This study has a huge hole in it. It didn't regulate how many calories the participants took in. Which would be fine, it both groups took in the same amount of calories. But they didn't - the low fat group took in considerably more. So rather than show that low carb diet is superior to the low fat diet, it shows (*get ready to be amazed*) that eating more calories results in weight gain.

"What food is good?" and "What's the best place to live?" aren't particularly part of the "news for nerds" paradigm. Questions about phone apps are. I don't know about Apple's store, but Google Play is absolutely abysmal when it comes to helping users find great apps. I think his question is fine, and on point.

I'm anything but a conspiracy nut. I think we landed on the moon, that Oswald shot Kennedy, and that Icke is a con man. But the timing on this is seriously convenient. We want to attack ISIS, and *poof*, evidence suddenly shows up that ISIS has weapons of mass destruction. It's enough to make me consider making tinfoil hats.

I would've gone with "One png to replace them all."

60Tb/s is fine for me, but what about the other people who want to use it?

Not bothering to do the math, but assuming you're correct, that's still damned rare. Setting aside this being a precedent and the possibility of the slippery slope, the fact that this accidental collision only brings about a search warrant and possibly short term arrest, combined with its rarity, seem to make it not a huge problem. If you get hit with the rare collision, once they find out that the picture in the email was your kid at a theme park rather than child porn, you'll get your computer back and no prosecution will occur. That one person a year (a high side estimate) will be annoyed, maybe spend a night in a local jail, and be without their computers for a few weeks is hardly a horrible, horrible thing.

"Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?"

You mean the labor he did at the job he got to on public roads and learned to do in public schools and universities? At the company that was bailed out by the federal government in the 80s? That provides a paycheck he puts in a federally protected bank (that itself was bailed out by the federal government)?

You mean the sweat produced by his hard work as he breathes the clean air that the government mandates? The hard work that he'll thankfully get paid breaks and mandated lunch time away from, thanks to government regulation? At a work environment that his greedy bosses only keep relatively safe because the government forces them to?

No, he's not entitled to the sweat of his brow. At least not all of it.