> It's just evidence that creation isn't needed to work.

Guys, we are discussing an hypothetical guy residing outside of, and creator of, TIME itself.
You, and all the others, make NO SENSE because you imagine creation IN TIME vs. evolution IN TIME, instead of creation OF Time, the universe, with all its peculiarities like emergent life vs. a patch to introduce life (which seems bad programming style itself, and probably not what the genesis and similar books meant, at all).

If you make a tiny effort and watch things from the POV of a hypothetical god who stands beyond the concept of time, there is no problem in creating a universe with free will agents and knowing how it's going to end up, or in creating an evolving universe that ends up exactly the way you do, or in creating a universe whose time extends indefinitely in both directions and so on.

Face it, creation and evolution are orthogonal issues, just as who and why are orthogonal questions. Those who prefer to pit science against religion, just founded the religion of science and I applaud them on their proliferation effort.

Besides, who's more peer with respect to the author than the author itself? I tell you, it can't get more peery than this.

> The idea of patents was to foster innovation.
the idea they used to sell you the idea of patents was to foster innovation. De facto, patents are working as intended. I agree with you nonetheless.

Dang, I must have missed the speech declaring potholes higher in the priorities list than curing cancer.

Yours is not a good example, PRO, performing right organizations, SACEM in france SIAE in Italy, have long had agreements in place to get performing rights from each other's protected works. The law governing those territories is a problem of the resident PRO.

Nice to know that in our beloved EU the top priority for a politician is the harmonization of copyright. It means that all the other pressing problems have been solved.

This. Badly used Javascript, like html frame elements, also break the stateful nature of webpages, and this means breaking the concept of hypertext itself.
If sites were designed with optional javascript and ajax, they would work as well and referring to web content would be much easier. The semantic web was already there.

Of course big sites don't offer you the content as easily. Get logged in, get profiled, don't get out.

They have circumvented a protection measure, that is wiping the phone- a faulty protection measure, but that doesn't matter, as history taught us if you find holes and publicize them, no matter the responsibility of the manufacturer, you are terrorist!

Moreover, it is clear they have an interest in selling their own protection products, and that they have given bad ideas to people who normally would have started using the second hand phone and overwriting the crap with their own crap.

So why doesn't avast end up in trouble like $RANDOM_HACKER ? Huh?

Before MTV, cellphones and in general the sensory overload of contemporary urban life, extroverts could stay with themselves for 15 minutes too.

Introverts are to be considered uncool, not because they are more or less abnormal (the media hype, and therefore sanction, people with degenerate, inane, self-harming behavior: get a teenager's top 20 chart and listen to the lyrics).
They are uncool because they think too much for themselves. The system improperly known as society want people who respond to emotions, not thinkers.

I have a cunning plan, my lord.
  - The guest doesn't get open internet access.
  - The wifi provider opens up a secure tunnel with a server designated, or owned by the guest. The ISP is foiled.
  - The guest connect to it and sets up a secure tunnel itself, through which he accesses the internet. The wifi provider is foiled as it cannot snoop on it and cannot be considered responsible by what the guest does, morally. Legally it's another matter, but then, the law is immoral. Also if the guest misbehaves the investigators will find the server designated/owned by the guest first, which is probably the right place to investigate if you want to find the real source.

> CMB is based on data that can't be explained any other *reasonable* way
There are no parameters for defining reasonable or unreasonable things in a universe, if you happen to exist in the same universe, because you have no way to discover all the rules from the inside of it. I posit you have no way to discover any of the rules from the inside of it.

Science does not explain, science models.
Because for every chain of reasons that science can come up with, "the last element is "because it is that way".

> they call it BoringSSL because it contains a backdoor tunneling protocol.

In fact, I was thinking: "Boring, my ass", but I didn't know exactly why.

You left out some other possibilities. Sufficiently advanced civilizations might travel by hacking the spacetime, or by out of body experiences. So we might be observed without alien spacecrafts hovering over our heads.
And the observers might indeed be quite bored.

> No way! Not even possible.

Pffft. Get one, step on it, voila'.

For something completely different, I'll put a man on LEGO, any takers?

In the alternate universe where nokia execs say "Fuck you, disseminate the key" we have nokia with a hacker friendly smartphone platform OR an instantly obsoleted platform thanks to evil hackers. I guess they would be better off than this nokia.
"Being broken" was the business model of microsoft windows and they became number one with it.