If you're too stupid to spot a joke, maybe you should, as you so kindly put it, fuck off.

I'm sorry, I have a cold.

The same mixed results you'd probably get with people doing it.

Just look at those two photos of Obama - he really does look older in one than the other. If you didn't know who he was, or if you found similar looking images of two distinct people, those age guesses would not seem wildly inaccurate.

Why wouldn't they? It's right there, on their computer, the moment they buy it.

Forgive them, for they know not what else they can install.

My hobby: repunctuation.

Nuh uh. Doctor, not Dr.

And that's not quite just pedantic nerdrage talking. Dr. Who is similar-but-different character from a separate fictional universe.

So there.

Interesting nerdfact: they were planning to refer to the Dr. Who films in the 50th anniversery episode as having been inspired by the real Doctor, but they couldn't afford the rights to use the posters.

Who's "we"? All sorts of people use it for all sorts of things, and plenty of them do so only because it's traditional.

From a purely technical POV, it's never seemed like a great test image to me. It's soft, the red channel is washed out, the blue channel is noisy, there's absolutely no green or cyan (in the sense of pixels where green is the strongest channel, or red is the weakest channel) and very little blue.

Also, they cropped out her knockers and bum.

That's why I always use unsigned integers like a boss.

The summary fails to mention that it didn't all go to plan:

I read "did not go as planned" as "ended in a spectacular fireball," but they haven't released any images or video of that.

Incidentally the BBC's headline was:

which sounded to me like he'd gone up in the thing.

Two things:

1) We're still not seeing what a user would actually see. We're seeing solid, background-occluding objects overlaid on a camera feed. I'd like them to put a small camera inside a headset, and show us what we'd actually see if we were using it.

2) If they ever need a new guy to do Grover's voice on Sesame Street, I know who to call.

It sure does.

Eww.

Because it never tells you when you accidentally a word, that's why.

That should be probably further, but anyway, c'mon, it could be a lot further from the truth. They could have claimed to have encrypted the documents using a slice of lemon wrapped around a hamster.

So the only thing wrong with that sentence is the word "public," isn't it? That doesn't sound very far from the truth.

(in fact the screenshot shows the text also says "RSA-2048")

Whadya mean, "decryption key"? It's the same key! That's the whole point of the story!