The main problem is the "there is no solution" answer. What if we use the algorithm for a number N for several iterations and found that there are no valid decompositions. Can we ensure that the number is prime?

Aka: I do not want the insecurity of losing my workplace if my boss happens to learn in slashdot how clueless I am.

Seriously... could you send us the resumé that you sent to get that job?

My thoughts exactly. What a hacker needs to succeed should be in his/her brain; a network connection is needed but bandwidth is not the bottleneck.

Unless by hackers someone means "Kim Dotcom wannabes".

TFA says that he is probably going to spend his life in prison (up to 124 years).

So (provided that he is currently not jailed), the sentencing is improved not by release date but by entry date. If that guy was to die (or released due to age) in (say) 30 years, entering prison today means a served time of 30 years. Entering in six months would mean a served time of 29 years and six months.

Who did this guy kill?

Following in your line...

I bet the six months things is just an excuse for the REAL plan. Currently, a "Man in black" is having surgery to get his face changed to that of Monsegur. The six months are needed for healing/removing the scars, and for tattooing the prison plans in his penis.

After the six months, and just after the entry in jail, that agent will protagonize an staged prison break with several "princes of the contraculture" that are currently in jail. Once free, he will use his new connections to reach to the alien leadership that is the real mastermind of all these movements (from Anonymous to Al-Qaeda, without forgetting PETA) and he will call in the black helicopters before the alien spaceships arrive.

Is that complicated enough for you, dear?

You are comparing apples and oranges.

Soldiers are many people expected to be under fire/firing back for an extended period of time(many people * long time firing = lots of ammunition that need to be provided). These soldier will probably be many kilometers away from its original positions. All of this means that automatic fire for military weapons is a serious burden put on logistics, which also have to deal with fuel, food, medical supplies, etc. In these conditions, restricting firepower in order to ensure that ammo is not completely expended makes sense. Also, typically soldiers will have support from heavier weapons for the more complicated points.

In the other hand, criminals are lonely or in small gangs; they typically won't stay several hours in a shootout because they have to flee from the police, and their objective is not usually control of the battlefield. They also usually are in the same city/area where they have their stock/supply. They do not have heavy weapons cover, so they have to rely in the firepower they carry with them. That means than carrying enough ammo for a combat and resupling later is less of a problem, while the additional firepower is more decisive.

The difference is that these guns might not be accurate, but they will easier to do. Making a gun and not getting it exploding in your hand needs some experience with the hardware, which is an entry barrier. This project completely eliminates that barrier.

A increase rate of fire gives advantage to the attacking parte, who can shot more before anyone can react. Also, the attacker needs way less precission, making quick attacks (with less exporsure for the attacker) more feasible (think of drive-thru shooting, would you like a semi-auto or a full auto for that).

Increase rate of fire and a benefit for quick attack will lead to more stray bullets in the air.

It reminds me one of my experiences

We were trying very hard to get our users not to bother the in situ support but to call the help desk, with users trying to call the in situ tech because they knew him personally.

One day, nearly at the end of the day, I got a call from a stressed user "My PC has caught fire!". I thought "Ok, she needs a replacement" and told her to call the help desk and got out.

When I was arriving home, it dawned on me that the user never did say that the fire was already out... and maybe she was asking advice on PC firefight. I thought to check what had happened next day, but later I thought that it was better not to raise the issue. To this day I still don't know.

Are you being a troll or (trying) to make a joke?

It says that you like really big explosions...

FUD.

The main cause of Spain current situation is a real state bubble that nobody wanted to expose years after it was evident. Massive investment in infrastructures with political aims (and total disregard of ROI) is second. Corruption is a distant third but helped the previous two.

It is not an issue with a few solar plants which at least produce energy.

Oh, my, I must have been sleeping a lot lately.

To think that I believed that we were still in 2012...

Seriously, the author of these "articles" should disclose how to find his drug dealer. Must be some serious stuff.

I remember a little essay from Isaac Asimov about religion and science.

He argued that the point were science really won was with the lightning rod. Up to that time, a few guys could debate about evolution or the motion of planets; 99% of the population did not care and just followed their preachers. Before lightning rods, those struck by lightning were punished by heaven. With the lightning rod, those that profited from science were safe, while those who tried to oppose science with religion were at risk.

Maybe it is time to ask legislators to be coherent, trust God and remove the lightning rods from their homes.

Because all of the XVIII century newspaper editors were spiritual being who disregarded money. Is that your point?

Also, I fail to see how a line saying "This news is republished from such other newspaper", or paying a fee to the original writer would have hindered the spread of the news (less important news could have been omitted, but not the headlines).

Yes, they had another set of ethics so in their eyes it was not bad. But to say that, without those ethics the news would have not spread that far is a big overstatement. Nowadays, all newspapers "copy" news from the press agencies by paying and giving proper citations and it seems that it works.

It is like saying that, because these newspapers printing blatantly one-sided and partisan reports about the facts helped the American Revolution, all newspapers today should never try to be impartial or objective.