On what they mean for the language to do, and want the compiler to provide as much help as possible while allowing for as much flexibility as possible. I'm sure Google will now tell us the javascript is the only way of the future, with embedded python for shits and giggles.
I must have missed something. Since when do the rantings of one lone academic who works at Google mean that this was the rantings of more than one person, or even the official position of the entire company?
Wordpress is licensed under GPL version 2. What version of the GPL faq are you quoting? It doesn't seem to match the version I found. Take a look at my quote of it below, especially the first paragraph and the last sentence in the second paragraph (the emphasis in bold is mine).
The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.
It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case. We are thinking about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we don't have precise wording in mind yet.
They have two Android forks. One fork for cheap non-touch phones (based on 1.6). And one for the higher end ones (based on 2.x). Chances are, even their cheap non-touch phones will get the 2.1 update before yours do.
This is article is click-bait. Mainland China has already said over a year ago that they were forking version 1.6 of Android (and more recently a second fork from version 2.x) and re-branding it completely (stripping out google maps, google search, etc). This is a fact that Google was quite happy with at the time. Even if it's not technically called Android, or technically figuring within their official figures for Android adoption. It was something that they bragged about. Google was delighted to hear that 1.8+ billion people were going to standardize on something derived from their OS.
If there is anything new here, it's that Google lost some key employees to Baidu (which is not a big surprise considering the recent circumstances). Or it would be that Baidu decided not to copy a rebranded fork of Android, and decided to make their own mobile OS from scratch (just so they could give a slap in the face to Google), but that, the article doesn't make that clear, so I'm just going to assume that Mainland China is just going to stick to its original plan.
waite, agregating agregates? future prices? isn't this the sort of witchcraft that caused the ressesion?
Not really, there is no leverage involved. If you make a mistake predicting a price and can't pay for the new price for whatever reason, you just don't fly (or you try to fly on a different date).
I guess a travel agency or an airline of some kind could try to pre-purchase tickets to resell at a later date, or to farm it out to other airlines, but Farecast wasn't designed for that purpose, Farecast was designed with the consumer in mind.
They aren't even the least bit timid about admitting they're pro-piracy
You have a point. They even have a pirate ship as their logo!! It doesn't get more obvious than that. The Saudi Oil Tanker was the last freaking straw! I think we should just fire a couple of missiles into that building, then may be, they'll stop all their kidnapping, murdering, stealing, and raping on the high seas!!!
There are at least five companies with perfectly valid live traffic data (which do not depend on Caltrains sensors, a third of which don't work anyway, the Caltrains sensors that is). Don't believe me, just open google maps to your area, and zoom in to the nearest boulevard. Google will give you live traffic information even when you're far away from freeways or highways. And the collection of the live traffic information is not coming just from the Android phones with gps turned on, but any phone with Google Latitude turned on, most of the TomTom gps units (including the TomTom iPhone app), any phone with Waze on it (that's their entire business model, everything gets crowdsourced live), and any phone or standalone gps unit with a subscription to the live traffic data from Microsoft.
From your conclusions, I'm really having a hard time believing you. I also tried using Farecast from the time the 'Super Crunchers' book came out and before the time Microsoft purchased the company. And just like you, I was totally gung-ho about the concept and the startup company. And if someone had approached me just after reading the 'Super Crunchers' book, I would have easily invested everything I owned in that startup, I was so totally and utterly convinced by the arguments the author was making.
And by the way, I'm still convinced by his arguments, so don't take this as a complete opinion reversal. It's just that his choice of the Farecast example, as elegant and as perfect it looked on paper, didn't work for me at all in practice. The Farecast engine couldn't even get most of the current prices from the airlines it had listed on there. And as good as its prediction engine may have been, I will never know, but if the data coming in was only garbage-in to begin with, it doesn't matter how good the prediction engine is or was, the data coming out was most probably just garbage-out.
