But all that being said, what I want to see most is clothing that you can change the appearance of (color, pattern, even cut, if possible) at will.
Came and went as far back as the '80s, as clothing fashion is wont to do. A little biofeedback practice and you could make your hypercolor t-shirt change color from among 3 or more different colors (like, blue, pink and white).
The same problem applies to money: dollar bills become less and less usable as time wears one - becoming frayed, ripped, and generally uglier.
Uh, no they don't. Unlike batteries, a dollar bill has no intrinsic value, it is only an abstraction of value backed by the US government.
My raggedy dollar bill with a pair of horns and a mustache scribbled on ol' George's face will buy exactly the same amount of goods as a brand new, crisp and tidy, bill will.
On the other hand, a dead battery ain't going to produce any more juice even if George Bush and Alan Greenspan personally praise it on the floor during a joint session of congress.
There may be some costs to society. But the costs of prohibition are even higher. Prohibition does not work, and it never did. It only creates a black market ruled by criminal
But without criminals how would the good people know that they are the good guys? You cannot have light without dark, so as any good christian knows -- without criminals you can't have saints!
> let's all just admit it. this article is only here because > 90% of readers love pretty european women. > > The other 10% love "Soviet Russia" jokes.
Like: In Soviet Russia, pretty european women love 90% of slashdot readers.
Hate to be pedantic but, private copying between friends does not satisfy any of the requirements spelled out for fair use (which is why I didn't bother to reference it):
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research
Not that I agree with the law, just that I am all too well aware of the details and think that more people, especially those who are critical of it, need to be too.
So the people who own TiVo [stock] seem to think that this is a profitable idea. Not just "profitable" in the sense of "charging more" but profitable in the sense of "making more money total", i.e. revenue - customers lost - lawsuits.
Just because wallstreet thinks it is a good move does not necessarily make it so. In fact, with their track record, chances are the street is wrong. Share pricing, particularly of "bleeding-edge" tech which TiVo still is despite *our* longtime familiarity with it, is all about human psychology in the short term and value in the long, sometimes very long, term.
I'm sure that a good number of TiVo unit owners do not share wallstreet's enthusiasm. Probably more people than wallstreet thinks too.
They wouldn't sell at all beyond the first couple of hundred if anyone could just press a button and magically turn one ipod into two for no extra cost.
Since copying information is now effectively a cost-free operation, any business model that depends on charging for copying information is doomed to failure in the long term.
Charge for searching a well-maintained index of music and movies. Charge for the creation and release to the public domain of music and movies. Charge for the delivery of music and movies on a physical medium like on a CD or in a theater. All of those add or create value that consumers will pay for.
But don't try to charge for moving bits around in a computer, we can do that already so it adds no value and no rational consumer will pay for it.
It's too bad that they cannot find alternatives to lawsuits, you might find it plausable that they could perhaps offer movie's online at low-prices, and maybe even really early releases for people on the internet, and charge a price?
It really is no surprise that they perfer lawsuits to changing their business model - the Ass's of America (RIAA, MPAA and all the Aothers) are primarily organizations of lawyers. Going to court and writing press releases is all they really know how to do.
Oh yeah, they are also very skilled at blowing $100K+ on coke and hookers.
First they came for the cockroaches and I did not speak out because I was not a cockroach. Then they came for the sheep and I did not speak out because I was not a sheep. Then they came for the chickens and I did not speak out because I was not a chicken. Then they came for the humans and there were only robots left and none would speak out for me.
[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Hey everybody, it's the guy with one quote and no brain! Maybe if you post it three or four more times that will make it true.
Quran: [5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Jesus H Christ! Another dittohead with quotes but no research of their own.
Here: Some Misappropriations of Quranic Verses. In short, the original Arabic "Auliya" has been mistranslated into "friend" without regard for context. With context, it is easy to see that it should translate as "military protector." Even if it really did mean "friend," that is lightyears away from meaning "sons of monkeys and pigs" as the first dittohead stated.
If you're going to blame European colonialism on Christianity than you have to blame "a government program to create nukes" on Islam.
Apparently you are just as simpled minded as the other poster, let me walk you through it SAT style:
first guy: al-queda == islam me: terrorists:islam as kkk:christianity dittohead: kkk < government with nukes me: so what? government != al-queda you: christianity:colonialism as islam:nukes me: WTF?
