Linux and a lot of GNU software can an surely have been used to enable the killing of thousands, but we will not be blaming Stallman and Torvalds for that.

Yes, but how much money have oppressive regimes put directly into the pockets of Stallman and Torvalds?

I've gotten several notices from Charter regarding my supposed sharing of stuff using the eDonkey network. The notice in part looks like this:

Dear Charter Communications:

The Entertainment Software Association ("ESA") is a U.S. trade association that represents the intellectual property interests of numerous companies that publish interactive games for video game consoles, personal computers, handheld devices and the Internet (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ESA members"). ESA is authorized to act on behalf of ESA members whose copyright and other intellectual property rights it believes to be infringed as described herein.

ESA is providing this notice pursuant to the Section 512 of Title 17 of the U.S. Code (as enacted by the 'Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act') to make Charter Communications aware that the IP Address identified below is using the services and systems of Charter Communications to infringe the exclusive copyright and other rights of one or more ESA members. This notice is addressed to you as the agent designated by Charter Communications to receive notifications of claimed infringement.

Based on the information at its disposal on 24 Feb 2009 08:13:42 GMT, ESA has a good faith belief that the subscriber using the IP address 66.XXX.XXX.XXX is infringing the copyright rights of one or more ESA members by copying and distributing unauthorized copies of game products (through peer-to-peer or similar software/services), in violation of applicable copyright laws, through internet access that Charter Communications provides directly to the 66.XXX.XXX.XXX or through a downstream provider that purchases this access for 66.XXX.XXX.XXX. The copyrighted works that have been infringed include but are not limited to:

Title: WWE Smackdown! vs. RAW
Notice ID: 825XXXXX
Infringement Source: eDonkey
Infringement Timestamp: 24 Feb 2009 04:16:42 GMT
Infringement Last Documented: 24 Feb 2009 04:16:42 GMT
Infringer Username: 31765E8B8C0E5B88C60C1837A54XXXXX
Infringing Filename: WWE Smackdown VS Raw 2009.cso
Infringing Filesize: 974144108
Infringer IP Address: 66.XXX.XXX.XXX
Infringer DNS Name: XX-XXX-XXX-XXX.dhcp.bycy.mi.charter.com
Infringer Port ID: 35986
Infringer URL: ed2k://|file|WWE Smackdown VS Raw 2009.cso|974144108|6D85B916A468073D52EC11168C7XXXXX|/

The only thing I've ever used eDonkey for was acquiring pr0n. I've never transferred or shared any type of executable. And my wifi network is secured with WPA2 with a strong, 10 character preshared-key. I've gotten two or three of these types of notices so obviously there's something really wrong with how they're determining who the "bad guys" are.

Ever use one of these cards in conjunction with a credit card? They have your real info now.

now you can disagree with me that sony products are usually better, but you can't ignore them.

Er, why not? I've ignored Sony for years and I still buy a fair share of electronics. I would strongly disagree with you that they make the best of anything (except maybe gaming console, but I've still never owned a PS of any kind). 20 years ago, they used to make the best TV's. That's not the case anymore. And they've never made the best MP3 player, audio equipment, photography gear, or PCs.

I'm not sure how any reasonably well-informed person could swallow Sony's marketing angle. What they're really good at is projecting the image that you've bought into.

Uh, that's the purpose of the judge. To, well, judge was is relevant and what is not.

netcat ("nc" on most Linux distros) provides the same functionality. However, it's also more flexible in that it allows you to test UDP ports and you can easily set it up to listen for incoming connections on an arbitrary port. It's a great tool for troubleshooting firewall issues.

Slashdot is open source. Gawker's code is not.

I work for a small start-up. We have something like 2,500 square feet of office space, including private offices for most of six people there. We also have no servers (everything is cloud-based) and everyone uses a notebook, wifi, and cell/cordless phones. What tends to happen is that 2/3rd of the floorspace is empty at any given time. We all tend to congregate in the centrally-located conference room. If people need to make a private call or really concentrate on something, they'll steal away to an office and then return later.

This behavior isn't dictated by management, it just happens. I've found out that if I sit in my office for most of the day, I feel out of the loop (even with constant email exchanges). There are some downsides to being constantly plugged-in to everything like that, but overall, I feel it's a net-positive. A great amount of collaboration just emerges.

Using front companies that present themselves as marketing or advertising agencies, Choicepoint (since purchased by LexisNexis) buys data from pizza delivery places. Apparently it's a great way to be able to correlate unpublished or cellular phone numbers to a particular address.

Kinda useless to give them all cell phones without first beefing up the wireless and Internet infrastructure. That part might be a bit more difficult and time-consuming.

I use both Rackspace and EC2 for different applications. One big advantage of Rackspace (Slicehost) for smaller projects is the ability to assign multiple public IPs to a single instance. This comes in handy when running multiple SSL websites without needing to spin up an additional instance.

Fire hydrants put out about 5000 gallons per minute. A gallon of water weighs 8.345 lbs and 150 tons is 300,000 lbs. Therefore, the airship could carry 35,949 gallons, or enough for 7 minutes of fire fighting.

I'm sure there's more to the story than that. Did the musician assign the copyright of his songs to a recording company? If so, then I'm sure he was monetarily compensated for doing so when he signed that agreement and understood that they were no longer "his" songs. And did the ASCAP have some sort of agreement with the bar that the owners were to ensure that no unauthorized performances were conducted?

I'm not saying that these terms weren't laughably restrictive and counter to free culture. But the situation likely boils down a contract dispute--one that was entered into freely by all parties involved. If that's the case, there's enough blame to be spread around for agreeing to such terms. The ASCAP would not have had standing to sue if some random songwriter was performing in some random bar.