You seem to completely ignore that governments are elected and therefore accountable to the people.

150BC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
Beat that.
Also, the Greeks used mirrors to do stuff on battlefields. But I dont care enough to work out what they called it.

No bounds checking? In a security module of Android? Duh! What sort of idiots do they have coding this thing?

Agile idiots. It passed the test suite written by other agilistas, so no QA needs to be performed. Just ship it. Put bounds checking into the backlog. If someone can come up with a good user story like "86% of all devices we've shipped are vulnerable" maybe we'll fix it in the next sprint.

No, as the series of court rulings have gone, the Fourth Amendment does not protect you from lawful search and seizure (such as a safe or hard drive). The combination to the safe, or encryption key to the drive, is not incriminating evidence and providing it to allow for lawful search and seizure does not violate your rights. They can admit evidence produced by oneself into court (such as two sets of books in one's own handwriting for a case of fraud) and that is not a violation of the Fourth (or Fifth) - just so with information one puts on a hard drive. What they can not compel one to do is testify against oneself (which is the Fifth by the way) nor assume guilt because you do not take the stand (not that a prosecutor won't toe that line with the jury). So, if one can keep all details of a crime in one's head and manage to destroy all other evidence which could be subject to lawful search and seizure - then you've got a shot at being a criminal mastermind.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with the line of thought - but I can certainly follow the logic as well as the precedence.

What would be interesting is if one's pass-code was material evidence with respect to the case - but a possible way around that would be limited immunity or ruling it as inadmissible evidence...It would make for an interesting case study.

Actually, the sum of the evidence says otherwise. The security audit has found nothing wrong with Truecrypt 4.1a, and in fact they plan to carry forward the TrueCrypt project when Phase II of the audit is completed.

Why buy her a diamond?

Diamonds are almost entirely carbon, where as this has a significant portion of oxygen in it, so this wouldn't actually form a diamond structure. This sort of headline bait is rather annoying.

It's like trusting a proctologist to give you brain surgery :)

No, they won't, although the batteries might last. Some people just seem to emit EM or some shit which kills watches, regardless of price or quality. It is absolutely true, although I can't explain the mechanism.

Yes, because you personally know everything about an anonymous internet coward, you fucking dick.

On cheap watches, the cost of replacing the battery is equal to the value of the cheap watch. So much so, that it is getting really hard to find batteries for watches in stock (at least the last time I looked). I don't buy watches as they are simply for tools trying to impress people with "money".

"Look at my Rolex, such a fine time piece" , Uh no thanks, my less expensive cell phone keeps perfect time, changes time zones automatically for me and does more that your stupid Rolex, which is just a fancy clock bracelet.

Since this is addressed to non-watch wearers too (last sentence).... ok, I'll answer.
If you want me to wear a watch, it needs to have:
1) extreme reliability - it will last at LEAST 5 years, which I have never seen in any watch, cheap or expensive.
2) Battery will last 3+ years, or it will require no battery.
3) It doesn't have a shitty leather strap or shiny shit that will make it get stolen or some shitty material
4) It costs less than $40.

I have never seen a DUMB watch which satisfies these, and I suspect that any smart watch would fail miserably at ALL of them. All I want is something which won't fall apart will tell me the fucking time when I'm hiking in the woods for a week and my cell phone dies. ALL watches have failed me so far.

...and he's certain of that - how?

I have no idea what the 'valley' represents, nor the 'hill' so this explanation tells me nothing.