I could be missing something, but I don't think anyone has mentioned the data being provided as a real time feed. If I were to guess I would think that the 'delay' was much longer than a week, but probably covered a considerable duration of time.

The cops probably care less about where someone is speeding right now, and more about where and when the incidence of speed limit violations are the greatest.

Did you consider the possibility that he might, at different points of time during the last 10 years, have visited more than one location?

I didn't say there were, or even that he was wrong in saying Ubuntu would never succeed. I said that the arguments he presented were complete and utter boloney and that that indicated that he was, in fact, just pulling stuff out of his ass with no real justification.

As a side note, the notion that stock linux has a terrible user experience does not follow logically from the fact that it is not very successful/widely deployed. There are many reasons for the very limited success of desktop linux. Suggesting that it being too difficult to use (If you assume that this is the case, which I do not.) is the only - or even the most important - reason is just not very insightful.

Replied to the wrong post, obviously. None of that was directed at you, Freaky.

While I agree that the linux desktop and even ubuntu has several unsolved usability issues, you come off as someone who used ubuntu for a week in 2006 and then for another two weeks in 2008 and then decided it was always going to stay the same.

I challenge you to spend a month running Natty and then a month running Win95. (Feel free to apply the most recent updates) Good luck finding the latter more UXillating (?) than the former.

Do you even know what Ubuntu is? Have you ever used it?

What? Ubuntu has always been about streamlining user experience as compared to other distributions. With varying degrees of success, sure, but that's always been their mission statement.

You mean like exactly what Ubuntu is doing with Unity? I almost hope you're a troll. "UX"..., sigh.

Score: 5, Insightful, seriously?

The basic understanding of market effects are so poor on this site it's a fucking travesty. How is this not obvious? As scarcity of IPv4 addresses diminishes, a market (inevitably) emerges. As demand for addresses continues to increase, the market price (inevitably) increases. As that price increases, the cost of providing IPv4 addresses (inevitably) increases, thus (inevitably) providing increasing incentives to transition to IPv6.

Also, in response to another poster: Yeah, this could certainly lead to IPv4 addresses becoming a luxury item. So. fucking. what?! As long as routing is in place, an IPv4 address serves exactly the same function as an IPv6 address. Why would you even care if somebody is interested in paying extra for nothing? What is the loss to you?

The thing is, there is no harm in that. Not to anyone. Pirating something that you would under no circumstance pay for is a Pareto improvement, as it leaves someone better off, and most importantly nobody worse off than if infringement had not happened.

Yeah, I'm just going to go ahead and call a big fat [Citation needed] on this one. According to Wikipedia, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, formerly TWAR "less commonly" causes myocarditis (inflammation of the heart) which has been linked in some studies to sudden unexpected death in athletes. This appears to be what you're thinking about, but I can't find any verification that Chlamydophila should be more prevalent nor more indirectly lethal in athletes than in the general population.

Also it appears that the incidence of sudden unexpected death is somewhat in debate, as is the most common causes of it, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "died as flies" is almost certainly a massive exaggeration. If young athletes were suddenly dropping dead in large numbers in the 80s and early 90s, I'd probably be putting my money on drugs.. Pending further study, of course.

I say "does it" as the diversity of hardware did not hurt Microsoft.

This diversity of hardware is nothing like what Microsoft had to deal with. Microsoft had to deal with a multitude of vendors providing devices that resulted in, more or less, some combination consisting of a processing unit, graphics hardware, a screen, a keyboard, a mouse and a sound card. Android is supporting a multitude of devices that may or may not provide one or more of the following: a screen, a capacitive touchscreen, a resistive touchscreen, gsm hardware, gps hardware, 3g connectivity, wlan connectivity, ethernet connectivity, a physical keyboard, no physical buttons at all, any number of physical buttons offering any random functionality, sound hardware capable of reliable voice input, a useless simplistic microphone, lots of internal memory, little internal memory, limited internal memory with optional extension. I could go on.

The point is that if someone tried to put Windows on something, it was a PC. If someone tries to put android on something, it could be anything from a toaster/washing machine/fridge through a headless server through a laptop through any imaginable kind of phone through a tablet pc. Creating a system that performs reasonably well in all those use cases involves more than just writing plenty of drivers for a lot of different hardware.

What, you mean like that crazy Einstein guy? Challenging Newton of all people?!

Oh, trust me. We'd get it.

This seems entirely uninteresting. The only obvious conclusion you could draw from this data is that reaching a major milestone in a major social event triggers a major outburst of communications, which seems trivially obvious. For some interesting analysis on #jan25 tweets, see for instance this, an attempt to visualize influence levels between twitter users. It is interesting to note that there are relatively few highly "influential" tweeters, many of whom were arrested or detained at some point during the protest. This could possibly indicate that the Egyptian authorities were conducting a similar analysis.

And how would it "impact confidence in Microsoft's service" were they to release personal details to the public at a whim? If the mother wants to claim she received no evidence, she should go right ahead. If she wants to have any evidence received scrutinized and hopefully refuted, she should also go ahead. If she has received evidence and concluded that it doesn't warrant any further attention, it probably doesn't warrant any further attention.