According to the actual study, the numbers are not entirely so definitive:

women: 30.9% iOS, 22.8% Android

men: 28.6% iOS, 32.6% Android

Clearly a 2% preference for iOS means it represents the entire female gender! /s

And the poor customers are stuck with the choice of either paying 200% higher costs, or having to spend time and energy travelling to the nearest village that doesn't charge outrageous prices (assuming they aren't all controlled by an armed Flour Cartel, or the industry is a monopoly). In the end the customer suffers.
It may be Capitalism at its best but its also totally amoral in my opinion. I'll take government price regulation in industries that are providing essential materials (i.e. necessary food items) any day.

Look at the cable TV industry here in Victoria BC. There was a system where we had competition between Rogers and Shaw Cable. Rogers and Shaw reached an agreement and divided up western Canadian cities so that they each controlled certain cities and there was no competition. The price stabilized at about $20/mo for basic cable services. The Government stepped in and added the ability for other companies to participate in the market, but the barrier to entry costs are quite considerable, so few can afford to compete. However, Telus (a phone company) started offering cable TV services via their infrastructure. The cost was about the same initially, but now that Digital TV is the only option, the price has almost doubled (about $35) for the same service. Telus didn't lower there prices to compete, they merely matched the going rate, then everyone raised their rates with the switch to digital. The only person to lose out is the customer, again. Competition didn't actually work at all there. I am on Telus at the moment (and the service is lousy by the way, and in order to get any channels worth watching it costs about $65/mo, but that can easily ramp up. If you bundle your internet and phone with your TV signal, their top end package is $185/mo). I just don't buy the Randian "the free market is always right and always works" concept at all. There are too many examples where it doesn't seem to work for me at all.

Some day people are going to go into those craters and i can only imagine what they'll find.
We have no idea if the ice is just a flat sheet or if it's formed into giant snowflake like ice crystals.
what if, when we get there, it looks like this cave discovered in Mexico:
http://www.crystalinks.com/crystalsmexico.jpg

I fully agree that the ice is valuable, and should be mined. I'm just saying that preserving ONE crater will be even more valuable, in the fullness of time.

Ding! Ding! Ding! This is the correct answer. What most people don't understand is that the venues are charging less than people are willing to pay. Demand is greater than supply and so the price goes up. Scalpers are there to correct the situation. The only way to "beat the scalpers" is to price the tickets appropriately, meaning to "auction" off the tickets to the highest bidder. Then, if the performers/venue feel the prices are too high, they can perform another show. This is the way the free market economy works.

Don't forget, there are a number of people, "grass roots" types, who have become totally enthralled with politics by smear and propaganda. Thus, if Al Gore has been making money, he must be evil, propagandizing theories he doesn't believe so he can sell carbon offsets; although those who accuse him of that are normally those who proclaim that everything must be made into a commercial business in order to have value. I didn't hear them objecting to Cheney's ties to Halliburton and the extremely favorable contracts that they got in Iraq. Then there are those who may know a thing or two about science, but only a thing or two. They seem to believe that if you a) flood the offices of the British warming scientists with requests for information, then it proves a conspiracy if when, later, b) someone steals the e-mails and finds some resentful e-mails, and that proves that the theory is wrong; who think that if you can show that one fact is questionable, the whole theory has crashed; who look at a graph that goes up steadily except for one brief period in one year, and then forever trumpet, "But the temperatures are not rising!" They don't seem to care that this requires knowing collaboration between huge, worldwide organizations and the absolute corruption of one respected scientific body after another. They are not Creationists or truly crazy religionists, they are just doing politics. In fact, what they're saying shows a profound disrespect for science, because they are putting politics over science. In a society that depends on technology for the preservation of our civilization, this is extremely dangerous, and proof that we don't have a "conservative" movement at all in America, but a rabidly reactionary one. When Glenn Beck, who is the most popular voice of "conservatives" today, says that "progressives" are the problem, and then proceeds to speak of progressives as a cancer, that's just a tiny bit like calling Jews "rats," and "vermin." William Buckley, who did not give liberals an easy ride, would be disgusted with the movement conservatives today, as he was with McCarthy, and the John Birch Society, and other effluences of mindless hatred of everything modern, or, in his last days, of the neocons who took us to war in Iraq.

You're assuming every event always sells out.

Explain this to me: these guys bought 883 of the 1000 available 2006 Rose Bowl tickets. How exactly is that doing anyone a service? People still have to buy the tickets, so why does it do people a service when they have to buy them second-hand for more money versus just buying them from the box office for face value?

Then the buying of politicians would be supplanted by the buying of judges for the purpose of getting rid of both laws and people they don't like.

How does one balance an altruistic need to volunteer information to the police against the general "don't talk to the police" principle of avoiding self-incrimination?

Unfortunately, the answer has to be: you don't. (BTW, did you listen to the "Don't talk to the police" video? Everyone should.)

As a first approximation (without the benefit of law school and years as a practicing attorney, or years as a police detective this is what you have to go on) you must assume that law enforcement and the criminal justice system turns every expectation you have of fairness and reasonable behavior on its head.

It is as simple as this - if you are completely innocent of any wrong doing and tell nothing but the absolute objective truth, and the police come upon an erroneous piece of information (say, a mistaken witness) that contradicts anything you say, then the contradiction with the false data can by itself send you to jail. There is no way to protect yourself against this.

If you had read Apple's report, you would have known that this is wrong. One of the companies that got caught _did_ have their contract cancelled. And $2.2 million got paid to workers who had been charged unfair fees by employment agencies.

>>>You would be perfectly free to give away Wi-Fi but if someone downloaded a movie and you were sued you couldn't use the defense "oh well I have an open wifi connection so it must have been someone else.

So?

People come-and-go from public buildings all the time. If a product goes missing, do they hold the owner of the building responsible? No. They figure it must be one of the anonymous persons. - What they are doing here is the equivalent of demanding you show an ID every time you come-and-go from a store, mall, restaurant, et cetera. It's an excessive imposition.

Since all that is in the database is the license plate, time stamp and location, I do not see the problem. There is no link between the license number and any other personal, and therefore confidential, information in the database. As to the usefulness of the information that is collected, the repo man just does a search on the license number to find the locations.

The Geneva convention was set to clearly divide militaries from civilians. If there is a double-standard in there, is it that States agreed to follow these rules but not the rebels.

If you are wearing a military uniform, using an aircraft with military marking, and target enemy militaries, you are doing war.

If you disguise yourself as a civilian, you are a spy or a terrorist, and outside of the convention.

Although completely unfair, your Afghani rebel is free to openly charge to Vegas in his non-existent plane, wearing his non-existent uniform to kill the remote pilot. But he cannot cowardly hide behind a disguise to kill. Maybe unfair to non-States, but those are the rules.

Once you come to accept that, you will see that you post was, maybe unwillingly, a troll.

(And yes, I am throwing away mod points because no one had the smarts to make that point.)

I haven't tried it but it looks like a good idea. http://www.cyberguys.com/product-details/?productid=36218&sk=MC71419
Format it ext3 and then share it SMB for any OS.

An "open standard" is publicly available and either 1) royalty-free or 2) licensed in a "reasonable and non-discriminatory" way (RAND).

If you go royalty-free, that rules out H.264 and HE-AAC in the DVB-T digital television standard. Somehow I don't see that happening in Hungary.

In truth, almost all telecommunication standards are royalty-free or RAND licensed. All ITU standards must be.