do is not because, back in the time when they were written, mass surveillance was not as easy as it is today.