As for moslem being an insult - I've never heard of this. In fact, looking on google
Oh, you, a non-muslim have never head of it and can't figure out how to work google so it must be ok? Do you really think I just made it up? If I were the dittohead who obviously doesn't know shit about islam, then yeah but after refuting him with facts and you still think I don't know what the hell I'm talking about? Come on.
hypocrite
dumbshit
Why don't you look in google for the terms moslem and derogatory, of the 4000+ hits it shouldn't take you too long to find a couple that explain it.
I'm telling you that even if Iraqis were driving tanks through main street that we would NEVER resort to car bombing OUR OWN FREAKING POLICE STATIONS set up by the Iraqis during reconstruction, or cutting OUR OWN FREAKING OIL PIPELINES.
You don't think so do you? Maybe you missed out on all the bad, bad shit that went down in Northern Ireland and those are two ethnic groups a whole lot more similar than most Americans and Iraqis. But if the Irish aren't a close enough example to home, you might want to look at how British sympathizers were treated during the American revolution.
So now Islam has to be defined in terms of Christianity? What about all the protestants? Are they so bad since they don't have a central figurehead to preach being nice? There are plenty of islamic scholars and clerics who preach peace, go to your nearest mosque and you will hear from one yourself. Just because the rabble-rousers get all the press doesn't mean that what they say applies to anything more than a group of mostly teenage and twenty-something boys.
Sistani is just playing politics and maneuvering for his long-term benefit. He is as much a politician as he is a cleric.
Who is going to clean up the dirty laundry in Islam? Personally I think the majority of believers like it just the way it is, and feel they are being consistent with the truth of Islam, whether you want to admit it or not.
How many muslims do you know personally? Sure, there is plenty of shit that people accept rather than question, but that is true of any society and America is no exception. All of the muslims I know are just as "good" and as "bad" as everybody else in my community - well, I do know a few nutjobs in favor of nuking the mid-east and "turning it into a parking lot" whom I consider to be a lot worse than any muslim that I have ever met.
Uh, huh. That would be why the same book refers to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys
Man, I sure wish I could be a dittohead. Then I could go around being all confident in my RIGHTeousness and wouldn't need any supporting proof at all. What the Quran REALLY said is that in a particular story where one group of jews ignored the sabbath, the other group of jews called the first group sons of apes, among other things for disobeying God's will. God eventually came along and punished the first group, eventually wiping them out after warning them a few times first. Big whoop-de-freaking-do! Old testament is full of stuff 100x worse than that.
Also says its cheif prophet married a 7-year-old when he was in his 50s, but he was nice about it and waited 'til she was 9 before he "took her as his bride".
More dittohead nonsense. First, the Quran is NOT ABOUT Mohammed's life. If you knew jackshit about Islam, you would know that. The whole big deal is that it is suppossed to be literally God's word to Mohammed, not some sort of autobiography.
Second, there are a couple of references to Aisha, Mohammed's last wife as being 7/9 in some of the stories about Mohammed, but there are plenty of other references to her being significantly older anywhere from 12 to 20 or more. Here's a good debunker on that whole silliness.
Let me clue you into something - it may be full of guys who fuck their cousins and their sheep (sometimes it's hard to tell the difference), but the KKK isn't within two years of completing a nuclear weapons development programme.
And exactly how does a government program to create nukes have ANYTHING to do with a fringe interpretation of a religion? Really? Could you at least stay on topic instead of resorting to dittohead logic?
Unless you're a moslem, I'd suggest you root for the side that's not trying to kill or force into submission the 4.5 billion of us who haven't drunk its particular brand of theological Kool-Aid.
Hey, big suprise, dittoheads are innumerate too. 1) People who consider themselves Christian number only about 2 billion (33% of the world population) and that is decreasing. 2) People who consider themselves Muslim number about 1.2 billion (20% of the world population) that is increasing. citation
The Christans figured it out 500 years ago during the Reformation. You're welcome to join us, but you're long overdue, and we're getting really fucking sick of waiting.
Bull-fucking-shit. Heard of the British Empire? European colonialism? Just because they didn't call it the HRE doesn't mean they didn't blame God for their actions. That stuff was going on well into the 20th century and we are still living with the remnants even today.
PS - "moslem" is considered a low-grade insult, equivalent to "xian." But it's clear you have no respect for other people's religion which is probably why you use the term in the first place. Ironic that would be the case in a discussion in which you erroneously make the same essential accusation of about a billion or so muslims.
