Fact: they have no preexisting projects.

Therefore, any know-how they acquire has to either be developed or "purchased" (traded for, if you will)elsewhere.
Since the timeframe excludes the first option, the second one is the obvious one.

The fact that they have zero know-how, essentially.

In fact, they have essentially zero know-how in all fields. They're comfortable living off oil and slavery-backed glamour.

You have a funny definition of "open".

Nitpick: it's not proprietary, it's just not used outside of aerospace environments.

Otherwise, you're exactly right.

The fucking "summary" is wrong.

If you read the warrant application, the feds state the following:
- He did try to access the IFE box, as evidenced by physical damage.
- It is possible that he interfaced with the IFE systems and *possibly* other aircraft systems

Nowhere did they say: "This guy accessed flight control systems."

It's an abstract "you", not you, necessarily.

Frankly, Health of the General Population > Freedom of religion.

If your "religion" demanded that you fire a machine gun into the air for 5 minutes a day, you'd find very little tolerance for it.

Either scenario has a probability of harming someone around the same order of magnitude, I guesstimate. So why should the first be any different?

And somehow convinced people it was a valid business model an not a bullshit crowdsourcing effort that effectively crowdsources all the difficult parts.

None that I know of.

I do have a few devices with GPS receivers, though.

You haven't made a point, either, since all you did was spread vague FUD.

"Something weird is going on" is not the same as "it works and we can actually do stuff with it".

It's one thing to be open to the possibility that something is incomplete.

It's quite another to write a long web page with grand predictions for something that is unproven and has no theoretical explanation yet.

It's also ludicrous to make a computer model without any sort of theoretical basis. I can "invent" a warp drive by imagining that $_phenomenon is a good approximation of $_supposed_operating_principle and making a computer model of that. Naturally, the results are pure bullshit and profoundly meaningless.

Neither of the above disproves very solid physics. It'll take something a lot more formal to reasonably conclude that space is asymmetric.

Wrong.

Conservation of linear momentum is most certainly NOT derived from Thermodynamics.

Conservation of linear momentum is a mathematical consequence of translational symmetry - in other words, momentum is conserved if the laws of physics are invariant in space. Similarly, angular momentum is conserved if the laws of physics are invariant by rotation.

You forgot infinitely-scrolling websites that never destroy any of the shit that now lies the equivalent of 20 pages up.

It looked good, until they were no longer able to not show faces.