If we're talking about Dropbox's general security IQ, how about the bug that allowed anyone to access any account with any password?

http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/20/dropbox-security-bug-made-passwords-optional-for-four-hours/

And before anyone freaks out and thinks that the NSA is reading their e-mail, keep in mind that they have to be very selective about how and when they use results from their quantum computer. This is similar to breaking ENIGMA--you want the enemy to think that their codes are secure, so you don't suddenly counter all of their plans perfectly. You certainly don't turn this on e.g. classical organized crime, as that could give away your capabilities on a considerably less valuable target.

Then the summary was worded terribly.

Nah, as others have pointed out, what you do is run the Shor's algorithm, then verify it. If it's wrong, run Shor's again. If it's right, you know you have the factorization. In this way, you can be 100% sure that you've correctly solved the problem, even if Shor's only provides the correct answer some percentage of the time.

What I don't fully understand is why 48% makes this impractical. Having not read TFA, the only way I can imagine that would be the case is if somehow not having exactly a 50% chance of getting the correct answer means that the algorithm doesn't scale correctly. Even only being correct 10% of the time would mean that you could break RSA much faster than you can without quantum computers. I suspect that was some bad editorializing.

What wouldn't be practical under these conditions is factoring larger numbers. You need more qubits for that. Nevertheless, this is a nice stepping stone towards high-qubit computing.

Actually, grade-school children can factor really large prime numbers in their heads. The trick is factoring the product of two really large prime numbers in your head without knowing either of the primes. You can get two of the factors (one and the product) but neither of those is particularly useful to the problem at hand.

Just FYI, it's the product of two secret primes. Product is for multiplication, while sum is for addition.

But the jurors are the ones who would have to decide that. So again, it's all up to the jury. And they don't come back with a verdict of "nullification"--they need only come back with the verdict that nullification would imply.

Programmers from the 70s would laugh at that statement.

That means Windows is a better product than Linux, right? Same for OS X?

I'm not sure what "harmless" means here--IANAL--but the harm from failure to disclose could have to do with the other party not knowing about the evidence. Since Apple introduced the evidence in open court, it's hard to imagine that they don't know about said evidence.

Yup. This is why competition is good for consumers.

This is truly the year of the Android tablet.

Politicians criminalized drug use and sales. They are clearly the reason that the market for drugs has to go underground.

When the government is creating the problem, it's perfectly reasonable to rest the blame there.

This is really odd, because usually this kind of response comes up when someone wants the government to help them in some way (providing food, shelter, health care) instead of when the government is restricting what people do (selling drugs, leasing their bodies.)

I doubt it, but I'm not sure what the relevancy of that question is.

It might be feasible to do something like that with AppArmor. To be honest, I'm really not sure.