This all well and nice, but when do I get my thinking cap?

Also, first first post. Yey me.

Partially I would agree, but there are still huge differences.
For one: Microsoft/Windows Update doesn't enable you to dowload and install new software, only update existing software (and to some extent drivers).
Second: iOS doesn't, AFAIK, allow you to not use App Store to install new software.
Third: Package managers like RPM, pkgsrc, emerge (if you want to call it a package manager), apt, and so on are tools to help you manage software installed on your computer and with updates. They do not limit you downloading software from other places and compiling it yourself, or indeed downloading and compiling software available in the package repository.
It's a little pears and oranges comparison to put apt (et. al.), Windows Update and App Store side by side since they are not really used in the same way.

You'll note I don't mention Software Update until now. It's because I haven't properly used MacOS since way-back-when, long before it was called MacOS X.

I don't want to sound like a fanboy, but it's hard not to when replying to parent. Performance per dollar is not the only metric, and by no means a proper metric for all purposes. It's like when you negotiate a raise. Your boss may offer you a 33% increase in pay, but if' you're making $3 an hour it doesn't amount to much. The same thing with the PPD metric. It doesn't show what work can be completed within a given amount of time, and for raw speed you pretty much have to go Intel today.

Parent is however right that Intel doesn't win every segement with regards to PPD, but as stated before; PPD is not the only metric and it's not always the proper metric.

Slight "Woosh!" to you too. As much as I hate to admit it, I know this reference and it's from The Last Action Hero. Oh Arnold, why hast thou forsaken us?!

Isn't civil disobediance the way for the public to say that law is wrong? Or more to the point, aren't laws supposed to reflect the moral and ethical values of a society? If that is true it follows that if enough people, say about 13% of swedes (current estimate I believe), actively decide that copyright infringement is acceptable, then the question on if laws should be changed to reflect that must be raised. The only thing being talked about right now is how to remove or limit what legal security we have left in the name of hindering copright infingement.

I'm all for copyright as a concept, but the laws right now are unreasonable. The author of a work will never have use for her/his work after death and copyright should at the very least end there (with a few exceptions). I would propose something like how it was in the US in the mid seventies, as I have understood it, with some additions.
When I create a copyrightable work I go to the proper patents and registration office and register the work, free of charge. The registration allows me sole use and ownership of the work for 10 years. After 10 years I get to renew my registration for a fee for another 5 years of sole use. After the 15 years are up I have to pay an increasing fee every year to keep ownership. Use before registraion puts the work in the public domain. Failure to pay a fee by its deadline puts the work in the public domain.

But that's just my $.02...

No, I think he didn't actually get the part, which is why he now sits in the Tingsrätten.

Exactly what you suggested. Rape and necrophilia and so on.

On the other hand, I would have thought the context implied that it did not fall realm of reasonably healty, and for claritys sake by healthy I mean without permanent physical or psychological trauma, sexual activities. A bit of [insert your less than outlandish fetish here] helps to spice up your sex life and, some suggest, keep the original passion in an intimate relationship.

Disclaimer; hot spices, sauces, fruits, vegetables, herbs and the like are not recommended to enhance sexual pleasure. There is a reason capsaicin is used as less lethal weapons.

At the risk of re-posting: where is the news in this? Hasn't modern psychology already established that it's disturbed or otherwise challanged individuals who turn to devient behavior? No matter if it's crime, "special" sex or what have you. It wasn't Marilyn Manson's music, although some of it might drive you to suicide, that made Klebold and Harris go shoot-em-up at Columbine High. It wasn't whatever the heck Kretschmer was doing while playing Far Cry 2 the night before going to Winnenden school. They were messed up people who would have done dumb shit no matter what they did before snapping. My $.02, but this just does not seem like news...more of a confirmation, I suppose.

Agreed that they could have developed their own. But it would've been a serious investment and risk for a company just starting to pick up steam again. It would have made, and did make, as it stands now, good business sense to choose a free base to build off of. But as for whether or not it would be otherwise beneficial I would suggest is pure speculation and whishful thinking. There is little use for a for profit entity to take into consideration the feelings of their customers in this regard. Even more so when talking about Apple. Sure, it's really nice, but the stereotypical Apple user doesn't care about it. What they care about is the logo and the "feeling" of the product, not whether it has software that "is as it should be" (ie. more or less open, in my opinion).

I would believe his point is that it was no grand gesture of Apples to keep WebKit open. They simply had to. KHTML probably was a good as any (better?) starting point when building Safari, and it just happened to be LGPLed. I would bet you insane amounts of money that if Apple could have, they would have kept WebKit closed up tighter than spandex.

Consider the following:
Your goal is to dissipate heat from the various components in your computer. If, instead of dissipating the heat into the air as per usual, you dissipate it using the suggested technology and lead the generated electricity back to the PSU you would decrease your net consumption from the grid (ie. not violating physics). The decrease though is probably not very big. Without any facts at hand at all regarding efficiancy of the heat-to-electricity (HTE) conversion I would pull a number out of my ass and say that you could, hopefully, decrease your net consumtion on the order of singles of percents (ie. <<10%). This does however also require that the HTE elements to dissipate heat from the components efficiently enough to keep your components cool. Also, as long as it does not require more energy (read electricity) to drive the process of making the excess heat to usable electricity in the computer, where inconsitent voltages and whatnot could be deal breakers, it's all sun and baby giggles.

While this is mostly a fun thought experiment for stationary computers, it could possibly make a difference for portable devices and their battery life. It could also, if the tech can be made small and efficient enough, be integrated into batteries such that they can recharge, albeit slowly, if not being discharged and warm enough (ie. not charging off of the heat discharge from the device itself).

Just my $.02 and if for no other reason it would be fun to try something like it =)

Indeed, relativistic velocities are very much within our grasp, but at 0.999c it would still take insane amouts of time to get anywhere interesting (read other stars, preferably with planets, and then preferably earth-like planets). Hence the need for superluminal travel. This does not however mean that the craft itself traveling is moving faster than the speed of light, relatively speaking (as in the case of worm holes).

Well yes, either of those four could be needed. Unless, of course, we devise some sort of superluminal menas of travel. Such means could be (stable) worm holes or perhaps even, for the lack of a better description, warp drive. While not likly, it's not impossible.

...no one has said it outright: DRM (and plain old copy protection if you care for the distinciton) only punishes those who care to buy the software. While this might not have been the intent this is the reality of the matter.
Stardock saw it, why can't EA (et al.)?