I would be more inclined to that position if the current jury had not just returned a verdict form which awarded Apple damages whilst simultaneously finding that there was no patent infringement... (See the live blog from 4.50 EDT)

Which is a significant problem with having juries in thorny, complex civil trials. Emotion, procedural rules and the voire dire triumph over expertise and reason. It can work in your favour or against you, but it is impossible to verify that the thinking processes of the jury are rigorous. At least judges sitting on their own have to explain the process by which they reached their decisions. Here the reasoning process appears to be a badly filled in sudoku...

And you managed to say it in Lolcats. Impressive!

Dear sir,

Twitter would love to invite you aboard: you are just the sort of person we need. Feel free to share your thoughts, and your contemporaneous fecal status, with millions of people around the world! Just keep it within 140 characters, ok? Otherwise, TL;DR

You don't think your thesis proves too much? This would suggest that every picture of every child legally incapable of "consent" to the taking of that photograph is thereby illegal. I'm sure the Disney Channel is thereby loaded with illegal content...

I've never viewed procrastination as dangerous. I dare say that none of us here on /. would disagree.

Unless of course you're a member of the bomb squad. In which case, how/why read e-mails mid task?