They can't literally make you tell them what they want to know, but they absolutely can punish you for refusing to comply with a subpoena, unless the testimony would require you to incriminate yourself, which the disclosure of a password does not if the fact that you possess relevant, incriminating information is a foregone conclusion. That was the decision in Boucher, from your own link.

Several courts have ruled contrary to this in the last two years, but these have only been in cases where investigators didn't know what they were looking for and simply wanted the passwords on general principles. The more general the search was, the more self-incriminating disclose of passwords became, and thus unconstitutional; and contrarily, if the government can show that you received incriminating information or it's obvious or reasonable that specific, incriminating information exists on your media, they can subpoena you to decrypt it.

Thank god we have Android Dalvik, where I can use my existing Java ME codebase. Oh wait.

We're going from Obj-C to Swift, this seems like a pretty lateral move from a "cross platform" perspective. I would have thought the Great Java Wars had taught everyone that true cross-platform development is a chimera that isn't worth either the vendor or developer's effort. Platform vendors compete on features -- cross platform is antithetical to competition on features.

What are you, 60?

TFA is actually mostly a Cocoa application stack guide. Discussion of the actual distinguishing features of Swift is minimal -- in fact I think the only thing they even passingly mention is unwrapping of Optionals. Otherwise it's just "How to build an iOS app"

but if the information is in the person's head, then he can't be forced to reveal it.

That's not how it works.

That's stupid.

If the terrorists changed their tactics, and you state that they've changed their tactics, you're revealing that the terrorists took action in response to finding out you've been monitoring them. If their new tactics made them vanish, made them hard to read (encryption), or did nothing, you would still notice: you'd notice them disappear if they completely beat you, or you'd notice their tactics change if their new tactics were just as ineffective as the old ones. As you say, giving terrorists information which they act on does help them, even if their response doesn't gain them anything; so saying in public that the Snowden leak helped terrorists, in any situation where they responded to the leak by change, is both accurate and not revealing.

If you confirm that the leaks haven't helped the terrorists, then you're only confirming that the situation hasn't changed. This would only happen if the terrorists didn't gain enough information from the leaks to make any changes--useful or otherwise--and thus you would confirm exactly what the terrorists know: that they don't know if there are any leaks, what the extent of the leaks are, and where those leaks may be. This is, again, unhelpful.

In spite of the re-naming, I bet it still makes people wince...

The report is a lie.

Terrorist groups have absolutely changed their behaviors and communications patterns to increase obfuscation and move attention away from their important operations. The United States National Security Agency, the US Military, and other terrorist operations have added increased layers of misdirection to better cover and draw attention away from their most critical activities.

It would be interesting to see similar studies performed on stevia. It is a natural sugar, but is ~300 times sweetener than sucrose. Such studies might help to determine if promoting glucose intolerance is a function of artificiality, or a function of sweetness

The liability shift from Visa's incredible marketing of the Visa Shield protecting you from identity theft with charge backs and banks calling you to tell you they're declining a suspicious gasoline charge in California after you've been using your card in Vermont all morning and since forever to "oh, someone else used your card? Well, sucks to be you. We can close the account and give you a new card number."

How do I turn this into a hot story to get the production crew salivating over running this on the evening news?

The US is the third world.

Oh, and this absorption chiller seems to provide 76% efficiency, versus 320% for a regular AC; but the cost is comparable, such that a $1500 unit would supply the same cooling.

Where I live, gas (heat) powered air conditioners cost less during the season to operate than electric ones.

Really? Because the installation of an AC and heat pump here is expensive, and the heat pump is wildly inefficient in the winter. It's good for the temperate season in the spring and fall, a total of about 3 months per year; there's 4-5 solid months where a heat pump trying to heat my house is either ineffective or a huge energy hog pulling in tons of electricity per unit heating. My most efficient option has been using a space heater in whatever room I'm in, keeping the rest of the house at 62F; otherwise I spend $300+ per month on natural gas at 1,400,000 BTU for my 1300sqft house.

I did mention the use of more efficient (20%-30% vs 14%-19%) sterling heat engines for power generation, but figure you'd use most of the heat directly and get little benefit. Sure, with a dT of 600C, you can pull 38% or even as high as 42% on a sterling engine; but at 300C vs 10C, you're going to get 20%, maybe 25%.

Solar hot water systems tend to heat the 150L tank to a maximum 190F before shutting down, in the first 2-3 hours of the day; a thermostatic mixing valve provides 120F-130F off the tank. This allows for less hot water usage when the water is hot, and stable temperature as the water cools, as people take showers at night or in the morning. Residential evacuated tubes have boiled coolant at temperatures as high as 350C in unusual conditions, but are commonly accepted to run as hot as 300C, and typically don't exceed 285C. It's considerable that a system running less than 5L of water in a loop can heat 150L to almost 90C from tap cold (10C) in under 4 hours.

In practice, people have a single 1.2m^2 panel here, running their hot water at 160F in the winter with short days, not quite enough to use hydronic heat. 2-4 panels would do it, at $500 each, with proper insulation.