Moreover, how many medications affect young adults differently than they affect adults? Improper administration of a powerfully chemical substance to an individual whose body is undergoing significant chemical changes may have long term adverse affects? News at 11 folks. Show me the study that says prolonged Marijuana use in adults (30 years+) for 6 years shows an identical increased risk.

And in other news a new study has found that younger generations are more apt to adopt and utilize new $technology. This study further explains that older generations can't possibly conceive how this generation could use $technology, because since they can't imagine themselves using it obviously no one else could be using it so frequently. The younger generation would have pointed out this rationale is solipsistic, but unfortunately they have no idea what that word means.

Really? This is ground-breaking news? We needed a study for this?

Downloading for the purpose of viewing != Infringement.

You are only "infringing" if you are redistributing the works; i.e. seeding while torrenting or using a P2P network where users can also download from you. Merely acquiring the content in and of itself does not constitute "infringement" per the title you quoted. Ergo, even if you acquire $100,000 worth of content from say, Usenet or another newsgroup (where it's an HTTP download only), you are not guilty of any such crime.

Just because a method for acquiring digital content is common doesn't mean it's the only avenue, so to assume that everyone who downloads a movie or an mp3 has done so in a manner which also redistributes the content and is thus guilty of any form of infringement (criminal or otherwise), is somewhat myopic.

Y'know, this would be a great way to learn about epidemiology and the way viruses are spread, all while wrapping it in a fun and enticing pretext; much like your professor did with the History of Rock Music course. Besides, having people aware of and preparing for the inevitable zombie apocalypse is never a bad thing.

I think it's funny that you insist you are a Linux user and tote the operability of the iPod as the major driving force. I'm curious as to what distro you used that you had no problems syncing your media collection with iTunes. The major reason why iPod got the failing grade from the tech-literate masses over simpler, streamlined, players (e.g. Sansa and the like) was that in spite of its open source foundation it was hopeless inaccessible. Also, you have to take into account WHEN the iPod came into popularity. iTunes was the first truly successful platform that sold Mp3s without getting the wrath and fury of the MAFIAA. They were the only source people could ethically acquire media from and profited from their closed-source monopoly. It become fashionable to legally acquire your media and thus became fashionable to own an iPod. Soon owning an Apple product became synonymous which being tech/fashion-forward. MS tried to compete, but came late to the portable media game and we all know how well that worked out for them.

That being said, I was able to store quite a significant portion of my media irrespective of what OS I was using years before iPod existed. And I *still* use that technology because I can replace all the working parts, upgrade the storage space via SD, and all for about a tenth of the cost of owning an iPod. Likewise, the iPhone added 3G calling capabilities to the iPod (along with a more robust interface) and marketed it as a different product. I'm sorry, but when I shop for a PHONE, it better be able to function, 100% reliably as a PHONE first. Anything beyond cellular service should add to the experience, not detract from it. Apple choosing AT&T as their exclusive partner significantly hurt them, and as a result RIM was able to establish firmer footing on the PDA market the were beginning to dominate. By-the-by, I know lots of people who have the iPhone for the sake of having it, but still use their Nokias (and I could SSH on my Nokia way before there as a functioning app for it on the iPhone).

Moreover, the iPad and iPhone are decidedly lacking in the everyday features I use the most. Full and unabashed Flash and PDF support comes to mind just off the top of my head.

I think, for a platform that is really in its infancy stages (if it's that old, really), Android is leaps and bounds beyond MS and Apple. Apple and MS have had the luxury of being in the OS market for generations, Google wasn't even immensely popular until the early-mid part of this decade. For a company with 1/3rd of the life of its competitors, I'd say it's kicking ass. Yes, Android is not without its fault, but given the time to mature and find its niche, I am extremely confident it will be a fierce competitor for all of Apple's wares. Moreover, Apple has always marketed itself as a company that provides technology "for the rest of us" or for people who lack the technical aptitude with no desire to ever cultivate those skills. Forgive me, but I don't appreciate a company specializing in "forward-thinking" technology treating me like I'm a moron. Let the majority have their technological prison, I'd prefer a tablet or slate I can actually, y'know, use.

Lastly, I don't walk around in a garbage bag, or drive a POS Geo. I don't shirk aesthetics for functionality. As a Gentoo and Enlightenment user I enjoy being on the bleeding edge of pretty, but I can have both my aesthetic AND robust functionality without compromising or sacrificing either.