Maybe he needs to register it on the internet to unlock all of the functionality.

There are customers willing to pay to get software developed to solve their specific problems but lack incentive to also make a profit on it by selling it to other parties. I currently develop software under different GPL licenses (as per request of the client). That way there is a smaller risk of IP conflicts of who actually owned the code (now it doesn't matter). There is also a chance that new functionality will be developed, driven by the need of others that this customer can benefit from in the future. By choosing an appropriate GPL license you can ensure that you have the option to benefit should a competitor decide to expand on your work. It does not mean that you have to GPL all your code, and if necessary you can use it with a non GPL license internally if required.

As for giving something away that originally cost a lot of money, do you never give anything away? I give away used electronics, clothes, toys and furniture. Some of it could probably be sold instead, but the effort of doing that is not worth it (for me). An easier option for me would be to just throw the stuff away and that might even benefit producers as some of the useful products would no longer be available, but this way there is a chance that they will be reused and benefit society as a whole.

Since you are using https you obviously think you have something to hide, that in it self is very suspicious.

Did you use SHA-0 or SHA-1? If you really did find a collision I think you should try to reproduce your case as I have so far not seen any success of not only being able to create hash(m1) == hash(m2) but also m1 and m2 are meaningful messages. I did find some papers indicating that it might "not be much harder" than finding collisions. A collision in the wild would probably warrant a whole bunch publications.

Sorry about crashing in on you, we come in peace, I promise. I'll just fire my laser for a while over there. No hard feelings right?

If they make extraordinary statements or statements that goes against common knowledge then I agree, it is their job to provide evidence that the statement is true, but for ordinary life some acceptance or due diligence to investigate is probably acceptable. Or are you one of those that will not leave a building just because of the fire alarm? You need to see the actual flames first?

As far as I know there are no scientific studies that jumping out of an airplane (flying, not standing on the ground) without a parachute is dangerous. There are even some cases where people survived such a jump. However, will you accept my statement that "jumping out of an airplane without a parachute is dangerous"? Or is a double or triple blind study needed where a few thousand people jump out of different types of airplanes, some with, and some without parachutes?

Does that make the math of the original poster any more correct?

Must be a big bomb to make a train fall 50,000 feet from a 14,440 feet mountain.

Commenting to remove my down vote. Big fat whoosh on my part.

Is murder "widely disobeyed"? I think a survey asking people if they share music illegally and / or they think all music should be shared freely would get a very different "yes" rate than if they were asked if they murder other people and / or you should be free to murder other persons freely.

I think there are organizations wary interested in this. Since the pieces do not need to look like regular puzzles but instead have straight edges and the software handles pieces that do not belong, the terms puzzle can be expanded. Suddenly the puzzle could be reassembling shredded documents and I'm sure we don't have to be very imaginative to come up with organizations that have interest in that.

Every single hash of 22 characters including symbols are probably more than you expect. Just using upper and lower case and digits in combinations of length 1-22 would give you 2752193871537130242917970742712955267306 combinations. That's quite a few to store.

Last time flying to and in USA I had to insist to get the pat down. The situation was basically the same in Atlanta, JFK and Newark, when asking to not go through the full-boy scanner I was first told that every one has to. When insisting I was asked why, and finally they removed the barrier (Newark had no barrier) so I could go through the metal detector. I was then made to wait for someone to come over and do the pat-down.

I can easily understand why someone would thing that you have no choose when the choose you have is closed of, you get information that you should not use it and when you insist you get question of why by a uniformed person that most of us have been trained to obey.

To be fair, the persons actually doing the pat-down were nice, professional and informed me along the way what they were doing (although they seemed quite worried about being accused of groping).

Who has time to read the whole summary? I can form my opinion from the title alone.