I know you are trying to be funny, but it's worth pointing out a couple of things. None of those other things are as immersive as video games. These are kids, remember? They really do learn from experience. The effect will be far greater coming from an activity that totally absorbs your attention by allowing you to take part in it. Actual violence is provably more effective - kids that grow up in violent households usually become violent themselves. Lastly, I don't recall the last time someone said that actual violence was OK while video games are not. Humour works best when it keeps some sort of tie with reality.

What a strange article. Lots of words, but no clear meaning comes through to me. He seems to be taking one sentence from a Canonical license and saying that it proves there's lots of problems for open source because copyrights fwibble a gwabbit. Well, if he's making up stuff I might as well start making up stuff too. Copyrights are what keep open source open - i.e. you can't ignore the license and stop other people using the open source code you distribute without breaking copyright law yourself.

I really don't see the problem. Contributed code where copyright is assigned to the company can be distributed under a license specified by the company it was contributed to. How is this different from any other company that takes in code? Code that is already under the GPL stays under the GPL - you can't hijack it for your own license, thanks to the copyright laws. If Canonical start being bastards and distributing copyright-assigned contributed code under a non-free license then people will stop contributing. The stuff they have already distributed under a free license remains free forever and they can't revoke it.

Exactly! Who needs to write cross-platform stuff? It's much better to re-write the code for each OS and device. That way the developers get paid 6 or 7 times for the same code. What's wrong with that?

You forgot: "Fucking great advert splatted in the middle of the screen, on top of the text." No idea what it was for. As soon as I see one of those I close the tab.

So was it purchased at a public auction or for an undisclosed amount? Unless you have some weird auctions in Oregon it would be difficult not to disclose the amount.

So BP and DuPont aren't a bunch of bastards? It's not their fault they were led astray by the possibility of screwing over the planet to make a few bucks? Are they the real victims here, maybe? Maligned, just for taking advantage of an opportunity to act like bastards. Poor things.

They are not a website. Did you not even read the summary? Christ.

Why do we need to justify it in these terms anyway? What is wrong with doing science just to find things out? Maybe as a species we should try to have loftier ideals in life, rather than grubbing around in the dirt with the bankers, trying to justify our curiosity and thirst for knowledge by thinking up with ways it will make money?

If I have the time, I always visit a new phishing site and put in bank details. Not real ones, obviously. I'm hoping that maybe there is a slim chance that somewhere out there, I might have just annoyed a phisher.

Not really. If Microsoft keep winning their patent suits then from their point of view the patent system is hunky dory and they will continue supporting it and using it themselves, to stifle their competition. If Microsoft lose and it hurts enough, then it might force them to rethink their patent strategy. If the US software patent system hurts them enough and keeps hurting them, they might start lobbying to change it.

Just to clarify - the "researcher" is employed by a private company that he founded himself. There is no tax money involved. This is not your tax dollars/pounds at work, this is a private individual, working for his own private company generating some publicity for himself. Take a look at his website. http://www.williamtp.com/ Once again - there is no public money involved.

This is not "scientists hard at work at Cambridge". As a scientist who actually works in Cambridge doing real research, it's pretty offensive to see this phrase attached to a story about a single person (who is not a scientist) drumming up some publicity by releasing a press release about some random old cobblers he's supposedly calculated using his super duper computer program. Can we just all try to be a little less gullible please?

It's the NHS - you don't get a bill.

Good lord! How DARE they want to ride their bikes wearing clothes that are comfortable. They should be persecuted until they stop, or you feel better about yourself - whichever happens first.

Everybody who gives even the smallest shit about the way Sky treat their customers should immediately unsubscribe to all Sky services.

But that would mean that they couldn't watch football. Oh well. It was a nice idea. Carry on screwing everyone with impunity Sky.