And for all I know, Microsoft may have solved that problem by taking it over (I haven't checked yet). To me at the time, it appeared that the airlines were deliberately obfuscating the data to the Farecast engine. So in that respect, Microsoft probably has a much better chance to get to that data. I can definitely see airlines blacklisting and messing with the bots or the scrapers of a small no-name start-up which is trying to circumvent their pricing schemes, but I think it would be a much harder decision to blacklist and mess around with the search bots from Microsoft, without getting yourself de-listed from Bing or Expedia at the same time, so in that respect, I'm much more hopeful that it works now under Microsoft (it's just that when I tried it, and I tried it several times, it really didn't work any of those times).
It's the advertising model that's to blame. And the publishers are the ones who agreed to play this way, so you can point the finger there.
I'd say it's supply and demand that's too blame. Until the journalism profession (or the cult of the personality for news anchor men or anchor women) becomes less sexy and less attractive for young people to want to emulate, there will always be an over-abundance of young people that are willing to work for free (or almost for free) for many years of their lives. And of course, current technologies and current advertising models, are only amplifying this very pressure to begin with, so it's not like my thesis is very different from yours.
Its not that they are journalists but how is it that nobody in the actual industry ever goes back and calls people on what they said 6 months ago?
Fox News does that (not that I'm a Fox News fan, or that I trust Fox News not to quote things out of context). So your point about "serious journalism" still stands.
Worse, as the recent case against Terry Childs has shown, judges and juries are often not technically savvy enough to understand what IT pros do. 'That lack of understanding can lead them to conclude you're at fault or should have known better,'
Has it shown that really??? I recall the foreman of the jury for the Terry Childs case was a pretty smart IT guy. Also, the resumes of the other jurors were not all that bad technically either. If anything, I really do think that Terry Childs was judged by a jury of his peers (even if this doesn't always happen in other cases).
Other companies are literally bidding less than the break even cost of legit companies because they're paying their labor under the table for less than minimum wage.
If it's in the construction industry, the market rate in California for illegal immigrants is $10 an hour (it's usually more depending on the area, especially in the summer). Your other points of rich people saving money are still valid, but I just wanted to point out that the wage of an illegal construction worker is not anywhere close to minimum wage as your post seems to imply (perhaps illegals, working as dishwashers or as sweatshop workers, are a different story, but that's the extent of what I know).
Also, your post implies that there is one-to-one relationship between jobs done by illegal immigrants and normal workers. Can we really be sure this is the case? Construction is a cyclical business. There is bound to be ups and downs. Let's forget the construction companies for a moment. Let's get to the source of the construction projects, either the fat cat client who wants to build something for his family, or the fat cat professional developer who hires construction companies because he hopes to eventually make a profit for himself. If you increase construction cost significantly for either of those rich people, it doesn't necessarily mean that they'll still go ahead with their project. Some will, definitely, but some won't.
And while I feel bad for the American workers you speak of that are trying to earn an honest living, preventing illegal immigrants from working in the US may give the legit workers only a very temporary respite, if nothing else. Construction work is still going to be as cyclical as ever. Also, construction work is modernizing itself like crazy. What only used to take several days years ago can now be done in a few hours (especially with the right tools and the right pre-fabricated materials). This is an ever-changing system. I'm not sure there is much we can do to save entire professions from being phased out, or drastically changed by it.
Is it possible that in the years since the Exxon Valdez, that Kevin Costner is the only one who has invested money into the technology of oil spill cleanup?"
I'll bet that he wasn't the only one. A better question would be: would the same small company with the same clean-up technology garner as much congress attention and free press if it had not been headed and funded by a celebrity in the first place.
Personally, I doubt it. As a society, we're still obsessed by celebrities. Companies or non-profits backed by celebrities often have a huge media advantage over competitors that have no celebrity-backing.
With our brilliant free market capitalism in place, a competitor should be here to the rescue to innovate and beat the crap out of these guys who don't take care of their customers.
The companies you speak of, to a certain extent, are Southwest, JetBlue, and Virgin. Not that this is going to help you much, unless those companies fly in your area, and fly to the area where you wish to go yourself.
