Follow this advice, but don't expect that the same thing won't happen.

That would be the Quaker position....

"That of root in everyone."

A Panentheist would see root in everyone and everything. My toaster could be root.

Don't get me wrong on the AP. I don't mind them printing those stories, I just don't need them in order to get those stories.

The place I disagree with you is that, I don't think it's up to me to pay them - in my case The Denver Post - in the hopes that they'll improve their coverage. I tend to think that they should improve their coverage and in return they'll earn my dollar. If I pay them now all they'll do is assume that I want more Broncos coverage, more police blotter stuff, and more reprints.

Currently, I'm more likely to get more investigative type local stories from the more hyper-local news weeklies, than from the Post. Even Westword, which doesn't look good being pulled out of a brief case in business society - does a better job of doing the research and getting a story out.

The "paper of record" label is a burden for the Post that it can't live up to at the moment. I think there's some steps they could do to become relevant - to me - but many of those steps would would be hard for them to swallow. They aren't what they were, and they don't know what they are now. My patronage won't solve that problem for them.

My local newspaper has little more than sports, police blotter items, and AP reprints. It may have been the last bastion, but that bastion has crumbled.

"...staff only allowed to use Windows with a supporting business case." That's why MS feels scroogled.

In the US Drucker's 20/1 would still be radical. 40/1 might sound reasonable after Drucker's opening bid. Even if we set it to a 1m/1 ratio, we'll have someone whine about socialism. But, the complaint won't have much traction at that end of the spectrum. Somewhere in between there is a range that's close to optimal, and I think it reasonable for society to negotiate what that range is and even codify it. A hard ratio, seems like a poor way to go about it.

The Declaration of Independence says "all men are created equal." Not the Constitution.

Trying to read his article while ignoring the MS connection, I struggle with what's written. It just doesn't square with my reality. The only place I can connect his assertions with experience is with Outlook, everything else: browser access, Mac (yes Maverick), iOS, Android, et al I've not had any issues. I'm not genius, but his assertions either make me think he's incompetent or just making stuff up.

Google wins either way. Best case scenario is if 1GB starts to roll out everywhere ahead of Google Fiber. That way they don't have to muck about with the infrastructure, and they still get people using their services at the higher rate.

Shouldn't it be, "Provided the plaintiff can show standing, the trial can go forward"? IANAL either, but it seems to me that Google will now have to go to trial, and the plaintiffs will have to make their claims stick. I'm not entirely up on the case, but wasn't this all about standing? ... not a response - to lazy to do another post.... The courts position strikes demonstrates a major issue I have with originalism. Arguing that Congress only had a very narrow idea of what radio was just demands a constant rewriting of law or force new technologies into the wild west of civil action. No judgement involved for anyone including judges.

I wouldn't have to own a car. That would put me on a cloud a little closer to heaven.

I imagine auto generating video is more than linking previously created video based upon content? Seems to me that StudyBlue.com already does that. I'm trying to picture the auto-generated video and all I get in my head is an image of Max Headroom reading lines with some background images of Europe.