You don't install outside the supported distro you paid support for. Anything outside that isn't production ready. Unless zfs ships as a supported addon with RHEL it's not production ready in any meaningful sense of the word - stability has nothing to do with it.

If you get a client with your network, it comes preconfigured.. so that's not a difference.

There *are* a lot of sucky sip clients. There are also some excellent ones.

zfs doesn't support volume reshaping, which is fine for large datacentres with huge budgets but no use for smaller setups.. even at work if I were to say 'to add an extra Tb to the array we're going to have to spend $5000 to buy a duplicate one and recreate it' I'd be laughed at. So it's a nonstarter.

btrfs does, but it's not ready yet.. so like Urban Garlic, I'm still waiting, since things like dedup will make a huge difference.

I'd be intrigued to know what app they're using that's returning the code and expiry date.. that information is encrypted on the card and none of the free nfc tag readers I've tried even attempt to decrypt it (I don't trust the banking system to use half decent encryption so not discounting the possibility entirely).

Of course it could just be the typical bullshit scare story that newspapers come out with..

That comparison misses the point, though - for most people, the goal isn't to have as many channels available as possible, it's to have something to watch whenever you want to watch TV. I currently have around 100 TV channels (all free to air), but I'm not guaranteed to find something I want to watch when I choose to watch TV.

I used to pay to get around 300 channels, but stopped when I realised that I still wasn't able to find something I wanted to watch whenever I turned on the TV set, and that when I did find channels I wanted to watch, they tended to be from the free to air set anyway.

A simple question illustrates the point - would you prefer 5,000 nearly identical home shopping channels for the same money you pay now, or would you prefer your existing TV package? I suspect you'd find that most people would prefer your current TV package, with its mere 200 channels, to a package of 5,000 channels that they're mostly not interested in.

If all my traffic goes via VPN to Sweden (or almost any other country around the world), what are they going to do?

Outlaw VPN usage?

Gives a whole new meaning to 'my computer crashed' though...

And that's where the debate lies. LightSquared's license permits them two uses of the frequencies licensed:

1. For satellite to earth communication, provided they ensure that the transmissions from the satellite do not leak out of their licensed bands.
2. As a later waiver, made after the spectrum was initially licensed: For earth to earth and earth to space communication, provided that they ensure that their earth-based transmitters do not interfere with earth-based receivers designed to pick up satellite to earth transmissions in neighbouring bands.

LightSquared's argument is that they have met the second term of their license if they ensure that their earth-based transmitters do not leak out of their licensed bands, even if they interfere with licensed users of neighbouring bands; note that the FCC has been clear that one way to meet the second requirement is to replace receivers of the neighbouring bands with ones that cope with your interference, an option LS has rejected as impractical, as they cannot find affordable receivers that have both the GPS abilities of the receivers they're replacing and better rejection of LS's signals.

I'm typing this on a Dell N-series laptop that came with Ubuntu pre-installed. I bought the most expensive Linux preloaded laptop Dell would sell me, complete with all the options they offered (including things like the insurance), partly to make the point to Dell that not everyone who buys a Linux preloaded machine is aiming to cheap out. I find it interesting that I cannot find numbers from Dell on how much they actually made (on a like-for-like) basis from the Ubuntu preloaded N series laptops as compared to the Windows laptops with the same hardware; I do wonder if they found that there is actually a niche market for them, in which they could make money, but chose to serve the bulk market instead.

On full manufactured typical items that are readily available and have competition. But what about when you want to replace/fix something that is simple, but costs a lot due to the manufacturer being the only one that supplies them?
An example? How about a bit of plastic on a BMW bumper that saves replacing the entire bumper? (which you can only get from BMW or, if you are very lucky, a scrap yard)

From his reply on http://frameworkdev.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/my-open-source-dilema/

" I have no such agreement. It was done on my own time with the company’s full support. They knew it was open source. I think now that I’m not at the company, they want to “control” it. As far as I understand it, they need to abide by the license. I think the tricky part is compelling them to abide by the license."

and

"I was not paid on W2, and I never signed the rights away. I think your right, that the code is GPL. It’s out there. It is what it is. I’m going to report this to GNU project and warn them that if they don’t bring to code back in-line with the license, that I will send a letter to their customers to make them aware of the situation."

Bandwidth costs money, an ISP has to have caps which realistically keeps overall usage to a level which the ISP can sustain with a given number of customers. If they don't and are offering "unlimited data" then they are over-subscribing their lines, lying or both. They can also over-subscribe their lines by simply selling their service to more customers than they can manage.

Obviously it can then be "managed" by traffic management, blocking protocols such as p2p etc but no-one likes these measures (especially here). I don't like them and I pay for an ISP that manages their data capacity honestly with caps and you buy bandwidth. It costs more, but it's worth it for me and they keep stats that show the number of unerrored seconds and buy capacity to keep up rather than traffic manage.

There is no such thing as "unlimited data" - period.

This.It wouldn't make a difference, as it would just mean everyone would continue doing nothing, and legitimate users would just pay more.

My ISP gives me a /27 for free on my home network and I enjoy not having to use NAT and I am using the addresses (well more than 16 of them). Now why should I have to pay an extra $30 for my net connection because the rest of the Internet providers haven't performed due diligence with this issue (and since my ISP has also been IPv6 ready since 2002 they are obviously doing their job properly)

That is kind of how it works in the UK (See how British Telecom has been split up).

BT Openreach was created to "Ensure that all rival operators have equality of access to BT's own local network" and it works pretty well, I have a BT line and BT Wholesale broadband, but provided by a different company with their own service levels, prices etc. And there are a lot of ISP's like this.

If an ISP doesn't want to use BT's infrastructure in the exchange, they can even install their own whilst still taking advantage of that piece of cable going from the exchange to the home, laid down by public money.

How is it not obvious to the US politicians that this is a sensible move? More to the point, how the hell did something sensible happen in a UK Parliament?