Many portions of Isam feel that any other religion is inferior and almost sinful, and thus many hate Jews, Christians, etc.
Uh, huh. That would be why the Quran refers to Jews, Christians and Muslims as all "children of the book."
For instance, in the terrorst handbook thing the British found on a raid, there were discussions on why it is ok to torture. The basic idea was that Muslums are allowed to torture others because they are Gods children, while others are not allowed to.
Let me clue you into something - the muslim extremists are about as Islamic as the KKK are Christian. Taking what they say as representative of the religion is a great way to delude yourself, and justify all kinds of terrible things.
But, let's take the response one step further, you say that modern "Christian" societies have progressed beyond such barbaric reasoning? That would explain this memo from the current administration rationalizing torture in the "war on terror."
So, just who now are we suppossed to be rooting for?
I'd like to be wrong but a system like this will probably stay monochrome for a while yet.
Depends on what you want to pay.
Red and green diode lasers into the 100mw range are readily available for around $500 retail. The blue is in the $1k-2k range.
I would easily pay $5K street for a doodad like this that would do 2048x1024 at 70Hz or better if it was bright enough and had good photo-realism, contrast should be excellent since it is off/on with the mirror. I wouldn't mind it weighing 10lbs and being as big as an encyclopedia, I certainly don't need it in my cell phone.
10 years from now, I could see it in a $100 cell phone, but in the meantime they don't have to get anywhere near that price-point or unit size to have a viable product.
Last time I did a Nielsen TV rating diary, they paid $5 a week.
I think we now know why TV caters to the lowest common denominator - $5/wk to give up my privacy and maybe manually fill out paper records of what I watch? Only people with nothing better to do are going to participate.
Just think, if someone were to hack the Nielson system, and instead of doing it to be a 1337 B1FF, no bragging rights, just subtle social engineering, we could get some good shows that last.
No more cancelation of a good show because the network can't schedule it well, no more reality show spam. Heck, we could get more pr0n on the air - the next Janet to whip out a tit will get crazy good numbers - fuck the FCC!
Hacking Nielson is better than being president, its like being the the guy who pulls the prez's strings, but without having to worry about a heart attack.
Sorry, the DMCA does not provide for a defense by disclaimer. You have now committed a federal felony. Please report to your nearest Ass. of Amerrica for induction to the copyright reeducation camps.
Wrong. Have you read the GPL? See section 3b. If you do not distribute the source to the recipient of the binary, you must provide offer valid for any third party to request the source from you.
As a developer of custom software myself, it did not even occur to me that a client would accept an executable without full source too. I suppose such suckers do exist somewhere out there, so I'll give you that.
However unlikely such a hypothetical situation might be in real life, if the developer does not satisfy their obligation under section 3a (i.e. provide source to the client) then yes, the develoepr (not the client) would then have to provide source to anyone who asked for it, for three years.
I develop custom software for a lot of companies and making sure that I follow the licenes is very dear to me because that way the company feels comfortable, with me and feels secure using the project. If I use a GPL Library I tell them that I am using a GPL library and if anyone want the source to this program you will have to release it to them.
Maybe you were just being sloppy with your terminology, but what you wrote is incorrect.
If you incorporate GPL'd code into custom software, the only people who are entitled to the source code of the program are the entities who receive the binary of the program -- not just anyone who wants the source.
Since custom software is typically developed on contract for internal use and not resale or redistribution, it is unlikely that anyone else beyond your original client will have standing to call for the source code.
And you have proof that these soldiers were acting on orders from the Pentagon? Well, that's a relief. You'll save the US tax payers millions in wasted investigations into this matter.
It does not matter if I have proof or not. You completely miss the point.
What matters is how the story plays out in the population of about a billion people for which Osama is still one of, if not the most, common names given to newborn boys.
And if you are going to smugly ask them if they have proof or not, you better first deal with all of that suddenly missing proof about WMDs in Iraq. At least there are pictures of Abu Graib.
Slashdot Mirror
But all that being said, what I want to see most is clothing that you can change the appearance of (color, pattern, even cut, if possible) at will.
Came and went as far back as the '80s, as clothing fashion is wont to do.
A little biofeedback practice and you could make your hypercolor t-shirt change color from among 3 or more different colors (like, blue, pink and white).
