I'm sure he does not mean 'Classified' information. He means classified under ITAR. It was probably a poor choice of word to use classified rather than categorized.

If only the ISPs would spend some effort of notifying customers who are infected with viruses and are sending out spam and such. Funny that they cannot bother to deal with that, but can be the RIAA/MPAA police.

I just looked at the bill. It says

‘‘(iv) to any telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio
  common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call, unless the call is made for a commer
cial purpose that does not constitute a telephone solicitation;’’.

The problem is that the current law is not enforced. Just in the past few days I got multiple machine dialed calls from someone trying to sell me a Home Security system. Not only was it my cellphone, but the cell number is on the Do Not Call list.

It makes sense. Think about all the business that T-Mobile lost while this thing was pending. People did not renew, some people did not switch to T-Mobile due to the uncertainty, etc. If it DOESN'T go through, T-Mobile needs to be compensated for that loss.

He will only be happy with the LONG FORM death certificate, then he will be very proud of himself.

Ahh, so people in the large cities like New York must have rates cheaper than people living in the rural areas or in Europe?

Among the most expensive and not even for a service that is advanced compared to other countries systems. And so called competition between carries is for which carrier can offer you which features for a high price ($55) plan. There is no real competition when it comes lower cost plans. And finally, my opinion for the most expensive, the lack of open systems. Carriers lock people into certain models of phones. Those lock-ins not only keep customers from shopping for the best service/price, but requires the carriers to earn even more profit to subsidize the exclusive contracts with the phone vendors.

From reading the various comments, it appears that someone illegally sold the books in question using the
Amazon 'self-publishing' feature. In other words, Amazon had no right to sell the book in the first place.

Amazon certainly failed in its responsibility to ensure it was only selling things it was entitled too. And Amazon has yet to clearly state that this is what actually happened.

But I think the respresentations in the media so far is that the publisher of Orwells books changed their mind, which does not appear to be the case. If that happened, people who had purchased the book already would still have their purchase. Rather, in this case, Amazon sold 'stolen merchandise', and the technology behind the Kindle allows recourse unlike a physical book.

I just remember the horribly loud and embarrassing sound of my father standing up and taking a Polaroid in the middle of the very quiet wedding vow portion of a wedding. Click....whuurrrr....shlllllll.

Absolutely right, I'm not sure why anyone would think adopting bleeding edge on a huge rollout would be a good idea.

Well, maybe the programmer who wrote the advisory and who signed off on the original 'overflow free' code are one in the same?

Yes and yes. If you watched any of the 'debate' on the House floor, just about all the stakeholders wrote letters buying in to the delay.

Shut down the iTunes servers.