Do you mean individual people who happen to be employed at banks, or the banks themselves? Because yes, society at large has an issue with the banks losing large amounts of money. Why? Because is the money in the banks is societies money. Where did the bank get the money to lend to Greece? From you. So if the Greece defaults on their debts, and then banks don't get repaid, it's your money that went away and will no longer be able to pull out of the bank. If there's no money to pull out of the bank, there's no money to pull out of the bank.

Actually, according to the article, it's claiming that by having too many rich people causes crime. The idea being that having someone move it and get a well paying job that must have only come from making someone else unemployed. So now there are a bunch of unemployed homeless people, and all of the housing has gone to over paid people. So home breakins has increased because now there's actually something worth stealing in houses.

After the recent Supreme Court decision you can tell Fox News knows it's happening somewhere. They just need someone to tell them about it, and they'll fly in the troops to 'report' on it.

If the cloud provider created an encryption that even they couldn't work with they wouldn't have clients. For starters, search wouldn't work. Secondly, the average Joe would expect the cloud solution to be like someone holding something for him in a safe. Should he lose the key for the safe, he would still expect a way to prove his identity and have the owner of the safe open it for him on his behalf.

So your best bet is to go with a solution whose privacy policy states that they won't datamine your data for commercial purposes.

But then only criminals will have social engineering. How is a law abiding citizen supposed to protect themselves?

I suspect that carpool lanes will still exist as an incentive for multiple commuter to pile into the same car. If every morning I whip out my phone and hit the "I need a pickup in 15 min" button, and an options pops up to pay less to carpool, I'll probably hit that, and end up in a car with a few people from my neighborhood. We'll all probably be ignoring each other, but that's okay. Then I might get inconvenienced a little bit as one or two people get dropped off at their work before mine. As long as the pick up and drop offs are in same neighborhood, I think it'll be worth it for most people to have an automated system commute for them like that.

That's always been Google mantra: embrace, extend, extinguish.

Think about the actions you do when having fun with technology. If it wasn't a game, smashing the same four buttons over and over would not be fun. But the technology has made it fun. Once someone figures out how to make teaching a certain principle fun, technology can replicate that solution the world over, instead of being bottled up in a single classroom.

That wasn't my experience. Once they started putting ads in the web client, they were more than happy to keep hosting an email address for you.

Most everyone had highschool chemistry, and that's not the reason why they know that chewing medical pills is bad. They know it's bad because at one point some authority figure would have told them not to, and the instructions on the bottle would say to do otherwise.

True, but how many cooks do you know are also good at chemistry. I suspect that the majority of cooks, who prepare the foods you eat, if they were any good at chemistry would not be cooks, because they'd be doing something else. While some really advanced chefs will make use of things they learned in chemistry, the vast majority do not. So the schools could stop teaching chemistry, leave it for college and those who want to be chemists, and the skills of the cooks out there will not change.

But given how new programming is, and how pervasive computers are, if everyone had a little bit more understanding of programming, it could have a huge impact on society.

Many students really struggle with the concept of variables in math for years. And after all that they think of post-arithmetic math as something that is useless because they will never use/apply it in anyway. But if a year was spent on programming - tell the kids that they get a year free of math - in between arithmetic and algebra, when it comes time to teach algebra, the kids will already get a lot of the concepts that they struggle with now, and will be able to see how to make use of it. They will probably take what they learn in algebra and *gasp* apply it to what they've been programming.

I agree that there should be a division between computer science and software engineering, but given that most Universities don't make that split, we can't expect the politicians to do so either. As ideal as teaching the science of computing without computers is, only a very select few can wrap their minds around that. I know for myself that it took a few iterations of learning the concept in the class room, tinkering around with a program, and begin dazed and confused in class again before I really started to get it. Without the tinkering step, I don't think I ever would have.