The same problem applies to money: dollar bills become less and less usable as time wears one - becoming frayed, ripped, and generally uglier.
Uh, no they don't. Unlike batteries, a dollar bill has no intrinsic value, it is only an abstraction of value backed by the US government.
My raggedy dollar bill with a pair of horns and a mustache scribbled on ol' George's face will buy exactly the same amount of goods as a brand new, crisp and tidy, bill will.
On the other hand, a dead battery ain't going to produce any more juice even if George Bush and Alan Greenspan personally praise it on the floor during a joint session of congress.
They come in 45 watt and 65 watt equivalent bulbs, not twice the output of a 100 watt bulb as stated in the article .
Check out the specs for their colored bulbs, those are probably what the article was referring to.
There may be some costs to society. But the costs of prohibition are even higher. Prohibition does not work, and it never did. It only creates a black market ruled by criminal
But without criminals how would the good people know that they are the good guys?
You cannot have light without dark, so as any good christian knows --
without criminals you can't have saints!
> let's all just admit it. this article is only here because
> 90% of readers love pretty european women.
>
> The other 10% love "Soviet Russia" jokes.
Like: In Soviet Russia, pretty european women love 90% of slashdot readers.
Hate to be pedantic but, private copying between friends does not satisfy any of the requirements spelled out for fair use (which is why I didn't bother to reference it):
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research
Not that I agree with the law, just that I am all too well aware of the details and think that more people, especially those who are critical of it, need to be too.
That may be true, but unfortunately it is very clear written in the law and there is just about zero wiggle room:
So the people who own TiVo [stock] seem to think that this is a profitable idea. Not just "profitable" in the sense of "charging more" but profitable in the sense of "making more money total", i.e. revenue - customers lost - lawsuits.
Just because wallstreet thinks it is a good move does not necessarily make it so. In fact, with their track record, chances are the street is wrong. Share pricing, particularly of "bleeding-edge" tech which TiVo still is despite *our* longtime familiarity with it, is all about human psychology in the short term and value in the long, sometimes very long, term.
I'm sure that a good number of TiVo unit owners do not share wallstreet's enthusiasm. Probably more people than wallstreet thinks too.
iPods sell like hotcakes despite being not free
They wouldn't sell at all beyond the first couple of hundred if anyone could just press a button and magically turn one ipod into two for no extra cost.
Since copying information is now effectively a cost-free operation, any business model that depends on charging for copying information is doomed to failure in the long term.
Charge for searching a well-maintained index of music and movies.
Charge for the creation and release to the public domain of music and movies.
Charge for the delivery of music and movies on a physical medium like on a CD or in a theater.
All of those add or create value that consumers will pay for.
But don't try to charge for moving bits around in a computer, we can do that already so it adds no value and no rational consumer will pay for it.
It's too bad that they cannot find alternatives to lawsuits, you might find it plausable that they could perhaps offer movie's online at low-prices, and maybe even really early releases for people on the internet, and charge a price?
It really is no surprise that they perfer lawsuits to changing their business model - the Ass's of America (RIAA, MPAA and all the Aothers) are primarily organizations of lawyers. Going to court and writing press releases is all they really know how to do.
Oh yeah, they are also very skilled at blowing $100K+ on coke and hookers.
That's funny, it works fine on my player. Pop it and it automatically jumps to the menu on its own.
But then again, my player is VideoLAN Client, aka VLC.
First they came for the cockroaches
and I did not speak out
because I was not a cockroach.
Then they came for the sheep
and I did not speak out
because I was not a sheep.
Then they came for the chickens
and I did not speak out
because I was not a chicken.
Then they came for the humans
and there were only robots left
and none would speak out for me.
[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Hey everybody, it's the guy with one quote and no brain!
Maybe if you post it three or four more times that will make it true.
I've already refuted it once, that should be plenty.
Quran: [5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Jesus H Christ! Another dittohead with quotes but no research of their own.
Here: Some Misappropriations of Quranic Verses. In short, the original Arabic "Auliya" has been mistranslated into "friend" without regard for context. With context, it is easy to see that it should translate as "military protector." Even if it really did mean "friend," that is lightyears away from meaning "sons of monkeys and pigs" as the first dittohead stated.
If you're going to blame European colonialism on Christianity than you have to blame "a government program to create nukes" on Islam.
