Actually my problem with this is that it is impossible for a company that creates bot software to break *Blizzards* terms of service. Only the customer can break Blizzards TOS, because only the customer actually has a relationship with Blizzard.

Moreover - it doesn't even pass muster on that level because the TOS as they stand - are not actually legal. The Uniform Commercial Code is the only legal framework for interpreting a TOS agreement, and the UCC is quite clear - this kind of Boilerplate agreement is only acceptable as a contract between Merchants -
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-104#2-104(1)
(1) "Merchant" means a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by his occupation holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction or to whom such knowledge or skill may be attributed by his employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary who by his occupation holds himself out as having such knowledge or skill.
(...)
(3) "Between Merchants" means in any transaction with respect to which both parties are chargeable with the knowledge or skill of merchants.

The default under UCC code is not that people are considered to be merchants, but consumers - and thus, under the law, this type of boilerplate agreement is not applicable. Unless there is a 'professionsal' WoW player, the TOS is unenforceable.

This is simply interference in a third parties right to contract.

Citation Needed

I think the more important question to me - *is* there a good programming language for the iPad or (more importantly for me) the Android platform, preferably without jailbreaking it?

I believe you can run bash after jailbreaking, and that's not un-useful, but yeah, I hadn't realized how much it annoys me that there's no quick easy way to do programming (or frankly, scripting) on my tablet barring that.

Any contenders?

I confess my calculator of choice was a TI-35 Galaxy Solar, and I tended to work fine with that - anything more complex I could simplify in my head til the TI-35 was fine.

That said, the no calculator bias is a bit off in my opinion - it's all grand to know it well enough to scratchpad it, but in the real world you will be working problems that you *need* a calculator for. Statistics is particularly egregious about this but hardly the only contender for mathematics where habitually doing it by hand is actually a bad habit.

Now if someone could explain the attraction of reverse polish notation ... (No, don't, really.)

Pug

I confess I'm been really pleased with my PRS950. Works great.

In my experience Hulu Plus is the same price as Netflix with the additional 'features' of . . .
A worse interface (As of the latest iteration, there's a 'view timeline' at the bottom of the interface that doesn't actually show you where you are in the episode, and if you click *anywhere* on it to, say, watch Kevin Spacey steal Colberts Emmy again, you go back to the beginning of the program again. Seriously.)
Less Content (and some of the actual *good* content is just web series you can view for free - I'm looking at you Kevin Pollack - {G}),
Shows expiring at random times,
Arbitrary licensing on how you can stream (I'm *paying* for the Simpsons, but can't actually watch it over Roku? You have my money, why do you even *care*?)
Commercials,
a tendency to crash/hang more often than Netflix on any given platform.

Netflix is far from perfect, but frankly if Netflix doubled their price, I'd pay it and drop Hulu - 90% of what I watch on Hulu is The Daily Show/Colbert Report anyway - heck if Netflix picked those two shows up I'd drop Hulu.
Heck, if Comedy Centrals internet streaming was half decent, I'd drop Hulu.
And they were asking for *how* much to sell Hulu last month? Gee, I can't imagine why no one jumped on that.

Hulu - there to make you really appreciate Netflix!
Pug

Who . . . the hell . . . watches ~40 hours a week of TV?

Well - checking the 2011 BLS American Time Use Survey that's wrong; Actually, his number almost exactly match my math for "Leisure and Sports" Daily *30, but the numbers for "watching Television" (a subcategory) come to 2.75 hours/day, or ~82 hours per month on average; even among people that watch some *every* day that only goes up to 105 hours a month on average. Then there's the assumption that that is all 'original programming', as opposed to movies, reruns,catching up on series you missed the first time around.

So the premise is based on flawed data from the getgo, exacerbated by bad logic.
(Chart won't go through here "Filter error: Please use less whitespace", but search for "Watching television" in the report; )

Pug

Error 451: This site is unavailable . . . despite the server running perfectly fine, the domain being properly paid for, and all content being legal under standard interpretations of fair use and fair dealing, yet is mysteriously not coming up for reasons we cannot tell people about . . .

You do the math.

Yes - the teenager acted irresponsibly. He *probably* thought he was being manly and heroic. One wonders where in our gun-toting, Stand your ground, Castle Doctrine culture a teenager could get get the message that it was somehow heroic and manly to intercept a creepy man following them before they got to their house where anything might happen, but who knows where kids come up with these ideas.

But you're right - It's almost as if I was holding the heavily armed adult neighborhood watch volunteer to some higher standard than the teenager, expecting him to have actively done something to avoid a confrontation that could rapidly escalate out of control. Terribly biased of me.

Pug

I had the good fortune to run across Bayes Theorem (Not by name) in an article about misdiagnosing problems in Discover magazine back in the 80's, and for some reason filed the factoid away as 'Oh, this is *important* and is going to apply to a lot of things' and have never forgotten it.

The fundamental takeaway for me is "It doesn't *matter* how accurate your test is - what matters is how accurate it is compared to how rare the condition you're looking for is.". Random drug tests, random highway stops, the instant you are doing anything that force a 99% accurate test on a population that might only be 1% guilty, you should be fined for a violation of Bayesian logic.

It is one of those universally applicable truths, and we need to hammer it into the brain of every teenager before the get out of High school.

Pug

What an amazing set of rationalizing "What If's".

At some point if you decide to ignore the advice of a 911 operator and follow someone, you are taking responsibility for the consequences of those actions. Maybe Trayvon Martin did something anyone would have done at the time, and maybe he was stupid, and maybe both . . . but he didn't create these circumstances, Zimmerman did.

That you can follow someone on the street, kill them, and not even be found guilty of manslaughter beggars the imagination.

Pug

As a 6'2" 300 pound Man, I have the luxury of going "I will never draw a weapon unless I intend to kill someone".

Assuming that is true of everyone in every situation is the most amazing egotism.

In testing the Mi-Go Phone did have some sound problems, occasional whispering effects, and a small percentage of violent madness. Also a somewhat larger percentage of non-violent madness, whimpering, screaming in the dark, fetal position, and hallucinations.

On the good side, unlimited data plan, and discounted rates for Miskatonic University students and faculty.

Pug

I was aware of a couple of those but - they really aren't consistent.

Now, it's feasible we have a 'Blind Man describing an Elephant' Scenario here - these are all different perspectives on the same underlying issue. But my judgement call is really that it doesn't feel like that. This feel far more like replication of work (and yes, lack of respect of constitutional limits) than an overarching plan.

There should be elephant sized footprints here - and I'm just not seeing them.

Pug

We can't 'know' this is false, but . . . we can look at what the implications would be if this were true.

This would require vast storage, incredible database crossreferencing, would imply certain kinds of information be available not only without warrants, but without ever needing to pull the original data. Not only would warrants be redundant, so would National Security Letters.

All without a single patriot in the government going public and blowing the lid off this, yet simultaneously putting this information in the hands of someone willing to shoot their mouth off on CNN.

Can, in theory, all this be true? Sure. It could happen. *Practically* can all this be true? No - too many conspirators have to work invisibly, never tipping their hands, never making a mistake. Just don't buy it.

Pug