US citizens: call on Scalia to recuse himself from the case about dishonest "crisis pregnancy centers".

US citizens: call on the Federal Bureau of Prisons to bring back education for prisoners.

The Heatland (*) Institute worked long and hard denying the harm that tobacco does to health, before it took its expertise to denying global heating.

* Officially the "Heartland" Institute.

Apple's patent aggression against Android resulted in a loss for free software, even though Apple did not get the big money or the injunction it sought.

Software should be exempted entirely from patent law.

Reading on paper seems to be better than reading ebooks, even in a direct practical sense.

This point is interesting, but doesn't go beyond the shallowest of values: what it's like to read. Ebooks affect other values that people have considered important.

For instance, when technology and EULAs block and prohibit people from giving or lending books freely to others, they damage our social relationships. Most commercial ebooks are like that.

When ebooks are designed for products that snoop on users' reading, and permit a store to remotely erase their books, they damage our human rights. Most commercial ebook readers are like that.

See http://stallman.org/ebooks.pdf for more details.

Even acquiring a copy means being snooped on, if you have to identify yourself to the store. That's massive surveillance. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/surveillance-vs-democracy.html.

I've read some ebooks on my computer's screen, and it's ok. But I'd never get an ebook under the limits that commercial ebooks impose today. I won't let the question of what it's like to read distract me from what it's like to lose freedom.