In those cases, there tend to be a LOT of errors. The risk is that enough will read correctly to leak valuable information like passwords. Also, in those cases the memory is not active.

Plenty have it on the server side. Just use a server board in your desktop.

That crazy theory again!?!

Sir, I assure you that ducks absolutely do not cause climate change!

But note that pirates can slow it.

So to translate, "other than a perfectly valid and rational reason that I'd rather not consider, can you tell me a rational and logical reason?"

But as to the question, every culture has a mythos that (hopefully) reminds it's members of their values and provides for a commonality and a sense of belonging. Naturally, children tend to take it all literally. Why spoil their fun Mr. Grinch?

Then someone prints the barrel in two parts. The thick tube that matches no common bullet and a liner that is too thin to be a gun barrel.

What makes you think that? The Constitution permits copyright to exist (for the advancement of the useful arts) but does not mandate it.

Not necessarily. Some of that 59% (no idea how much) would naturally be the result of citizens behaving better for the camera and not escalating the situation.

Look on the right hand side. There's an awful lot of those 'exceptions'. Way too many. And way too many are later found blameless and put right back out there to do it again.

That needs to stop. It's not all cops, but it's enough of them that it's eroding the public trust. That, in turn will cause more violence against cops as regular citizens begin to fear for their own safety when they encounter police. With all those 'exceptions', is it REALLY unbelievable if a citizen attacks a cop and says he did it because he was in fear of his life? If the cops really want to be safer out there, they need to make certain that the idea of a cop attacking a citizen unprovoked or way out of proportion to provocation is laughable.

On the technical side, they have the ability to control what load a single customer can put on the shared bandwidth. They tell the cable modem and router behind it where the gateway is. They can share the last mile by each provider renting a slice of the (virtual) connection between CO and customer and can recognize their customers by MAC address to give them the correct GW.

The rest is a matter of business. The local government could buy them out. They could be legally split like AT&T. They could simply be informed that they are now in the wholesale last mile bandwidth business if they want to stay in town at all. Note that at that point if they decide they'd rather leave they would end up abandoning the cables amps, etc anyway since it would cost more than it's worth to save it. The town would just need to re-construct the head ends.

There's a shade of meaning there. Compaq wasn't a bad company (good companies can get into financial trouble too).

Just leave a mouse out of the package laying around in a targeted office. Eventually, someone will need or want the mouse and plug it in for you.

It's less sure and could take a while compared to plugging it in yourself, but it makes the person who gets infected want to keep quiet and even if they figure out where the mouse came from (unlikely), you have plausible deniability.

It would be hard to prove that the nice foil backed wallpaper was a blocking tactic rather than a perfectly legal aesthetic decision.

I believe OP was talking about passive shielding which would knock out all of those as well as WiFi and cellular.

His skills in filming exciting race scenes will allow this incarnation of Star Trek to really do justice to the pod-racing scenes.

That one's more clearly illegal because the mobile-phone bands are heavily regulated, so you can't transmit on them without a license. The wifi band is unlicensed space, which doesn't mean you can do whatever you want (as relevant here, intentional interference is still not permitted), but there is generally more leeway and violations are less clear-cut.