That being said, the airlines industry is not a free market, not by a long shot. Even pre-911, we used to bail out failing airlines with billions of tax-payers dollars. And airlines are not free to fly where ever they want. The exclusive rights to particular routes is not decided by the highest bidders, but more often by the airlines that have the most local political clout.
Please, let's stop the rhetoric of absolutes. The airlines industry is neither an absolute free market playground, as you implied, nor is it an absolute government-controlled industry, it's more a hybrid of the two, where the two systems are so intertwined, it's very difficult to know where one system begins and where the other ends.
Currently, there is the very real problem of a lack of transparency in the system. Personally, I don't mind the fact that I won't have anything free to eat on my cross-country flight, I'd just like to know about it beforehand. And even better, I would love to know about this even before I purchase my ticket -- when I'm still comparing airfares.
As a libertarian, this is the one kind of regulation I'd like to see adopted, the enforcement of greater upfront transparency, thought I'm not saying this going be an easy task. As long as there is an incentive to confuse the travelers as to what they're buying, many of the airlines will find more novel and creative ways to confuse us even more.
'Why pair an iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, or iPhone 4 with a DSLR lens?'
Evo envy? Your iPhone 4 didn't work anyway (you were holding it wrong)? And your ex-wife got the DSLR camera in the divorce settlement, and you only got a lens???
They could just talk to Cisco, Juniper, Nortel, or any other major network infra provider and get DWDM (read "extra colors") capability rolled into their switch.
It's a good thing that their Chief Scientist worked for twelve years at Nortel then, thought it's disappointing to find out that he is not an ex-UC Davis alumnus as the summary implies (He has a PhD in Photonics from the University of Ulster).
For those of us that are paying for Google Apps Premier to use more space, it turns out that my Google Apps Premier login won't work for Blogger, Google Reader, and a few other Google services (and I have to use a normal free google/gmail account instead, and therefore logout from my primary account).
And don't get me started on trying to press the 'Add to Google Calendar' from some web applications. That button takes me to the plain vanilla Google Calendar, and by the time, google reroutes me to my Google Apps Premier calendar which uses my own custom domain, it loses the url arguments -- losing the calendar item that I was wanting to save in the first place. And it's not like this is a difficult problem to fix. Google fixed that problem six months ago, it even made some headway on some other Google Apps Premier integration issues, but that specific Google Calendar problem has come back recently (and yes, I have several plain vanilla Google Calendars go into my Google Apps Premier Calendar as a workaround, but using that workaround severely limits the functionality and the extra convenience that I get when I have those buttons working correctly in the first place).
It was portraying itself as a security extension. If you think about it, that makes sense. Most anti-virus packages give you so many false positives flagging all the legitimate network tools, security tools, debugging tools, etc, that you're installing on your machine. You tend to disregard those warnings yourself when you know you're installing a security tool.
That may because telling you the name was only half of the issue. The name of the plugin was 'Mozilla Sniffer', but the real name you should hunt down is 'Tamper Data' to make sure you get rid of this thing (not that the makers of the popular 'Tamper Data' extension did anything wrong, it was just that 'Mozilla Sniffer' was disguising itself as 'Tamper Data' by using its uuid and inserting the malicious part of its code into the 'Tamper Data' folder).
Just take it to the police. Apparently there is no urgency for criminal justice when a theft involves no weapons. Unless you are talking Intellectual Property, of course.
You already have the name of the moving company, and probably some of the names of the movers. You're already way ahead of the RIAA in that regard (although, I'm guessing that your credibility must not be all that great right now just after being evicted, plus I'm assuming that the movers will claim that you must be the one who took back your laptop once you recovered your boxes).
How was the chain of custody handled when you got back your boxes? If you can prove that you didn't receive your laptop when you got back your boxes, you should try to finish the process civilly in Small Claims Court. If you're in doubt about who to put down as defendants, try to put down as many names as you can. The name of the moving company, the names of the movers, the name of the insurance for their company, the name of the storage place, etc (it's ok if you can't get all of them). Just be sure that the police files a report. Police officers are often under pressure from city officials not to file police reports that would increase city crime statistics. That's why you have to insist that they do.
