I can think of several myth buster episodes in which they build a remote controlled car.

This is REALLY nothing new.

As for using a tablet, you can buy toy helicopters to control from your iphone at any toystore.

Nothing about this is new or exciting. It is a slashvertisement and not a very good one.

It's not a political debate so much as a statement of fact based on the poll results. And if you've paid the slightest attention to American politics over the past few decades, this shouldn't be a surprise.

According to the more informative Time article, it's entirely software-based, and the whole shebang has Intel's backing.

This article makes no sense. What the fuck does Facebook's political stance have to do with UX?

Anyone who's ever used Facebook could tell you their UX is terrible, you don't need to bring politics into it.

You mean like the image you get by going to their home page and clicking the download link?

Depends on whether you still need the database around if the power ever goes off.

In some applications the DBs are just read-only or temporary and you copy/build them from permanent storage so it doesn't matter.

But in many other DB applications you do need to write and it needs to actually be permanently written (within monetary and physical constraints). And it often has to be written when you tell the user it's written. Bad stuff happens if you tell the users/customers "transaction succeeded", delay writing the transactions till later but then the power/battery fails and there's completely no record for thousands of transactions.

"Bitcoin users" sounds an awful lot like the democratic ideals behind most modern government currencies. Aside from being more globally representative, the question still comes down to how the users of the currency are more representative than, for example, that of USD.

If the NSA did have this control over the internet that you seem to think they have, how come you are discussing it?

As Ars explained, "RSA's defense seems to be that officials didn't know the NSA-influenced deterministic random bit generator had weaknesses that could be exploited to crack adversaries' cryptographic keys."

Whether bribery was involved or not, RSA used an algorithm without validating the math.

Not everybody feels that a currency backed by violence is an ethical arrangement.

Of course it's not. The question comes down to this: what's the alternative? So far, nobody has come up with a method to protect physical assets that doesn't involve physical security. Bitcoin doesn't solve this (nor does it attempt to.)

Nor do they feel that allowing politicians to destroy the value of a currency is a wise course of action.

How is letting a group of bitcoin power users alter the currency's value any different?

First of all, there is only one issuer of bitcoin: the bitcoin network, acting in aggregate, according to a pre-agreed algorithm.

Which is to say, the number of bitcoin can be changed as long as a sufficient number of people agree to change the algorithm.

Secondly, the value of almost any modern day currency is entirely a perceptual value caused by the notion that people will accept that currency at some approximately-known rate for payment for goods or services.

In theory, sure. In reality, there's a reason that countries with strong currencies have strong militaries to protect those currencies.

That's probably why the Enlightenment home page shows it running on a phone.

Kdenlive is essentially one guy's hobby project. Blender has a number of professional developers working on it full time. Both are open source, but it's really an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Quoting JFK on honesty and openness in government. Maybe you should study some history.