What would the Russians hope to achieve with that? He probably didn't memorize much and all the data he has is heavily encrypted and he doesn't have, nor know, the keys. I doubt torturing him is really worth their time and the spectacle is far more valuable.

He is doing a very good job of upholding his oath. It appears to me like he is defending "the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic," just as he swore to do.

How about Jose Padilla? He spent nearly five years in a military prison without being charged with a crime, just because the President labeled him an "enemy combatant."

I wonder how long it would take the Russians to break the NSA's best encryption?

Snowden has been planning this for years. Do you think he hadn't though about that possibility? The Guardian reporter was quite clear that Snowden doesn't want the information falling into the wrong hands. To that end, according to the reporter, the information he is carrying is heavily encrypted and he doesn't have the keys. He spread copies of the encrypted data and copies of the keys to trusted associates around the world. If something happens to him, then they can share their keys and reveal the information. While the Russians could break it in time, by then the information will have considerably less value.

Pot is legal to grow for personal consumption (or to give freely to others) in the state of Colorado (although it is still against Federal laws). As a consequence, it is more out in the open than in other states, so I doubt this would draw attention from drones. How about a "I support Snowden" poster instead?

It really depends on the definition of "know" or "associates". For instance, a person working for a call center might talk to more than ten thousand people from different communities each year. If this counts under the NSA's definition of "hops", then I suspect that nearly the entire world is separated by far less than 6 degrees.

According to the FISA ruling released by Snowden, the NSA is allowed to turn over any information on domestic crimes that it discovers "inadvertenly" to other agencies (what constitutes suspicion of a crime?). The NSA might not be charged to spy domestically, but the FISA court has ruled that it is, essentially, not prohibited from doing so. Given that if they monitor all communications within 2 or 3 "hops" from a suspected terrorist, they can reach a sigificant percentage of the domestic population.

You should get out more. Corruption of government is not a U.S. phenomena. There are many counties that do it even better.

That should give you an idea of the power of the Chaebol in Korea. They can be absolutely brazen and still get away with it. In the U.S., there is still a line that cannot be crossed.

Lee Gun Hee's first presidential pardon came after a conviction for bribing the President of South Korea. Can you image if irrefutable evidence emerged that Tim Cook had given bribes to Barack Obama (direct quid pro quo, not campaign contributions)? His next presidential pardon came about 10 years later when he admitted publicly to tax evasion and embezzelment, so it was an open and shut case. CEO's have a lot of power in the U.S., but it is on another level in Korea.

I have lived and worked for corporations in both places. I saw a difference. It may be one of degree, but it certainly was a difference.

Samsung just increased the prices 30% in November of last year for the chips they were already making. There aren't many companies with the capabilities to manufacture these chips in Apple's volumes. I suspect Samsung is make quite a profit on these chips and this is more an issue with Apple unable to find other sources for these chips (it is rumored that Apple had put a chunk into GlobalFoundries in the hopes of turning them into a viable source).

Samsung takes it to a whole new level. Their CEO has been convicted of felonies twice (two separate occations) and had the verdict put aside because he was deemed too valuable to the Korean economy. American Corporations have power, but in Korea, Samsung, and to a lesser extent the other Chaebol, are truely above the law.

I don't think most people would hate Oracle if all they did was "keep what works and get rid of what doesn't." After all, Google dumps far more unprofitable products each year and they have a much better reputation on these boards. Oracle has earned its reputation by repeatedly attacking the very foundations of the tech industry in the (short-sighted) pursuit of higher profit margins from more vendor lock-in. This is the root of the anti-Oracle bias, not scrapping a few products.

I won't disagree with you that this tool, as most tools, can be used for good or bad (and you gave excellent examples of bad times to withhold a story). While their motives and mine might not be the same, all I can do is commend the journalists when they do good and condemn them when they do bad.