Why wouldn't a police officer enforce the law? I do not get this. Or are you saying that the police should obey the popular opinion on what constitutes a crime and what should be enforced instead of the actual local law? If the "community" does not like the law, then try to get i changed.
Then again, I live in a country that is not so fragmented.

And if they guy selling cigarettes resisted arrest or even tried to pick a fight with the cop (always a very bad idea) instead of just paying the fine then he is really stupid. Resisting arrest or even trying to run away will make the cop think that you have committed a more serious crime (well, he wouldn't run away just for the cigarettes, I bet he has some crack too or there is an active warrant for his arrest) and the cop will be that much more interested in arresting you.

Piracy is convenient.

Downloading - a few minutes of my time to start the download. Then after it finishes (which is very fast usually), I can watch the movie on whatever device that has enough processing power and a screen, at any time having full control of it.

Going to the cinema (in general) - need to drive to wherever the cinema is, at a specified time, watch it with a bunch of strangers (that may include screaming children), no control whatsoever - cannot pause the movie to go to the toilet, cannot rewind a few seconds to rewatch a scene I missed, cannot increase or reduce the sound volume, cannot even have a conversation with whoever I came to watch the movie (assuming I did not come alone) during a boring part. Forced to watch ads before the movie. Cannot bring the food that I want (that is not sold (at high prices) in the cinema). The movie has to be recent enough to still be showed in cinemas.

Going to the cinema (this particular movie) - All of the above but include traveling to the US, getting a hotel room etc.

Buying a DVD/Bluray - Better than going to the cinema, but still have to go to a store that sells them, have to sit through a bunch of unskippable ads.

Time from "Hey, let's watch a movie! Which one? [googles some previously unheard of movie] This one." to actually watching it:
DVD: 30 minutes - 1 hour (assuming the store is open), days (if the store is closed).
Cinema: 30 minutes - 3 hours (assuming the movie is being shown in cinemas and the cinema is open), days (if the cinema is closed), undefined (if the movie is not shown in cinemas).
Download: 5 - 30 minutes (my internet connection is up to 500mbps).

Oh, and Netflix is not available in my country in case you were going to suggest it.

So, see, even if the tickets for the movie (or the DVDs at the store) were given away for free, downloading would be the preferred option.

Voicemail was never alive in my country.

The reason is that my country was part of the USSR until its collapse and there were no answering machines or voicemail in the USSR (or just nobody used it). My first experience with voicemail was when I got my first cellphone ~16 years ago. It looked neat, but not much use. I did have it enabled for a while, but I have not received a single proper voice mail message yet (people either just disconnected and called me later or I got a recording of somebody being confused and asking "what the hell is this?").

No, but 1) I do not buy a lot of CDs, mainly records and 2) I disable Autoplay/Autorun as part of installing Windows.

That's pretty much my main criterion for choosing a printer. That and how reliable it is. This is the reason why I use a 13 (probably) year old HP PSC 2500CM (that I got broken for almost free and repaired it myself) - the DRM does not work (as long as I do not download drivers from HP and instead use the ones that are part of Windows) and the cartridges are very easy to refill. After modifying the cartridge I only need a syringe to fill it and ink in bottles is quite cheap. I can keep filling the cartridges until the pump wears out or the cartridge starts leaking. Even original cartridges (HP No. 10) are not that expensive and are large - 69ml for black, 28ml for the others.

And if someone asks me for advice on a new printer, I first find a few candidates depending on what the printer will be used for, then check the website of an printer cartridge store to see whether third part cartridges are available and how expensive are they.

Why not? Let's say I like a game or a TV show. I watch/play it until I have completed it. If I still like it by the time I complete it, I will want "more of the same" hopefully with some annoyances of the previous instance fixed. I personally do not understand why would a fan of a TV show (or a game) would not want "more of the same" but something different. If I like the original, I want more of the same, if I want different, that means I did not really like the original, did I?

