This is the sole reason I'm on the fence about class actions. On the one hand, the consumer plaintiffs never get anything out of them. They're solely for the enrichment of plaintiffs' attorneys. On the other hand, it is often the only way to hold a big player accountable when it screws a whole lot of people just a little. It's like commissioning a privateer to fight pirates by saying, "Capture them, and any stolen booty you can find on the ship is yours to keep. Just get them out of my shipping lanes." (Which, by the way, is almost exactly what the King of England told Captain Kidd. Except he also said, "And I get a cut of the booty, too.")

Words have both meaning and context. "Unlimited" in a service contract does not mean "mathematically infinite." Ordinary people understand that, pay for their "unlimited" internet service, and happily use it to their hearts' content as much as they want for ordinary, consumer-grade internet operations. Want to watch streaming HD video, all day, every day? Go for it. You won't use nearly as much bandwidth as this guy did. How else would you have Verizon inform people, in a simple, understandable way, that they are providing internet service with no arbitrary usage caps as long as you aren't trying to host google.com? And how are they not within their rights to say, "We haven't charged you extra for your abuse of our 'unlimited' internet service (it is "unlimited" after all), but if you keep it up, we will refuse to provide you service in the future"? Should they be compelled to do business with everybody?

What this guy did is analogous to going into an "all you can eat" restaurant, filling up buckets full of food, and standing on the sidewalk outside selling it---and then complaining when they ask you to leave. It's the kind of thing that smarmy, basement-dwelling geeks do when they pretend to not understand what a word means because technically it has a different definition in a different context. It's also why they can't get dates.

Hate to break it to you, but we still don't care. Seriously. 99% of the people who use Android have no idea that it has anything to do with Linux. They just call it Android. And of the small minority of people who run "Linux" on the desktop, about 99% (from my observation), just call it "Linux." Richard Stallman and a handful of his groupies are still the only people who still care about putting "GNU" in front of Linux.

You have more faith in the DNC than I do. All I've seen them do is use tragedies to push their long-term political goal of ensuring that Americans do not have access to firearms. (They're not subtle about this goal, except when they're pushing gun laws. Then they pretend to have never said it.) None of the measures they have proposed would have done anything to prevent those tragedies, but they would have the effect of advancing the DNC's distinctly statist agenda of making people increasingly reliant on the State for everything from basic necessities to personal safety.

(And please, no rants about how Republicans are evil and corrupt too. Yes, they are. But on this issue they happen to be coincidentally right.)

The universe is approximately 13.7E9 years old. There are 8.766E3 hours in a year. Thus, the universe is approximately 1.20E14 hours old. So at a rate of 100 hours per second, it would take 1.20E12 second to exceed the age of the universe in YouTube videos. 1.20E12 seconds works out to around 1 million years. So we have a way to go still.

You may want to loosen your tinfoil hat. If you tighten the straps too hard, sometimes it can cause extreme irritability. Ideally, the fit should be "snug" but not "tight."

Right, which is why we have the Sherman Antitrust Act. In fact, I took a whole class on antitrust law in law school, and it was an awfully thick book, so I know first hand that we already have a ton of antitrust law. We don't need the McCain Micromanagement of Media Act.

At least Obamacare actually matters, whether you love it or hate it. I want my legislators to care about what's going on with Obamacare. I don't want them micromanaging my television.

At the risk of being a "me, too," seriously, they can't find anything more important to focus their legislative energy on? On the one hand, I kind of like the idea of a la carte television. On the other hand, I kind of don't care because I pretty much already do that with Netflix and iTunes (for Doctor Who). On the third hand, why is it the federal government's business how cable companies package their product? If there are antitrust issues, fine, we've had the Sherman act for more than 100 years. If that doesn't get you there, maybe it's none of your freaking legislative business.

Then there is no major American political party for you.

A little bit pedantic here, but nobody has the right to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. If you lose at the district court level, you have the right to appeal to the federal appeals court for your circuit. If you lose at the circuit court, you can petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which means they can reach out and grab that case with their awesome Supreme Court judicial superpowers. It's a bit like a pauper begging the king to intervene on his behalf because he feels like the local magistrate has treated him unfairly. And most petitions for cert fare about that well.

What I usually do in that situation is not watch hockey. But honestly, that's my response to most situations.

Without Citizens United, it's almost impossible to unseat an incumbent. Incumbents have serious momentum on their side. The only way to beat an incumbent is to spend lots and lots of money. Providing government-funded, equalized campaigns does not solve the problem. First, it means that we only get nice, tidy, government-approved candidates, which makes the two-party system even MORE entrenched than it currently is. Second, if both sides have the same amount of money, the incumbent will win. Lobbying is a problem, but restricting free speech is not the way to solve it.

Because we can just print more money to pay it off. Why, we can even mint 15 $1T coins and deposit them with the treasury, and Wham! There goes our debt. And fortunately, that has absolutely no effect on the value of the dollar, or the dollar's position as the international standard currency. And if there's one thing history teaches us, it's that no regime has ever fallen because it spent itself into mountainous debt that it was unable to crawl back out of.

The guy made an animation of a Pop Tart cat flying through space on a rainbow. That drawing is copyrighted. If Nintendo made derivative works of that drawing, then it's copyright infringement. What's so hard?