Why wouldn't you be allowed to sell sequences of numbers you have received in the mail?

So what's your solution chief.

OTP encryption can't be broken. There are still encrypted WWII messages that aren't broken. The question is, how long will your sensitive information be sensitive. It is physically impossible for something to be perpetually valued (unlike what Disney wants you to believe, if Steamboat Willy loses it's copyright it is not going to break the box office, it is just a historical curiosity).

Within 100 years, Goldman Sachs probably won't be around anymore and all their clients will have died. What numbers are in that account today will be a historical curiosity, even if it were damning the entire company today, when it's broken they'll just put in a formal apology for crimes past. Even so, if it was created today, what bits do you think will be left over within 100 years?

Current encryption (256-1024 bit) with a good key is projected to be good enough for at least several hundred years even if we get to quantum computing between now and then. By then, it will be similar to reverse engineering the Enigma.

I don't even know how they could arrest the guy. He had done nothing at that point, he had made no plans to do anything, no tools, according to his ex who installed spyware on his computer, he was supposedly writing on anonymous fetish sites.

And they were able to hold him for several months on this and he needed a psychiatrist to clear him? Ridiculous.

I would hope that my ISP's alerts me to legal action. If you have ISP's just complying with every legal request as some already do with DMCA, you can forget about ever getting to anything.

But that's what I mean. However, C++ is slower than C, C is simpler to implement and virtually any platform has a C compiler but it doesn't do a lot of things out of the box. You choose the tool you need and best suited for the job. I can't program a PIC in JavaScript, but I can do a website.

Not exactly. Dish does the same that Aereo did - they allow customers to access their own DVR where they recorded information using their own antennae over the Internet. Aereo allowed customers to access their own DVR where they recorded information using their own antennae over the Internet.

Aereo rents out the antenna
Dish rents out the satellite dish
Aereo rents out the DVR
Dish rents out the DVR
Aereo allows access over the Internet
Dish allows access over the Internet

Dish pays broadcast rights to send things over their satellites to customers' antennae
Local TV stations pay broadcast rights to send things to customers' antennae

I don't see a difference.

If you believe in 'white male privilege' spend a day at family court - you'll quickly forget that notion. Heck, spend a day in any court of law and you'll see the difference between the preferential treatments females and so-called minorities get over the typical 'white male'.

Once you start checking bounds and counting references and making strings safe and cleaning memory and garbage collection you're in the realm of ObjC, Java and other higher languages. They exist, they are available and can be used to implement any algorithm imaginable. Yet programmers still use C, Assembler and even PROM...

There are safes out there that are virtually impossible to break into. And when you do attempt, they destroy the contents inside.

Yes you did. And if it weren't online, it was in front of the stadium at least as far back as Sinatra.

You'll need $200/y for just an Office (Office365) and simple photo/music management suite (Adobe CC), which is included in every purchase of a Mac.

The funny thing is, MBA's even early models are still worth a pretty dime second hand (usually 50-80% of purchase price based on condition and age), Surface Pro's won't fetch more than 1/3 of their purchase price.

Net Neutrality is about preventing the providers from fiddling with your bandwidth simply because they want to extort money.

QoS was never part of Net Neutrality. If a Google or an Amazon wants to pay 1Mbps for a line directly to my house, that is FINE with me. They pay for the QoS and peering agreements at that point. However that does not mean the provider can now give me 9Mbps instead of 10Mbps because the Googles of this world paid for 1Mbps direct lines. And that is what this is all about. Comcast/TWC wants to sell my 10Mbps that I have over and over again to the highest bidders so I have 1Mbps to the Google, 1Mbps to the Netflix, 1Mbps to the Amazon and 7Mbps for the rest of the world. I want my 10Mbps and decide who I want to get services from.

I paid Comcast/TWC for the 10Mbps, I could reasonably assume that they give me 10Mbps to the "Internet". They pay for peering at an Internet Exchange. Google pays for peering at an IX, Netflix pays for peering at an IX. The IX makes sure that there is plenty of bandwidth at the IX to have the 10Mbps from Google to go to Netflix and TWC. The problem is now TWC wants to squeeze the Netflixes and the Googles simply because they are a large portion of the traffic they've been seeing and thus they're an easy target. TWC has been oversubscribed 1000:1 and even though data requirements have increased 10-fold, I am still at the same speed that I had 10-15 years ago. So now they need to actually get along with the rest of the world and they don't want to, they'd rather someone else pay for it (over and over again).

In a free market, I would go to whoever gave me the fastest connection to the Netflix. However in the US at least there is no choice so I am at the mercy of my provider. And even though they are a monopoly, they also don't want to be classified as a utility since then they could be regulated and forced to play fair like my other utilities.

So best case scenario is that you lobby away PAC money in the next election cycle. Once you have reached your goal, what do you think is going to prevent lawmakers from finding other loopholes in the laws to do something similar-but-not-equal the cycle after that? As we've seen with FISA/DMCA/... - if they can't do it this year, they'll try and try again until they can get their ways.

In other words, do you think getting rid of PAC's is going to solve anything about corporate money flowing into government. And once you have outlawed the only avenue currently available (a PAC that is run by the people) that can somewhat level the playing field for citizens, what other avenues will there be to fight this corruption?

Among other things, administrative overhead. There is a huge issue with leadership at all educational institutions. They have been protected from the failing economy by raising tuition and a de-facto monopoly as well as government funding. On the other hand, they are often at the low end offering of wages in the geographical area. This results in the most inept administrators continuing to take the lead, no accountability for failed project expenditures and the best talent in their pool being poached by the industry. Look at the average University student-to-employee ratio, you often find 50% more employees than students where students are often educated 100-250 at a time.