Oh, that's the competent service department!
Just key in the following sequence with your phone:
Don't listen to the automated call system, it will just confuse you.
Wait 30 minutes to speak to some underpaid kid that simply does not give a shit, argue with him for precisely 29:59 minutes, repeat for half a day, and eventually decide that competence is a matter of perspective and so the next person must be competent enough to speak to if you go back to the nice voice that you started your day with.
When this is clearly wrong and 3 kids have been fired from their minimum wage jobs for following procedure with you, just deal with it, accept the next slightly-better-than-shit thing that comes your way and go about your day glad that it's over with and the last person that you spoke to was competent enough to get you off the phone.
This is perhaps one of the very few uses of copyright law that I actually agree with. MLK's words don't belong in burger commercials, and his ideals are already regularly trampled on by people looking to sell him as a cuddly pro-establishment public speaker that brought us a couple of changes to the wording in the law books without ever aspiring for more, or trying to organize a greater movement to benefit the nation's impoverished. Idolizing him in this way is at least as disingenuous as trying to sell Ronald Reagan as a great, popular leader that brought prosperity to all Americans. In about 15 years I suppose we'll be hearing hacked-together sound bytes from Mumia Abu Jamal on death row praising the American military industry for bringing true security to his family.
As far as not being able to find the videos, they are on youtube, they're just not necessarily legally there, meaning that you can watch them but Google can't CG a clown suit on him and use the animated gif as a mascot until people never want to see him or hear him again. If the videos do come down, they'll go back up in spite of the law because people want other people to watch it. It's important to us because we care about the man and what he stood for, and I'm sure his family is happy about that. We're going to share it as part of our culture whether it's technically legal or not, and I'm going to assume with reason and good faith that his family wants people to know what he really fought for, and that their disagreement rests more on who is profiting from crushing what remains of his legacy. There is definitely a lot to disagree with in the way he is most often presented.
While I don't care to read anything posted by this man ever again, I can see his perspective and appreciate that he genuinely cares about the project... even if his take on things seems a little silly and sometimes tramples on my idea of what free computing should mean.
I can only believe that he doesn't speak for everybody involved with GNOME 3, and that a good many of my current negative views of GNOME 3 will be put down by 3.2 which will hopefully fuss about my video drivers a bit less (working suspend doesn't mean much if the UI doesn't load). Right now it just occupies space on my session menu and I look forward to the day that I can choose between KDE, XFCE, GNOME, and Openbox when I log in depending on how I feel at the time. There's a bit of promise in GNOME 3 and I would be happy to see it fulfilled, with the caveat that I already have an Android phone and I'm not interested in downgrading to a netbook user experience any time soon.
That said, I wasn't using GNOME 2 when it was scuttled and wasn't around when KDE 4 was brand new so I don't know what it's like to have my favourite environment of many years pulled out from under me.
Off-topic: I understand that everybody and their cousin is all about the "cheap server-side storage"
"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead." -- Lucy Van Pelt