I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it turns out to be a really hard problem.

FACT: Torvalds started Linux

FACT: Linux is named after its creator

ERGO: Torvalds's first name is Linux

The logic is unassailable.

Surely you won't need to pay the attendance fee if you're a presenter. At least, if it's a reputable conference.

Thank you. It saddens me that most news outlets still routinely omit easily-addable links to in-depth information like this.

WTF?

I understand what you're talking about but I have no idea why you choose to go off on this poor guy. He stated his opinion, made it clear it was only his opinion and backed it up with some the reasoning behind his statement. He in no way claimed to be absolutely right; in fact, he even pointed out a reason why he might be wrong. Perhaps he was a bit foolish to assume similarities between iPhone and N900 but one is free to draw that conclusion thanks to the information he provided.

In short, he offered a reasonable and fairly modest observation along with enough support to allow the reader to make their own judgement on whether to accept it.

This guy is not your enemy.

So what if instead of posting her vacation pictures to Facebook, she had them in a shoebox and showed them to a friend. Would that be discoverable?

The point is that the general test for obscurity isn't whether it's obscure to you personally. No one alive now fought in the War of 1812 but that doesn't make it obscure.

As a practical matter, that's pretty much what you have to do now. Modernizr and the like make it easier for you, but ultimately that's what they're doing. You can't really trust what each browser claims to support anyway.

Obscure to you, perhaps, but anyone who went to arcades in the 80s definitely saw Karate Champ.

Morality and ethics are not exclusively defined by what is legal.

Or in other words, it is not the end-all and be-all argument to say "it's legal so you should have no problem with it".

Do you really think the ISPs are paying their lobbyists to push a bill through Congress so they can save their customers money?

Hold on, here's the crux of the issue. If the state had an active role in selected projects to receive money and choose this theme park, there may be a problem here. If, however, the incentives were made available to all and the theme park applied them of their own volition, then there's no problem.

It's like the difference between someone handing out sandwiches only to Christians versus a Christian joining a line that says "free sandwiches".