Please read up on the origin of IQ tests. To the extent they are calibrated to anything apart from other IQ tests, they are calibrated against academic performance. Because they were developed originally by British and French scientists, they are calibrated against specifically European standards of academic performance.

There is no objective, unambiguously defined, quantifiable quality of "intelligence" that IQ tests can be said to measure. It is an entirely subjective test with no real scientific basis. In fact the only thing that IQ tests absolutely and definitely measure is the ability to do IQ tests.

Because IQ tests are calibrated mostly against a cultural artifact (European academic culture) Cultural bias is as likely a reason for variations across different cultures (very closely correlated with different races for obvious reasons) as any other factor.

Until you can rule out cultural bias in any IQ test (and I really don't see how you can) all your theories about genetic differences are meaningless.

For extra bonus points, find me ANY objective, unambiguous and measurable definition of the term, "intelligence."

Someone's job is on the line.

I'm assuming the GP's argument is that the higher than previously expected possibility of life-bearing planets early in the life of the universe increases the possibility of panspermia, all other things being equal.

The probability of panspermia is product of (at least) two other possibilities:
1.) Life exists somewhere
2.) Life is carried though space from one planet to another by some means.

Regardless of the probability of the latter, (which may be infinitesimal in any case) increasing the probability of the former at any point in time increases the overall probability of panspermia.

Right. Because nobody in their right mind would ride around in vehicles powered by a fuel known to burn violently from the smallest spark or even explode when mixed with air.

So how does that work? I thought the Supreme court was the highest authority on the law in the US?

GP's argument:

Your argument:

Which is shooting down a different position to the one the GP took. No one is arguing that privacy for all isn't the best situation. But this technology now exists, so the genie is out of the the bottle and that option is almost certainly off the table.

We now get to choose between the option where a small powerful elite has this technology, and the option where everyone has it.

I, for one, prefer the latter.

Sudo was written around 1980.

Ubuntu's first release was in 2004.

You can find sudo in every major linux distribution that I'm aware of - and in fact all of the Unices I've used in my 15 years as developer.

The reason why I so strongly dislike the Toyota Corolla can be summed up in three words: reciprocating petrol engine.

Somebody needs to buy it and run it. How much would it cost?

The targets of this idea are not people, but the automated systems that scan all content and communications for random keywords etc. The bots searching for starting points that can be investigated further by humans. The idea is that if too many false postitives are thrown up, the manual parts of the process get overloaded, reducing the value of the automated systems.

Once an individual has the attention of human spooks he's already past the point where this strategy is relevant. So your anecdote is valid, but slightly off-topic.

I totally agree on Retroshare... I saw it and immediately loved it. I've had a hard time convincing non-techy friends and family to start using it though.

I think it just needs to be pushed more, and maybe some of the buggy bits will get a bit more attention.

At https://www.adeccowaytowork.com/en/contact

For example:

Incidently their twitter feed is interesting reading at the moment. As is their facebook page.

Ditto. I've only ever successfully migrated one non-techy person (my brother) to Linux. He uses it as a media centre mostly and never touches a command line. But most people seem to have a morbid fear of installing a different OS on a computer to the one it came out of the shop with.

I recommend macs now to all my friends who complain about their slow/buggy/malware-ridden boxes. It's astonishing how the support calls drop off overnight.

If the OP has to help maintain this code, and is also held partially responsible for the performance and robustness of the software, (management tends to see development teams as an amorphous software-producing blob) then the guy IS making his job a lot harder.

So;

When you deliver criticism of someone's code, always be as specific as possible. Choose one class, or function, or whatever and offer an alternative solution which is demonstrably better.

The message should not be, "You fscked up," but, "Hey I found a better pattern for this class of problem, don't you agree?"

Try to make the atmosphere of the interaction collegial rather than instructive. Nobody wants to be corrected, particularly by someone more junior, but if you can persuade him that you just have good ideas you might have a better chance.

You can probably find lots of other advice on effectively delivering criticism, I'm sure people write about this stuff. You can google for it, I can't be bothered.