Apparently you are just as simpled minded as the other poster, let me walk you through it SAT style:
first guy: al-queda == islam
me: terrorists:islam as kkk:christianity
dittohead: kkk < government with nukes
me: so what? government != al-queda
you: christianity:colonialism as islam:nukes
me: WTF?
As for moslem being an insult - I've never heard of this. In fact, looking on google
Oh, you, a non-muslim have never head of it and can't figure out how to work google so it must be ok? Do you really think I just made it up? If I were the dittohead who obviously doesn't know shit about islam, then yeah but after refuting him with facts and you still think I don't know what the hell I'm talking about? Come on.
hypocrite
dumbshit
Why don't you look in google for the terms moslem and derogatory, of the 4000+ hits it shouldn't take you too long to find a couple that explain it.
I'm telling you that even if Iraqis were driving tanks through main street that we would NEVER resort to car bombing OUR OWN FREAKING POLICE STATIONS set up by the Iraqis during reconstruction, or cutting OUR OWN FREAKING OIL PIPELINES.
You don't think so do you? Maybe you missed out on all the bad, bad shit that went down in Northern Ireland and those are two ethnic groups a whole lot more similar than most Americans and Iraqis. But if the Irish aren't a close enough example to home, you might want to look at how British sympathizers were treated during the American revolution.
Where is the Muslim analogue to the Pope???
So now Islam has to be defined in terms of Christianity? What about all the protestants? Are they so bad since they don't have a central figurehead to preach being nice? There are plenty of islamic scholars and clerics who preach peace, go to your nearest mosque and you will hear from one yourself. Just because the rabble-rousers get all the press doesn't mean that what they say applies to anything more than a group of mostly teenage and twenty-something boys.
Sistani is just playing politics and maneuvering for his long-term benefit. He is as much a politician as he is a cleric.
Who is going to clean up the dirty laundry in Islam? Personally I think the majority of believers like it just the way it is, and feel they are being consistent with the truth of Islam, whether you want to admit it or not.
How many muslims do you know personally? Sure, there is plenty of shit that people accept rather than question, but that is true of any society and America is no exception. All of the muslims I know are just as "good" and as "bad" as everybody else in my community - well, I do know a few nutjobs in favor of nuking the mid-east and "turning it into a parking lot" whom I consider to be a lot worse than any muslim that I have ever met.
Uh, huh. That would be why the same book refers to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys
Man, I sure wish I could be a dittohead. Then I could go around being all confident in my RIGHTeousness and wouldn't need any supporting proof at all. What the Quran REALLY said is that in a particular story where one group of jews ignored the sabbath, the other group of jews called the first group sons of apes, among other things for disobeying God's will. God eventually came along and punished the first group, eventually wiping them out after warning them a few times first. Big whoop-de-freaking-do! Old testament is full of stuff 100x worse than that.
Also says its cheif prophet married a 7-year-old when he was in his 50s, but he was nice about it and waited 'til she was 9 before he "took her as his bride".
More dittohead nonsense. First, the Quran is NOT ABOUT Mohammed's life. If you knew jackshit about Islam, you would know that. The whole big deal is that it is suppossed to be literally God's word to Mohammed, not some sort of autobiography.
Second, there are a couple of references to Aisha, Mohammed's last wife as being 7/9 in some of the stories about Mohammed, but there are plenty of other references to her being significantly older anywhere from 12 to 20 or more. Here's a good debunker on that whole silliness.
Let me clue you into something - it may be full of guys who fuck their cousins and their sheep (sometimes it's hard to tell the difference), but the KKK isn't within two years of completing a nuclear weapons development programme.
And exactly how does a government program to create nukes have ANYTHING to do with a fringe interpretation of a religion? Really? Could you at least stay on topic instead of resorting to dittohead logic?
Unless you're a moslem, I'd suggest you root for the side that's not trying to kill or force into submission the 4.5 billion of us who haven't drunk its particular brand of theological Kool-Aid.
Hey, big suprise, dittoheads are innumerate too.
1) People who consider themselves Christian number only about 2 billion (33% of the world population) and that is decreasing.
2) People who consider themselves Muslim number about 1.2 billion (20% of the world population) that is increasing.
citation
The Christans figured it out 500 years ago during the Reformation. You're welcome to join us, but you're long overdue, and we're getting really fucking sick of waiting.
