TrueCrypt hidden containers get around that problem by hiding the real secret data inside a dummy encrypted container that you can hand over the password to. Any unused space will be filled with random bytes, as is the norm for a TrueCrypt container, so isn't suspicious.

Capable isn't the same as well screw everyone else over at the first opportunity.

I once left two bags if expressive shopping items on a train in Japan. Next day I collected them as a cleaner had handed them in. Could easily have taken some stuff and never been caught, but didn't. Once a friend left 50,000 yen in a restaurant. That's about â300 or $400. Went back the next day, it was all waiting for her, found by the staff and kept safe.

In some cultures people are basically nice. It's actually quite shocking for British people when they go to Japan and people just trust them by default. In the UK that will get you screwed over fast.

If murder were legalised most people would not start murdering. Most people don't commit serious crimes because of morality. Minor crimes, especially victimless ones, are another matter because there are fewer moral qualms.

Fear of being caught tends to come far down the list. A long time ago in England almost all crimes carried the death sentence. 10 year old children were hung for stealing. It didn't really reduce the crime rate. If anything it just made people driven to crime by poverty more likely to murder the police trying to catch them, since death was certain anyway.

Actually hardware security is pretty good. Secure description chips where the key is stored in a special memory and wiped instantly if you try to open the chip up have proven fairly resilient so far.

Each computer will have a unique key that is used to encrypt media before it is downloaded, and a private key you can't read out of the chip to decode it. Like AACS for bluray the crack will probably be a flaw in the algorithm, not in the hardware.

What is Apple's warranty policy for water damage? If they say it is only water resistant and you take it swimming, presumably your warranty is void. What about heavy rain? Are there moisture sensors in there like the iPhone has?

Right, they are saying it is the result of a pattern of behaviour. Like when you find ashes it is evidence of a fire, but that doesn't mean you need to have an ashes quota. It means you need to prevent fires.

By "people like you" I mean people who leap to unfounded conclusions based on their existing preconceptions. Take your comment "Old Fuddy Duddy. Get the thought police it's hate speech." No-one is saying it is hate speech. You made that bit up yourself, it's your own reaction, your own mind that thinks that way. They are saying it is discriminatory in the context of a PATTERN of similar remarks.

To win a discrimination case there needs to be a pattern, an on-going problem. A single remark is not enough if that's all it was.

Sure, but the problem here is that the exploit executes in the sandbox process which has root. A normal, non-sandboxed app would run at normal user level and, as you say, be limited in the damage it can do. The sandboxing was supposed to add an extra layer of security, but backfired and actually helped the app to trivially get root access.

They have not said "company X hasn't hired enough Y". They said that company X discriminated against this guy on the basis of his age, and that their hiring practices are discriminatory. It's not about the average age at all, it's about the hiring process.

Think about it. If this guy wins the result will not be Google being forced to hire more older workers to bring the average up. The result will be changing the hiring policies that are discriminatory. In other words, the aim is fairness, not numbers.

Allegedly. What are the laws regarding recording such phone conversations in the US? In the UK it would almost certainly have been recorded and would be available to use at the trial. I could be extremely interesting. Without a recording it's just he said-she said.

No-body is suggesting a quota. Slashdot seems to have this strange reaction to numbers where they are always assumed to be a quota. In reality the stats mentioned in TFA are just there to give journalists some easy to understand and digest facts for their articles, and are unlikely to be major points in the lawsuit. The lawsuit has to rely on establishing a pattern of behaviour or specific policies that discriminate, merely pointing out that the average is low is not enough.

It's really unfortunate that every single article on equality likes to have a stat in it, because then people like you assume a quota is being called for. It isn't, it never is. The stat is just a simple illustration that clueless journos can understand without having to really get into the details of the issue to pen their throwaway article.

Sweeping generalizations about age groups are what lead to age discrimination. I know you don't mean to be actively discriminate against the young with your post, but it sets up a frame of mine in which it happens. It's exactly the same thing as is alleged in many discrimination suits by older people, where the mindset is that their generate are has-beens who are stuck in their ways and unable to adapt or fit in.

I've known good and bad programmers of all ages. Age does not correlate with quality, it's just a bias people use to explain and re-enforce their perceptions when they don't have objective data. Data is not the plural of anecdote.

I wonder if Apple will exit the PC business in a few years, once iOS and OS X have converged. Instead of PCs they will just sell oversized tablets. Maybe something like a Surface, but a little bigger, to replace their laptop range.

They don't seem that interested in the serious end of the PC market. Most of their serious software has been discontinued or crippled now. The Mac Pro launched with kinda average specs and was clearly designed as more of an appliance than a PC, to be discarded rather than upgraded. OS X is becoming more and more like iOS with every revision... I bet they would love to lock it down in the same way.

I can see Apple declaring the PC dead at some point. Maybe not in the near future, but in the next decade.

The OS is supposed to sandbox apps so that if they do get 0wned the damage is limited and the rest of the OS and apps are not compromised. Apple has attempted to do that on OS X, but clearly it hasn't worked as well as they were hoping. Even if an app get compromised that isn't supposed to let the code take full control of the OS.

If they are too cheap to upgrade from XP they won't be shelling out for a new Mac. Vista came out in 2007, so their computers must be at least 7-8 years old, and probably older.

What is the burden of proof in the US for this sort of thing? Balance of probabilities? Seems like with the USGS saying it is likely you could probably get over that 50% chance limit. Who decides, a judge or a jury?