To that point, if the group's actions constitute a criminal offense, what is Facebook doing to ensure the preservation of data that could help an investigation?
To answer Noyes' seemingly rhetorical question, I strongly suspect the post office would conduct its own investigation and turn over all information to the Justice Department. Will Facebook do the same?
In reply to: "'Kill Obama' Facebook group active for a month"
January 5, 2010
0 replies
True that. In reply to: "Nirvana bassist defends Bono's antipiracy stance"
January 5, 2010
0 replies
I don't think this is the issue at all.
I strongly believe Bono is actually saying that he doesn't want to get LESS than what he's currently receiving from royalties, from sales of individual digital song files.
Bono is making this a black and white issue as a red herring over the lower revenue stream that he and others are having to deal with.
In reply to: "Nirvana bassist defends Bono's antipiracy stance"
January 5, 2010
0 replies
Cartman: If that happened to me, I'd be like...EH! G!#$@*(#! Don't mess with me, I'll chop up your parents, cook them up in a chili, and feed them to you!
Kenny: Hrrri hreeek hrwooem hnn hooftooorb! Doorf haaak ahayff mehhhh hooftooorb! (Translated: I like naked women on youtube! Don't take away my youtube!)
In reply to: "Stewart, 'South Park' dragged into YouTube row"
January 4, 2010
0 replies
I think the major point to take away from the report, is that NVidia faces challenges in selling their product, by way of the bottom line. Marketing and creating distribution channels with discounts will eat away at NVidia's bottom line, as well as the cost of development.
If you know in advance that a company is about to endure pain trying to swim upstream, you would sell now, and buy later when it becomes clear that AFTER they've spent all that money to make inroads and bring a product forth, that the market has accepted it.
In reply to: "Big hurdles for rumored Nvidia x86 technology"
January 4, 2010
0 replies
That's a good list targeting the core issues Google's facing. In reply to: "Five New Year's resolutions for Google"
January 4, 2010
0 replies
Distracted driving is already on the books of most jurisdictions, but in the case of cell phone usage, lawmakers find it particularly offensive that the public should be using cell phones.
In states like Oregon, police and other specific groups are exempt from distracted driving laws, which makes about as much sense as saying that DUI is illegal for everyone else except for some people. Either the act of talking on a cell phone IS a problem for everyone, or it's not a problem for everyone. There should not be special classes of people that are treated differently.
January 2, 2010
0 replies
LOL. In reply to: "China arrests thousands in Web porn crackdown"
January 2, 2010
0 replies
Good to know that China cares more about people watching porn than fraud and malware being spread from within their borders. In reply to: "China arrests thousands in Web porn crackdown"
January 2, 2010
Brings irony to the whole reality show epidemic. In reply to: "NASA's next frontier: Venus, the moon, or an asteroid"
January 2, 2010
0 replies