I know, but that doesn't change the fact that Verizon (the current paid licensee of the trademark Droid) is referring to the device as the "Droid Eris".
Actually, my Nokia E71 used to do that as well, sometimes it got stuck in 3G mode (even thought, I set it to never use 3G), and I couldn't do any calls with it until I rebooted (even thought the E71 is supposed to work on 3G, the 3G from T-Mobile in the US is using a slightly different band within 3G).
As to the 911 calls in the US, there is a well-known routing problem for any cell phone that tries to dial 911. In California for instance, all the calls from cell phones for 911 automatically get routed to the same California Highway Patrol dispatch center. So with the advent of almost everyone having a cell phone these days, you not only have 30+ people calling the same dispatch center for the exact same incident that's happening at the very same time, but usually you end up having reached the wrong dispatch center anyway and they end up having to forward your call to someone else.
That's why, it's important to call from a land-line. From a land-line, you get routed to the right local 911 dispatch center immediately, plus through a reverse-lookup they automatically have the address you're calling from, and you also usually never have to wait for someone to pick up your call. And assuming you can't get quick access to a land-line, the next best thing is to have the direct phone numbers to all the police emergency lines in your area already pre-entered in your cell phone's address book. If you don't have those numbers entered in there yet, may be you should do that right now, you just never know the next time you'll need to call them.
Since when was 5 megapixels "low resolution"? With this type of phone camera, that's pretty much beyond what the optical system of the tiny lens can resolve. And on a proper camera with decent optics, 5MP is enough to create great results.
Sorry, I should have said "low [screen] resolution, low 5MP camera..." because its screen really does have a lower resolution. And a 5MP camera is not a low resolution camera, definitely not, but the pixel-count is lower than some of the cameras of the flagship models that have just come out, or are about to come out (at least, that's the case for my Evo which has an 8MP camera, and I believe the Incredible is supposed to have an 8MP camera as well).
Slashdot Mirror
On what they mean for the language to do, and want the compiler to provide as much help as possible while allowing for as much flexibility as possible. I'm sure Google will now tell us the javascript is the only way of the future, with embedded python for shits and giggles.
I must have missed something. Since when do the rantings of one lone academic who works at Google mean that this was the rantings of more than one person, or even the official position of the entire company?
The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.
It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case. We are thinking about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we don't have precise wording in mind yet.
They have two Android forks. One fork for cheap non-touch phones (based on 1.6). And one for the higher end ones (based on 2.x). Chances are, even their cheap non-touch phones will get the 2.1 update before yours do.
This is article is click-bait. Mainland China has already said over a year ago that they were forking version 1.6 of Android (and more recently a second fork from version 2.x) and re-branding it completely (stripping out google maps, google search, etc). This is a fact that Google was quite happy with at the time. Even if it's not technically called Android, or technically figuring within their official figures for Android adoption. It was something that they bragged about. Google was delighted to hear that 1.8+ billion people were going to standardize on something derived from their OS.
If there is anything new here, it's that Google lost some key employees to Baidu (which is not a big surprise considering the recent circumstances). Or it would be that Baidu decided not to copy a rebranded fork of Android, and decided to make their own mobile OS from scratch (just so they could give a slap in the face to Google), but that, the article doesn't make that clear, so I'm just going to assume that Mainland China is just going to stick to its original plan.
waite, agregating agregates? future prices? isn't this the sort of witchcraft that caused the ressesion?
Not really, there is no leverage involved. If you make a mistake predicting a price and can't pay for the new price for whatever reason, you just don't fly (or you try to fly on a different date).
I guess a travel agency or an airline of some kind could try to pre-purchase tickets to resell at a later date, or to farm it out to other airlines, but Farecast wasn't designed for that purpose, Farecast was designed with the consumer in mind.
They aren't even the least bit timid about admitting they're pro-piracy
You have a point. They even have a pirate ship as their logo!! It doesn't get more obvious than that. The Saudi Oil Tanker was the last freaking straw! I think we should just fire a couple of missiles into that building, then may be, they'll stop all their kidnapping, murdering, stealing, and raping on the high seas!!!