Bull-fucking-shit. Heard of the British Empire? European colonialism? Just because they didn't call it the HRE doesn't mean they didn't blame God for their actions. That stuff was going on well into the 20th century and we are still living with the remnants even today.
PS - "moslem" is considered a low-grade insult, equivalent to "xian." But it's clear you have no respect for other people's religion which is probably why you use the term in the first place. Ironic that would be the case in a discussion in which you erroneously make the same essential accusation of about a billion or so muslims.
Many portions of Isam feel that any other religion is inferior and almost sinful, and thus many hate Jews, Christians, etc.
Uh, huh. That would be why the Quran refers to Jews, Christians and Muslims as all "children of the book."
For instance, in the terrorst handbook thing the British found on a raid, there were discussions on why it is ok to torture. The basic idea was that Muslums are allowed to torture others because they are Gods children, while others are not allowed to.
Let me clue you into something - the muslim extremists are about as Islamic as the KKK are Christian. Taking what they say as representative of the religion is a great way to delude yourself, and justify all kinds of terrible things.
But, let's take the response one step further, you say that modern "Christian" societies have progressed beyond such barbaric reasoning? That would explain this memo from the current administration rationalizing torture in the "war on terror."
So, just who now are we suppossed to be rooting for?
I'd like to be wrong but a system like this will probably stay monochrome for a while yet.
Depends on what you want to pay.
Red and green diode lasers into the 100mw range are readily available for around $500 retail. The blue is in the $1k-2k range.
I would easily pay $5K street for a doodad like this that would do 2048x1024 at 70Hz or better if it was bright enough and had good photo-realism, contrast should be excellent since it is off/on with the mirror. I wouldn't mind it weighing 10lbs and being as big as an encyclopedia, I certainly don't need it in my cell phone.
10 years from now, I could see it in a $100 cell phone, but in the meantime they don't have to get anywhere near that price-point or unit size to have a viable product.
Last time I did a Nielsen TV rating diary, they paid $5 a week.
I think we now know why TV caters to the lowest common denominator - $5/wk to give up my privacy and maybe manually fill out paper records of what I watch? Only people with nothing better to do are going to participate.
Just think, if someone were to hack the Nielson system, and instead of doing it to be a 1337 B1FF, no bragging rights, just subtle social engineering, we could get some good shows that last.
No more cancelation of a good show because the network can't schedule it well, no more reality show spam. Heck, we could get more pr0n on the air - the next Janet to whip out a tit will get crazy good numbers - fuck the FCC!
Hacking Nielson is better than being president, its like being the the guy who pulls the prez's strings, but without having to worry about a heart attack.
This post is not meant to encourage anyone
Sorry, the DMCA does not provide for a defense by disclaimer. You have now committed a federal felony. Please report to your nearest Ass. of Amerrica for induction to the copyright reeducation camps.
Wrong. Have you read the GPL? See section 3b. If you do not distribute the source to the recipient of the binary, you must provide offer valid for any third party to request the source from you.
As a developer of custom software myself, it did not even occur to me that a client would accept an executable without full source too. I suppose such suckers do exist somewhere out there, so I'll give you that.
However unlikely such a hypothetical situation might be in real life, if the developer does not satisfy their obligation under section 3a (i.e. provide source to the client) then yes, the develoepr (not the client) would then have to provide source to anyone who asked for it, for three years.
I develop custom software for a lot of companies and making sure that I follow the licenes is very dear to me because that way the company feels comfortable, with me and feels secure using the project. If I use a GPL Library I tell them that I am using a GPL library and if anyone want the source to this program you will have to release it to them.
Maybe you were just being sloppy with your terminology, but what you wrote is incorrect.
If you incorporate GPL'd code into custom software, the only people who are entitled to the source code of the program are the entities who receive the binary of the program -- not just anyone who wants the source.
Since custom software is typically developed on contract for internal use and not resale or redistribution, it is unlikely that anyone else beyond your original client will have standing to call for the source code.
And you have proof that these soldiers were acting on orders from the Pentagon? Well, that's a relief. You'll save the US tax payers millions in wasted investigations into this matter.
It does not matter if I have proof or not. You completely miss the point.
What matters is how the story plays out in the population of about a billion people for which Osama is still one of, if not the most, common names given to newborn boys.
And if you are going to smugly ask them if they have proof or not, you better first deal with all of that suddenly missing proof about WMDs in Iraq. At least there are pictures of Abu Graib.