• obscurity - "not well known"
• secrecy - "concealed or hidden"

So a password is a secret, not an obscurity, and is not sent across the communications channel.

"security through obscurity" usually refers to obscuring the design of a system, not to key secrecy. Unlike design obscurity, secret keys provide a measurable barrier to brute force attacks.

Changing port number for ssh is interesting to classify. If chosen it randomly for each system being set up, it could be argued that it wasn't a design obscurity. But it doesn't add to the total security against a targeted attack, because the port number can be determined prior to key forcing (and in a lot shorter time). Also, the port number is not secret, in the sense that it is sent in clear text across the network when the real user logs in.

Of course, changing port number may have practical advantages (reducing traffic, simplifying logs). But it isn't a security strategy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo

The reason it was noticed on Linux is because a portion of this UEFI space is being used to keep a non-volatile copy of the most recent kernel log messages (so that on a crash event, it is easier to find out what happened).

Why should someone need an Apple developer account to code the device that they own? How is that a general purpose computing device? It's not about the money, it's about all the strings attached. I can program my microwave oven if I really wanted to, but the manufacturer did not intend for me to do so. Apple is mighty close to having the same attitude towards its clients; it intends them to be consumers, not creators. So they forfeit the right to describe their fashion items as computers.

Yes, Turbo Pascal wasn't sophisticated, but on CP/M it was a game changer. I bought a copy in 1984, because the alternative was Pascal/MT. MT was excruciatingly slow (taking something like 9 passes over the file, which was of course being read from a floppy on each pass). Because Turbo was all in one, the whole thing could run out of memory, which took the edit/compile/test process down from minutes to seconds.

The issue here is not whether all genetic modification is safe, it is about the misleading reporting of a scientific article. The scientific community do have ethical concerns about safety, which is why such studies are performed in the first place.

In this particular instance, they were screening for toxins that could be produced in error by a sequence. In the particular gene they were looking at (one commonly used to promote expression of proteins for another inserted gene), they couldn't find any. This doesn't automatically make it safe, but it rules out a set of potential issues.

And remember, such allergens/toxins can be produced in non-modified organisms, which is why we even know about them in the first place.

Have you read the Pirate Party's submission regarding copyright review, or their submission regarding patent reform? Do you have specific points of disagreement other than just implying that it is not sensible?

Canberra. No one knows why anyone would want to live there.

Are you really claiming that a computer being run by Los Alamos and called Trinity is primarily going to be used for alternative energy?

Exactly; the only Skype API that is "open" is the scripting interface to the proprietary client software; not to the Skype network itself.

Psychological comfort. Because it is nice to know that you weren't just being paranoid when you go to the trouble to reinstall everything.

Many language varieties in China would be seen by linguists as distinct. Compare putonghua or guangzhou hua with holooe. Whether you call these 'dialects' or 'languages' or fangyan depends on how you define the term 'language'.

While it is true that some spoken variants of English are quite difficult for other English speakers to understand (such as Black Country English, or the Glasgow Patter), there's not the linguistic range that you would find between the Chinese languages/dialects. Most English varieties are mutually intelligible, and differ primarily in pronunciation and a few words.

Interestingly, the Switzerland firearm-related deaths per capita are not that much lower than for the United States. The firearm related suicide rate is roughly the same. But the firearm-related homicide rate for the United States is significantly higher. Interpret that how you will.

And of course you need to consider other risks, not just theft. If the place catches fire, you may not be able to get out of the window.