There are at least five companies with perfectly valid live traffic data (which do not depend on Caltrains sensors, a third of which don't work anyway, the Caltrains sensors that is). Don't believe me, just open google maps to your area, and zoom in to the nearest boulevard. Google will give you live traffic information even when you're far away from freeways or highways. And the collection of the live traffic information is not coming just from the Android phones with gps turned on, but any phone with Google Latitude turned on, most of the TomTom gps units (including the TomTom iPhone app), any phone with Waze on it (that's their entire business model, everything gets crowdsourced live), and any phone or standalone gps unit with a subscription to the live traffic data from Microsoft.
I used Farecast before the buyout...
From your conclusions, I'm really having a hard time believing you. I also tried using Farecast from the time the 'Super Crunchers' book came out and before the time Microsoft purchased the company. And just like you, I was totally gung-ho about the concept and the startup company. And if someone had approached me just after reading the 'Super Crunchers' book, I would have easily invested everything I owned in that startup, I was so totally and utterly convinced by the arguments the author was making.
And by the way, I'm still convinced by his arguments, so don't take this as a complete opinion reversal. It's just that his choice of the Farecast example, as elegant and as perfect it looked on paper, didn't work for me at all in practice. The Farecast engine couldn't even get most of the current prices from the airlines it had listed on there. And as good as its prediction engine may have been, I will never know, but if the data coming in was only garbage-in to begin with, it doesn't matter how good the prediction engine is or was, the data coming out was most probably just garbage-out.
And for all I know, Microsoft may have solved that problem by taking it over (I haven't checked yet). To me at the time, it appeared that the airlines were deliberately obfuscating the data to the Farecast engine. So in that respect, Microsoft probably has a much better chance to get to that data. I can definitely see airlines blacklisting and messing with the bots or the scrapers of a small no-name start-up which is trying to circumvent their pricing schemes, but I think it would be a much harder decision to blacklist and mess around with the search bots from Microsoft, without getting yourself de-listed from Bing or Expedia at the same time, so in that respect, I'm much more hopeful that it works now under Microsoft (it's just that when I tried it, and I tried it several times, it really didn't work any of those times).
It's the advertising model that's to blame. And the publishers are the ones who agreed to play this way, so you can point the finger there.
I'd say it's supply and demand that's too blame. Until the journalism profession (or the cult of the personality for news anchor men or anchor women) becomes less sexy and less attractive for young people to want to emulate, there will always be an over-abundance of young people that are willing to work for free (or almost for free) for many years of their lives. And of course, current technologies and current advertising models, are only amplifying this very pressure to begin with, so it's not like my thesis is very different from yours.
Its not that they are journalists but how is it that nobody in the actual industry ever goes back and calls people on what they said 6 months ago?
Fox News does that (not that I'm a Fox News fan, or that I trust Fox News not to quote things out of context). So your point about "serious journalism" still stands.
Yes, they are called sociopaths, but they already have far deeper issues to deal with.
Not to mention, most fully functioning sociopaths are expensive too.
CEOs, RIAA Lawyers, lobbyists, it's an impossibly super expensive talent pool to recruit from.
Worse, as the recent case against Terry Childs has shown, judges and juries are often not technically savvy enough to understand what IT pros do. 'That lack of understanding can lead them to conclude you're at fault or should have known better,'
Has it shown that really??? I recall the foreman of the jury for the Terry Childs case was a pretty smart IT guy. Also, the resumes of the other jurors were not all that bad technically either. If anything, I really do think that Terry Childs was judged by a jury of his peers (even if this doesn't always happen in other cases).
Other companies are literally bidding less than the break even cost of legit companies because they're paying their labor under the table for less than minimum wage.
If it's in the construction industry, the market rate in California for illegal immigrants is $10 an hour (it's usually more depending on the area, especially in the summer). Your other points of rich people saving money are still valid, but I just wanted to point out that the wage of an illegal construction worker is not anywhere close to minimum wage as your post seems to imply (perhaps illegals, working as dishwashers or as sweatshop workers, are a different story, but that's the extent of what I know).