Take a game like the Borderlands series for example. I like it, I played through the story multiple times, so I am happy when a DLC or a sequel comes out which is pretty much "new story for the same game", since I enjoy the game more when I have not already seen the story.

Not everyone can afford a million dollar space-grade digital camera. Then again, maybe the digital cameras have improved on this in the time since I read about it (I don't do much photography at -30C).

Going back to vinyl - for me, listening to records or tapes is much more enjoyable than listening to CDs or files, even if the audio quality is worse (scratched record, a very old poorly recorded tape) just because of the visuals (spinning reels are much better to look at than a progress bar on a MP3 player).

However, staring at a SD card while the music plays is much less enjoyable as staring at a spinning record or tape reels.

However, in some cases the older technology is better. For example, a steam engine can use any heat source as fuel, so it may be useful if you can easily get wood or coal, but not diesel or electricity.

IIRC, a film camera can operate at lower temperatures than a digital one.

Shellac records can be played without electricity.

While CDs have 96dB dynamic range, modern releases are so compressed, the DR is barely 10dB. Generally, newer releases of an old recording sound worse than old CDs, because of this loudness war.

However, watching a file play is much less fun than watching a tape reel or a record spin. Sure, when I am doing something else while listening to music, I can listen to a file just as well (or may still listen to an analog recording since my file collection and my analog collection have different music). Also, when listening to files, I am sometimes too tempted to just skip songs, but I can't do that on a tape (need to keep the winding even, so I refrain from fast forwarding) so I listen to the entire tape.

Speaking of just audio quality - I have a couple of tape recorders with vacuum tubes that from an objective point of view sound worse than my tape decks with transistors - smaller frequency range, more noise, higher distortion). However, playing an old recording (say, the Beatles or something like that), it does sound "better" to me and is more enjoyable to listen to, than, say, playing it on a more modern tape deck.

I have a cassette with 50s rock&roll on it. Playing it on my usual system is OK, but if I connect the cassette deck to my tube radio from 1964 it sounds great! More modern music sounds better on my usual system though.

Cost. SSDs are still more expensive per gigabyte than HDDs. Yes, SSDs are faster, but maybe my 48TB backup server does not have to have microsecond seek times...

TLER is useful in all cases, just that it is pretty much mandatory for RAID, so the drive manufacturers disable TLER on cheaper drives to prevent them from being used in a RAID.

Yes, in theory, non-TLER drive stands better chance of recovering unreadable data, but during that time the PC appears to be frozen, so the user just reboots it. Even with TLER of 7 seconds (default) that's still a long time. I do not know about others, but I'd rather my PC be responsive and report the error so I can either restore the file from backup or run recovery software to read the sector 5000 times hoping to read it correctly once.

We have a bunch of Seagate SV35 drives in a backup server. They started to get kicked out of RAIDZ one by one. Some show actual bad sectors (and were replaced since warranty was not expired), but others worked OK when tested using MHDD and the seller refused to replace then under warranty.

It turned out that those drives are so sensitive to vibration that dropping a coin on the PC case (with the drive secured in the drive bay) from a few cm height caused the drive to hang for about two seconds and emit a beep.

Now we use WD RED drives for this - they are more resistant to vibration and have TLER.

SMART for all the Seagate SV35 drives we have show a lot of "High Fly Writes" - the normalized value is 1 and the raw value is between 1000 and 7000.

In that game, the player also chooses to run people over with his car (either specifically or because driving on the sidewalk is faster), kill them with various weapons etc. That does not make the gamers into murderers.

So, why can I kill a man in a game (and that is OK), but not a woman? The scene where the player has to torture a guy to get information, would that be different if a woman was tortured? Yes? Then where is the equality.

Then again, I am still waiting for various countries that have conscription army to stop excluding women from that.

If you can kill both men and women in a game, that means that there is no gender equality.

Killing men is OK. Killing women is not. I guess it's similar to the race equality where killing a white guy is OK, but killing a black guy is not (unless the player character is also a black guy).