> And what about all those customers who purchase their papers from newsstands or vending machines? Do they have to turn over their personal information? No

They are not subscribers, so your argument is baseless. Subscribers are people who have an ongoing relationship with the publication.

I can see why he expects this information... he's a publisher who's spent the lion's share of his career dealing in print media. If people were subscribing to the dead-tree edition of the Journal, he would have not just their names but their home addresses and probably phone numbers as well. Now subscribers want to pay for the same publication--the Wall Street Journal--and the publisher expects to have the same information they would if they were sending the physical newspaper. What's the big deal? Just cause something is delivered electronically rather than via the post, that makes basic subscriber information suddenly privacy-threatening?

I'm as paranoid about privacy concerns as the next [rational] person, but I don't see what the big deal is here.

> as the abused get smarter, the abusers also get smarter at an equal or quicker pace

As an Apple consumer my whole adult life, I am getting fed up with their abuse. There is a freedom I am entitled to when I purchase their (or anyone's) products .. it is the freedom of OWNERSHIP, to do with it what I wish (that isn't outright illegal or causes harm to others), and Apple seems hell-bent on stripping me of that freedom. I expect this kind of draconian top-down use-policing from Microsoft .. not from Apple. It's getting to the point where I can't even tell the difference.

What Napster were YOU using? I could find anything and everything I could think up to search for, and some of my musical tastes are quite remote. I used to be able to bet my co-workers (and win, typically) on attempts to stump Napster. THOSE were the days that had record industry executives spending their nights trembling beneath sweat-drenched sheets.

You're assuming linear trajectories. In the solar system, EVERYTHING is moving along a curve. Nothing hurls straight at a standstill Earth only to have the moon swing through its path and take the hit instead, which is what you seem to be arguing. All objects in the solar system are being carried by the sun's gravity and thus are at varying-sized elliptical orbits, so it is not too difficult to imagine numerous parabolic paths sliding between Earth and its moon to impact it on the inner side.

I honestly read it that way. I was seeing the word "up" as being implied. (Queue up the people arguing for .. etc etc). Either word fits without changing the basic intent of the statement.

> I'd be willing to seed that game.

Posts like this are why I love the internet.

Dude ... what? The iTMS was selling music and media for YEARS before the iPhone was released.

"I notice you're still working with polymers."

"Still? What else would I be working with?"

"Ahh, what else indeed..."

"Corporal would you open this book up to the part that says that where the mess hall is?"

"Well, Lt Kaffee, that's not in the book either, sir."

"You mean to say the entire time you've been at Gitmo you've never had a meal?"

"No sir, three squares a day, sir."

"I don't understand. How could you know where the mess hall is if it's not in this book?"

"I guess I just followed the crowd at chow time, sir."

This is the creepiest thing I have read in a long time. Is this real? Am I the only one who see this device as the basis of an episode of Rod Serling's Twilight Zone?

OK I'll bite.

A bank robber flees the crime scene in a car going 90MPH. Would you permit the police to give chase, given that they would have to violate traffic safety laws to do so? Or should the police only drive the speed limit?

Another scenario: A man is holding a hostage at gunpoint. Should police draw their weapons and aim them, even though threatening violence (or death) against a fellow citizen is against the law?

The police are permitted a good deal of latitude in their behavior in order to enforce laws. It would be impossible for them to do so otherwise. And yes, a cop posing as a pross or a drug dealer or a 12 year old girl in a chatroom gives people lots of reasons to reconsider engaging in illegal behaviors. That's the whole point, comrade.

Your Newton 2100 (1997) was killed by the Palm Pilot (1996).

Apple created the modern PDA, but Palm got it down to its correct size and eviscerated Apple's market share. By the time Apple's technology was maturing into an useful device, Palm had achieved a strong dominance and WindowsCE devices were coming up hard and fast.

You have no idea how pissed off the MxO community has ALWAYS been regarding SOE's refusal to market and adequately support this game. Most players now posting on the official SOE board are refusing to ever spend money on another Sony product, holding them directly accountable for the game's failure.

The game itself is actually quite an achievement. The environment is vast and magnificent even at mid-range video settings, the character models are the best human MMO avatars I've ever seen including lifelike animations, moods, emotes and facial expressions, the system of crafting is VERY extensive (and not very complicated, despite what a previous poster tried to argue earlier). The combat system of "Interlock" is fun and challenging, unlike any other MMO's, allowing for different fighting styles (Aikido vs. Karate vs. Kung Fu, for instance), and the MOST appropriate IP for an MMO thus far in the industry. And SOE basically let it wither and die with virtually no marketing, no promotion and not even a decently-sized staff. For the past year and a half, the game had no animator. Since January, the game has had no devs at all and was just on "autopilot".

Basically, SOE screwed this game, and it's a damned shame as its potential was so vast.

No. SOE won't allow anyone to host a private server despite numerous requests, citing copyright issues and co-ownership with Warner Brothers.