Ok, but if a bank operates with bitcoins it might not just loose a few millions, but everything it possesses in a hack.

What could you gain if you hacked a bank? Whatever changes you make, if they find out they will just undo them.
That is not possible with bitcoins.

With such a massive volcanic eruption, doesn't mass extinction result mainly from dust in the atmosphere, which is blocking sunlight and stopping photosynthesis? And they still find something that can be compared to 21st century?

I think for some parties it is best when he stays locked into that embassy. So they are not gonna change anything and Assange must stay there until he is willing to risk to go to Sweden.

A good image merging algorithm could also do the trick, though these normally go wrong sometimes. Maybe not an alternative with this large amount of images.

From what I know these changes are to protect against credit card numbers s stolen from online trading, and to stop skimming. It is no longer enough to copy a magnetic stripe and steal a pin to get the money if no country in the world accepts magnetic stripes any more. USA is one of the last who does, a large part of the withdrawals in skimming attacks is done there now.

Ok, that makes sense. I guess they differentiate for the country where the card comes from. Because if they accept a card with only a magnetic stripe from Europe they will not get any cash from the bank if there was a fraud.

Your credit cards don't even have the microprocessors yet? So you can not use them at cash machines in large parts of the world anymore?

These computers are parts of botnets that exist for a long time. Send the infected customers an email about their infection, containing the offer to fix it (for a certain price) and a deadline when they will be cut off if they do not get this fixed.

But why should this tower only be good for the A-3, and not for other rocket engines? Or did the NASA stop engine development completely?

The article acts as if they are wasting $350 million by completing it. But it does not say how much has been spent already. Maybe there is not that much money to save by cancelling it?
And I can't believe that the NASA will not use it in the future, the article also gives no real reason for that.

Fructose occurs naturally in fruits, but not in that large amounts and only combined with fibre. You would never eat that much fruits, and the fructose would be taken up slower.

But we can only cope with low body hair because we know ho to make clothes. Animals can't do that and will either loose to much energy keeping their body warm or cool down and become slow and easy prey.

I think this could also be a by-product. Having low amounts of body hair greatly reduces problems with parasites. It gives us most flexibility for the temperatures that we can collect fruits in.
Reducing the hair and especially increasing the number of sweet glands are probably quite simple modifications. And we had over a million years to become what we are, so only minimal selective pressure is needed.

There was no way to burn CDs at home in 1990. Just take a look at the Wikipedia article on CD-R.
A 1990 CD writer was the size of a washing machine and costing $35000. The first recorder under $1000 came out in September 1995.