I think he's saying that we shouldn't be using evolution as a talking point when we want to say "see science works!" because we have no proof that evolution indeed works as Darwin described. We have right boatloads of evidence to be sure, but no actual proof (evolution is perhaps a bit of a bad example as we can see bacteria and viruses evolving all the time -- but we still can't say with 100% certainty that we're correct in extrapolating that to all of nature.)

The real problem with the article is that _NOTHING_ is 100% reproducible. Even quantum electrodynamics -- aka our most well-tested theory ever and the most sciencey science we have by any definition of the word -- is written in terms of probability. You can't show the two-slit experiment by firing a single photon. Or even a dozen photons. You have to fire hundreds or thousands of them before the interference pattern emerges. Its only "science" (by this guy's definition) due to the fact that its a lot easier to shoot 100,000 photons in a reasonable time frame than it is to evolve dinosaurs on 100,000 planets.

"Science" is not a belief system to be sure, but you CAN believe that "science will answer everything given enough time." That's wholly unjustified. Its entirely possible that science can NEVER explain everything either due to the fundamental limits of nature (we'll never be able to see past ~14bn light years for example unless we find something that travels faster than light, which currently seems pretty unlikely) or due to the more simple limits of our measurement devices (we're maybe.. just maybe.. going to be able to detect gravity waves in the next few years. Detecting an individual graviton though may not ever be something we can do as building an LHC-like detector powerful enough to measure gravitons would likely take more energy than is available on the entire planet. Perhaps if we're some day able to harness the Sun's energy in a more direct manner -- heading towards Dyson sphere territory here -- then maybe we could build a big enough detector in theory. But that's an awful lot of extrapolation.)

Not really.. adjust it so that people who rate a lot of things (earning themselves an ebay-like reputation) would be weighted differently than the person who just came in and rated one item.

That would significantly cut down the paid shilling abilities as you couldn't just start up 1000 new accounts to post a single review each for your site, but not eliminate it. (You could do the same thing but also pick 10 random listings to post random reviews on in order to flesh out the numbers.)

Add a temporal aspect to it though -- ie: measure the average time between reviews and if its too low, drop the user's weighting) -- and it becomes harder to game the system yet again as the shills now have to maintain their shilling accounts over time in order to build up enough reputation for their reviews to matter.

Not that it couldn't still be gamed.. but it would require a much more substantial investment by the shills in order for their shilling to be of marketable value. But that also makes them semi-trackable -- set up a fake company listing, hire a known shiller to promote it and then ban any account that posts a glowing review. Because those accounts have to be curated over time, this would be a significant risk for the shilling firms and would at the very least require them to invest enough time/effort to try and determine if your fake listing is actually fake (and of course you could go the next step and create an actual fake company with a fake website and a fake email address/phone#/etc if you wanted.)

Being "unacceptable" doesn't prevent someone from doing it. It has to be enforced somehow. But as soon as you add enforcement to the system, its no longer a "free" market.

That works for basic access passwords since the only check is "is it right yes/no?" at one particular entry point (the login screen.) You can reset that password and they only have to "update" the one location (their password hash file.)

Encryption is a whole different beast as you're effectively password protecting every single byte on your device. Simply changing the access password won't change those bytes.

So unless they're storing your password in plaintext (or reversibly encrypted,) or they've built a master key into their algorithm then no, they can't recover your data even if they reset your password for you.

No major company with any sanity would store user passwords in a recoverable form -- way too much chance of a rogue employee or a hacker getting their hands on the file and open them up to massive lawsuits.

Similar issues if they store a "hard to get" copy of the password right on your phone -- it won't take very long before someone figures that out and how to access it and then you may as well turn off the password feature all together for all the security it would give you.

Master passwords are a little bit more likely.. not because they're any saner (for the same reasons) but its a little easier to control a single key stored in a vault somewhere than it is to control a (probably distributed) password file that needs to be accessed regularly. Of course having it in a vault is great for something like the CSS or the PS3 master keys (which were both cracked eventually of course) but less good when your level 1 or even level 2 tech support need to use it periodically..