Also, your post implies that there is one-to-one relationship between jobs done by illegal immigrants and normal workers. Can we really be sure this is the case? Construction is a cyclical business. There is bound to be ups and downs. Let's forget the construction companies for a moment. Let's get to the source of the construction projects, either the fat cat client who wants to build something for his family, or the fat cat professional developer who hires construction companies because he hopes to eventually make a profit for himself. If you increase construction cost significantly for either of those rich people, it doesn't necessarily mean that they'll still go ahead with their project. Some will, definitely, but some won't.
And while I feel bad for the American workers you speak of that are trying to earn an honest living, preventing illegal immigrants from working in the US may give the legit workers only a very temporary respite, if nothing else. Construction work is still going to be as cyclical as ever. Also, construction work is modernizing itself like crazy. What only used to take several days years ago can now be done in a few hours (especially with the right tools and the right pre-fabricated materials). This is an ever-changing system. I'm not sure there is much we can do to save entire professions from being phased out, or drastically changed by it.
Is it possible that in the years since the Exxon Valdez, that Kevin Costner is the only one who has invested money into the technology of oil spill cleanup?"
I'll bet that he wasn't the only one. A better question would be: would the same small company with the same clean-up technology garner as much congress attention and free press if it had not been headed and funded by a celebrity in the first place.
Personally, I doubt it. As a society, we're still obsessed by celebrities. Companies or non-profits backed by celebrities often have a huge media advantage over competitors that have no celebrity-backing.
With our brilliant free market capitalism in place, a competitor should be here to the rescue to innovate and beat the crap out of these guys who don't take care of their customers.
The companies you speak of, to a certain extent, are Southwest, JetBlue, and Virgin. Not that this is going to help you much, unless those companies fly in your area, and fly to the area where you wish to go yourself.
That being said, the airlines industry is not a free market, not by a long shot. Even pre-911, we used to bail out failing airlines with billions of tax-payers dollars. And airlines are not free to fly where ever they want. The exclusive rights to particular routes is not decided by the highest bidders, but more often by the airlines that have the most local political clout.
Please, let's stop the rhetoric of absolutes. The airlines industry is neither an absolute free market playground, as you implied, nor is it an absolute government-controlled industry, it's more a hybrid of the two, where the two systems are so intertwined, it's very difficult to know where one system begins and where the other ends.
Currently, there is the very real problem of a lack of transparency in the system. Personally, I don't mind the fact that I won't have anything free to eat on my cross-country flight, I'd just like to know about it beforehand. And even better, I would love to know about this even before I purchase my ticket -- when I'm still comparing airfares.
As a libertarian, this is the one kind of regulation I'd like to see adopted, the enforcement of greater upfront transparency, thought I'm not saying this going be an easy task. As long as there is an incentive to confuse the travelers as to what they're buying, many of the airlines will find more novel and creative ways to confuse us even more.
'Why pair an iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, or iPhone 4 with a DSLR lens?'
Evo envy? Your iPhone 4 didn't work anyway (you were holding it wrong)? And your ex-wife got the DSLR camera in the divorce settlement, and you only got a lens???
They could just talk to Cisco, Juniper, Nortel, or any other major network infra provider and get DWDM (read "extra colors") capability rolled into their switch.
It's a good thing that their Chief Scientist worked for twelve years at Nortel then, thought it's disappointing to find out that he is not an ex-UC Davis alumnus as the summary implies (He has a PhD in Photonics from the University of Ulster).
I thought the Tamper Data plug-in was for recording information about ground compacting equipment.
I feel for you. Nobody has ever gotten my jokes either.
Who has multiple google accounts, and for what?
For those of us that are paying for Google Apps Premier to use more space, it turns out that my Google Apps Premier login won't work for Blogger, Google Reader, and a few other Google services (and I have to use a normal free google/gmail account instead, and therefore logout from my primary account).
