Well... this is a way lesser evil. But still vala is not in my heart, and tomboy has to go away too: gnome official dependence on mono must become optional.

Have those people ever thought about the scalability of their technologies and the issues that will reveal themselves at mass market scale??????????

In an "intellectual property" (patent on your neurons!) world, the best balance would be the GNU (A)(L)GPL for long term insurance of open source software quality. Once IP is gone (patent system etc...), license won't matter because everything will be public domain (everything not physical will be free to copy/modify/improve/share)... since then, GNU (A)(L)GPL in the meantime.

... and how much GNU GPL violation? And how much money is forbidden to open source and free operating systems because of not legitimate and digital prison alike operating systems?

You mean the code does not not have interfaces for the UI and OS??? You mean they wrote 2 clients that do *not* share code? Are you making a fool of me?

Your employees are internal... your users/clients are external... if you distribute a device to your users/clients, it's external and your must publish GNU (L)GPL code. One of the main purposes of the GNU (A)(L)GPL is to have a legal leverage in order to get optimal code.

It depends on the country laws, contract and employer.

My contract is based on french telecom legal template which says:
- code specific to the assigned work: all copyrights belong to the employer.
- code *not* specific to any assigned work:copyrigths are shared by the employer and the employee (you need an agreement to work on that code). Namely if the employee departs from the company, he will keep the copyrights.

Of course, there may be more about this in the french law (I was told, french copyrights on code always belong to the employee). And of course, an employer aware of the open source ways would let the copyrights go to the employee or at least be shared.

The main issue with the shared copyrights: the employer would have the right to close the code produced by the employee. And that's a very big issue for GNU GPL coders! You know... those guys who want to have the best open source code installed by default on all systems.

May we have those builds, even unsupported?

Internet is not anonymous... wow they are smart! :P What they don't say: IPs can be poison and computers behind some IPs could be compromised. Then they may identify some IPs which share some content. But do they check the content? And above all, they cannot link what happend with an IP to its owner. They cannot prove it with inexpensive systems.

I bought with my money a PS3 digital prison for 300 €.
Something is not right...

Indeed, many evil companies are doing similar. For instance, as a GNU/Linux fan, I can see "the pressure" done on some "under the spot" forums related to open source. Moreover there were naughty rumors (in France) about some companies (or their well-known proxies) hiring students on internship-level pay to lobby on those forums. Personnally, I do believe that the reality is way uglier.

That war between google and China is non-sense... it does too much favor a company that sells locked-closed sources operating systems. Fishy. Are they behind all this?

... hundreds of bot nets were created... but they got 1, they are happy.

How much for this regional router? :) I bet diffserv/IPv6 label, then traffic classes, are properly supported. At last death for the POTS? Now: I have roughtly 1Mb/s upload link... with FTTH I will have 50 Mb/s then 200 Mb/s (like in Japan). That means 50 times and then 200 times... :D Who said personal cloud?

If those infos are matched on the "workers" database, ok, if not... 400 millions people data is nothing for a custom made database with modern technologies (i.e. do *not* use an SQL engine).