Congratulations, that's one of the stupidest things I've ever read on /. I don't even know where to begin, except to say that it sounds like your thinking seems to be, "Let me pick a position which I know will be unpopular, which must mean it is more correct than the popular position, and then go through some inane line of reasoning to support said position."

"They are the only people who would have actually earned it."

Everyone here is dumber for having read that.

I would much rather them use existing tried tech and incrementally advance them rather than try a radical new design.

Except that they're not. Those solid boosters? They're "based on" Shuttle SRBs, not identical to them. Several segments longer, meaning higher internal pressures, different burn characteristics, etc. If you don't think that's going to take extra years of testing, there are several bridges I'd be happy to sell you.

Ditto for any other technologies that they're basing stuff on rather than reusing identically.

The SLS isn't also known as the "Senate Launch System" for nothing. NASA's role should be to try radical new designs, not serve as a conduit for senators to shovel pork to their constituents.

Yep. Carbon, nitrogen, oxygen .. all metals. To an astrophysicist, we're not made of meat, we're made of metal.

(Okay, there's a fair bit of hydrogen in our mix, too.)

And I still don't trust it.

you need to learn how to read BADLY.

Wouldn't it be better to learn to read well, than to learn how to read badly?

And it would be good also to learn to write well. Your prior post is utterly incomprehensible.

Part of my understanding is that a 501(c)3 is a public, mutual benefit corporation where all assets are actually owned by the public, should push come to shove.

I'm sorry, but you're confused -- that's not correct at all. The assets of a 501(c)3 have to be transferred to another exempt organization if the organization shuts down, but they are in no way owned by the public. We had that baked into our articles of incorporation but I'm not sure if that's a requirement.

501(c)3s can include religious corporations and public-benefit nonprofit corporations. A public corporation is something completely different, a corporation set up by a government; for example, some state universities are set up this way. A mutual-benefit corporation, which includes some co-ops, insurance companies, and other groups set up to benefit their members, cannot be a 501(c)3.

but the IRS's definition of a charity requires that you be serving a distinct, disadvantaged group of people.

No. 501(c)3 organizations can include churches in rich neighborhoods, symphony orchestras, museums, and plenty of other groups which do not serve "disadvantaged" groups.

PHP is the language for web programming, just as C/C++ is the language for system programming.

People have been hating on C since at least the 1980s. It's still here. People have been hating on PHP since 2000 or so. It's still here.

The feds threat was six months, not 10+ years.

Bullshit. Threatening "50 years if you make us go to trial, but if you confess we'll recommend six months but the court can still give you 50 years" is still threatening 50 years. The threat of heavy sentences to get people to waive the right to a trail is an egregious violation of due process and the the guarantee against cruel and unusual punishments.

I suggest that you e-mail the 784,000 web pages that say Aaron Swartz snuck into the closet, and inform them they're using the English language wrong:

They're not using the English language wrong, they're reporting the facts wrong. Just as the mainstream media did for decades in the War on (Some) Drugs, just as they did in the run-up to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the media is lying and/or negligently passing on the government's story.

No way they just Taser you for refusing to answer questions.

You can be tased or beaten by cops pretty much at their psychotic discretion.

Boy tased for refusing to wash cop car

Man tased for not giving up his phone

Man beaten to death for not providing ID

We live in a police state, and it's not going to stop until either 1) we raise standards and pay for cops, or 2) we liberalize CCW laws and recognize the right of self-defense against bad cops.

It seems that there's just far more white men in the US that are inclined to be software developers than there are females and minorities who are inclined to do so.

And part of the reason that there are fewer females and minorities who are inclined to do so, is because when a woman or a black guy shows up in a CS class they're an oddity, subject to (usually subtle and unconscious, but sometimes stupid and obvious) sexism and racism. So they're more likely to say "screw it" and go study something else, so there are fewer women and African-Americans in CS, so when a woman or a black guy shows up in a CS class they're an oddity...and the cycle continues.

There is no quick fix. But over time a little attention by folks who work in tech to the basic rule "don't be a dick" can cut it down.

we'll probably never see a 50/50 split because these inclinations are part nature as well as part nurture./

...and making unproven and unprovable claims about the natural abilities of various groups of people, would be a fine example of "being a dick". Cut it out.

Destruction of evidence is a separate crime

But since I have not committed a crime, the automated destruction of my private data to protect it from cyber-criminals in the event I lose control of it is not destruction of evidence.

An encrypted hard drive is little different from a locked safe

An encrypted hard drive is entirely unlike a locked safe. It is much more like a notebook kept in a private code: if I write "June 26: red green Q 17 x-ray romeo eagle" in my journal, the state has no rightful authority to compel me to tell them what that means to me.

In those cases, the information (since it was gained as part of an intel and not LEO operation) would not be admissible.