And don't get me started on trying to press the 'Add to Google Calendar' from some web applications. That button takes me to the plain vanilla Google Calendar, and by the time, google reroutes me to my Google Apps Premier calendar which uses my own custom domain, it loses the url arguments -- losing the calendar item that I was wanting to save in the first place. And it's not like this is a difficult problem to fix. Google fixed that problem six months ago, it even made some headway on some other Google Apps Premier integration issues, but that specific Google Calendar problem has come back recently (and yes, I have several plain vanilla Google Calendars go into my Google Apps Premier Calendar as a workaround, but using that workaround severely limits the functionality and the extra convenience that I get when I have those buttons working correctly in the first place).
It was portraying itself as a security extension. If you think about it, that makes sense. Most anti-virus packages give you so many false positives flagging all the legitimate network tools, security tools, debugging tools, etc, that you're installing on your machine. You tend to disregard those warnings yourself when you know you're installing a security tool.
That may because telling you the name was only half of the issue. The name of the plugin was 'Mozilla Sniffer', but the real name you should hunt down is 'Tamper Data' to make sure you get rid of this thing (not that the makers of the popular 'Tamper Data' extension did anything wrong, it was just that 'Mozilla Sniffer' was disguising itself as 'Tamper Data' by using its uuid and inserting the malicious part of its code into the 'Tamper Data' folder).
Just take it to the police. Apparently there is no urgency for criminal justice when a theft involves no weapons. Unless you are talking Intellectual Property, of course.
You already have the name of the moving company, and probably some of the names of the movers. You're already way ahead of the RIAA in that regard (although, I'm guessing that your credibility must not be all that great right now just after being evicted, plus I'm assuming that the movers will claim that you must be the one who took back your laptop once you recovered your boxes).
How was the chain of custody handled when you got back your boxes? If you can prove that you didn't receive your laptop when you got back your boxes, you should try to finish the process civilly in Small Claims Court. If you're in doubt about who to put down as defendants, try to put down as many names as you can. The name of the moving company, the names of the movers, the name of the insurance for their company, the name of the storage place, etc (it's ok if you can't get all of them). Just be sure that the police files a report. Police officers are often under pressure from city officials not to file police reports that would increase city crime statistics. That's why you have to insist that they do.
I know, but that doesn't change the fact that Verizon (the current paid licensee of the trademark Droid) is referring to the device as the "Droid Eris".
Actually, my Nokia E71 used to do that as well, sometimes it got stuck in 3G mode (even thought, I set it to never use 3G), and I couldn't do any calls with it until I rebooted (even thought the E71 is supposed to work on 3G, the 3G from T-Mobile in the US is using a slightly different band within 3G).
As to the 911 calls in the US, there is a well-known routing problem for any cell phone that tries to dial 911. In California for instance, all the calls from cell phones for 911 automatically get routed to the same California Highway Patrol dispatch center. So with the advent of almost everyone having a cell phone these days, you not only have 30+ people calling the same dispatch center for the exact same incident that's happening at the very same time, but usually you end up having reached the wrong dispatch center anyway and they end up having to forward your call to someone else.
That's why, it's important to call from a land-line. From a land-line, you get routed to the right local 911 dispatch center immediately, plus through a reverse-lookup they automatically have the address you're calling from, and you also usually never have to wait for someone to pick up your call. And assuming you can't get quick access to a land-line, the next best thing is to have the direct phone numbers to all the police emergency lines in your area already pre-entered in your cell phone's address book. If you don't have those numbers entered in there yet, may be you should do that right now, you just never know the next time you'll need to call them.
Since when was 5 megapixels "low resolution"? With this type of phone camera, that's pretty much beyond what the optical system of the tiny lens can resolve. And on a proper camera with decent optics, 5MP is enough to create great results.
Sorry, I should have said "low [screen] resolution, low 5MP camera..." because its screen really does have a lower resolution. And a 5MP camera is not a low resolution camera, definitely not, but the pixel-count is lower than some of the cameras of the flagship models that have just come out, or are about to come out (at least, that's the case for my Evo which has an 8MP camera, and I believe the Incredible is supposed to have an 8MP camera as well).