Anyone can give consent; responsibility says that you make an uncivil posit by asking animals/children to consent to have sex with you. Bigotry? Ask a professional.

None of these are arbitrary. Anyone can be seduced. As a higher species, we bear civil responsibility. Screwing animals isn't responsible.

Screwing children is the same answer. They have insufficient nexus and context to say "yes". They're children.

Consent isn't legal fiction, it's civility. All else is rape.

You're conflating pre-disposed behavior with an action, and you forgot: consent. Animals can't give consent. Children can't give consent (and shouldn't need to be asked). Siblings are usually underage during incestuous phases and they can't give consent because they're children.

Being attracted (or not) to any gender can work, but the Judeo/Christian/Islamic ways (subject to some notable exception) argues against non-heterosexual relationships, except asexuality-- which oddly is lauded. Homosexuality doesn't produce offsprings, except in rare cases not worth mentioning (not talking about bisexuality).

Consensual sex is key. We go successfully from "consensual".

Redacting sounds good on the surface, but piecing the info back together again is somewhat trivial. Sharpies don't do a great job when you can blow something up to ridiculous multiples, then use pattern recognition to infer the data hidden behind the redaction.

It's better to have Norton AV recognize this as a virus. That'll get rid of it. Yeah. Or give it to an IRS exec in the form of an email.....

And amazingly, no one at NASA will be sacked as a result of this.

There is something negative in exchange for the average tax payer, called: we prop up the difference because the bills still need to get paid. Teachers, public safety, roads, etc etc.

This is yet another example of how that thick, bought-and-paid-for tax code benefits those who bought and paid for it. That means most of us that thought that government fairness wasn't an oxymoron get another kick in the slats.

Remember to vote. And if in Chicagoland, often and frequently.

Think about it. They already know who you are unless you anonymously purchased a "drop" phone. With either GPS or LBS, they know where the phone's been. It was with you, likely. You fell asleep where you live, so that's your address, resolved to about 1m most places. There's a MAC address on the phone, very difficult to spoof. There are two more IDs on the phone, one as your EIMI or equiv, and other that's buried in a firmware-reachable mem location.

You drove by the sniffing cell towers on your way into the airport. If WiFi was on, it sniffed that, too. Up against a database linking users to cell, another easily done link says: whoa there, Chuck, you're on the no-way-Jose list. We're going to ask you to step into our office after we get the nekkid picture of you.

Yeah, I'm giving them too much credit, partly in humor. Such a scenario isn't outside of the realm of real possibility. Why use so much technology when you can mark ropes? Next they'll be weighing passengers with rugs made out of load cells so they can balance plane weights before you ever get to the bankrupt pizza maker on the next concourse.

Um, the line goes to here, so about X. If the line goes to there, ummm, y.

They just wanna check your MAC address to ensure you're not on the NoFly list so that they can handle your incarceration discretely.

More of a problem is finding 32-bit distros with updated apps that don't trigger CVE issues. Dusty Linux distros are almost as dangerous, as, dare I say it, old Windows releases.

Try an energy link and go check CVEs using the string openssh for starters. Kernel? No. All the crap in the back? Oh, yeah.

Some kids will become good and responsible coders, but not all kids. Some will be artists, musicians, mechanics, farmers, etc., and for the rest of the world that doesn't code, a heavy responsibility is placed on the FOSS community to do code reviews.

People don't compile at all. They download binaries, and they don't know the difference between an MD5, a SHA-x and a hole in the ground. Binaries therefore need special protection. Open Source doesn't mean anyone's actually looking at the code, and there needs to be peer review on critical components given with distros, but this isn't guaranteed to happen. Instead, there's an incredible bloat of stuff that we HOPE is good. An actual process might be better. What kind? Something more than Linus yelling at you.

I would agree with you, but we need to train them first so as to avoid the problems associated with the usual tech support issues. There are many that could easily qualify, including token devices, session-based tokens, even anonymized public keys. Many choices.

But businesses don't want the overhead, and no one seems to get punished except----> users when the info is breached or misused in any way. Nobody seems to get punished.

"Locks keep your friends out; your enemies have pick tools".

You can make anything up you want, but changing them frequently is the key to killing their usefulness when there are bulk thefts of passwords. These things go undetected for months. If you'd changed already, you're good-- unless the crack gets the deltas, too, which is unlikely.

Stupid passwords will still be stupid, but no use to go to incredible lengths unless your keys are extremely valuable-- then go to a Yubikey or another secondary auth. Key age is probably more critical than its ability to be dictionary attacked, IMHO.

Liberty exists rarely, anywhere.

You see, it might be Dubai, but the software will be perfected there, and it will migrate elsewhere. Slowly, it becomes acceptable in a conventional sense. Then it becomes "the norm".

A thousand cuts..... then a million.