If they already have you, which is pretty likely if they've managed to get your physical phone since most people keep those on or near them at all times, then they can probably figure out how to lift a print. Or you know, just coerce you to touch the pad.

If they ever get quantum computing off the ground, we will see some earth-shattering advancements as it will break pretty much all modern crypto systems. (Factorization for sure. Apparently discrete logs as well according to a quick Wikipedia check. Those two underpin the vast vast majority of crypto systems in use today.)

Of course quantum computers only help with certain classes of algorithms. We've already come up with new crypto systems that aren't (currently believed to be) breakable using quantum computers and I'm sure more will crop up as time marches on.

That only applies in a closed system. Honestly if ISIS or whoever takes over their local region and then plays nice with the rest of the world, we (US/Europe) will likely leave them alone. Maybe a few minor economic sanctions as a slap on the wrist.

But if they take over their local region and then start posturing about taking over things we actually care about (either through direct military action or terrorism,) they'll find very quickly that Allah is more likely to welcome them to heaven than he is to stop the bombs and bullets coming their way.

Yeah I think there might be a misinterpretation somewhere. I can't see any religious reason to ban math, especially when TFS goes on to state that physics and chem (both of which require a lot of math) are fine as long as the teacher adds on a "praise Allah" every time he (I would assume.. BS like this usually isn't particularly free of gender constraints!) makes a statement that sounds intelligent.

Banning sports is also kind of strange. Perhaps this group really is attempting to make "only" religious nuts rather than religious terrorists. If they were looking for the latter, you'd think that keeping the kids in shape and espousing team>individual would be beneficial in the long run.

FTFY.

Well I don't use Yelp! nor do I have a business, so I really couldn't care less what they do personally.

And I don't disagree that Yelp! has no real incentive to change the system -- until someone sues the tits off them and finds a judge that agrees.

Right now businesses (particularly small businesses) have little to no recourse if someone decides to take out a vendetta on them. Its an overwhelming burden for a one or two person operation if one of those people has to be spending 16 hours a day monitoring Yelp! (not to mention the thousands of smaller review sites) in order to respond to every jerk out there who gives them a crap rating because there was no parking on the public street in front of their building (that they have no control over.)

Something will eventually have to give. It will likely take a court case because as you said, Yelp! themselves have no reason to change the system, but someday somebody is going who gets burned under the current wild west system of any jackass posting anything they want with no recourse is going to find a way to get recourse.

So pretty much like any other publisher then? Unless you're already a known name you generally need to provide at least a first draft for them to read over before they'll give you the time of day never mind a year's salary (and almost certainly not all up front if they do!)

Where it can fill in the gaps is when you have a product (say a game, since that's what I'm usually most interested in) and are nearing production and suddenly you need:
a) Hosting services for downloadables.
b) Production services if you plan to make hard copies of the game, merchandise to go with it, etc.
c) Possibly most important: Visibility.

It can also help if you're a good designer but perhaps a crappy artist. You can build your game with clip art and cube models or whatever and then try to get the funds to hire a proper artist to flesh the game out as you're nearing completion.

There's plenty of points during a game's development cycle where a sudden (comparatively) large influx of cash can push it past a milestone that the developer wouldn't have been able to manage on their own (or would have taken them significantly longer to do so.)

Not to mention KS's for silly things like a nifty T-Shirt design or whatever where the idea actually is pretty much 100% of the project -- its not hard to get silkscreening done if you've got a picture and a few hundred/thousand dollars.

As for what the devs do if the KS fails.. depends on the dev. If they're mostly business people they may cut their losses and try something new. If they're creating a labor of love they'll probably try and push through it on their own. In both cases they may try to find other sources of income if they really believe in their idea and think that KS is just stupid for not trusting them. Everyone's reaction to a failed KS will be different I'm sure.