It's because of the wave nature of electrons!

Whoa, hang on, it's because of the particle nature of electrons!

Pssssh, fools! Relativity! E=MC^2. You're welcome.

Wait, wait - I got this - we have this cat in a box and it dies, or something... I'm pretty sure this has something to do with it.

Hold on, I think it's because of innumerable, invisible vibrating strings that permeate the universe.

Noooooooo, it's from this thing called the Higg's Boson and once we understand it, it'll explain it. Ah, shit. Now there's two.

Well, no one really understands gravity, so it is probably caused by whatever causes that. Um, dark energy/matter, perhaps?

Well, at least there's a parallel universe wherein we do figure it out.

Just because something's complicated doesn't mean we don't try to figure it out. If we see a trend or occurrence in a scientific discipline that is unprecedented or poorly understood, then we try to find the a reason or cause for such anomalies. In this case, finding a cause (or several causes - which is more likely to be the case) could help us prevent similar incidents in the future and potentially save lives. Isn't that worth the speculation? Besides, societal trends, regardless of the complexity of a society, are still less complicated than theoretical physics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=HlZRcxvGIWE&NR=1

Thank God someone will be out there to defend us against stuff like this.

T&C's exist because bad laws exist, so we give websites the opportunity to get around them.

Maybe we could just let people learn to be responsible with their information and let the market work like it always does. If a website leaks your information, then don't use it. Why should we have the right to sue them?

...and regardless of the size, color, or style of the font, people will still ignore it.

I don't get it.

Consumers throw their personal information like water balloons at as many websites as they can and then we feel it's somehow the website's fault when they drop one. If you don't want your privacy balloon to pop, hold onto it.

I assume you're referring to human's nature to create?

What about human nature to be selfish? Hell, what about the human nature to survive by having a profession that is actually lucrative? It's easy for us, the consumers, to demand that all creators do their work for free because we only look at the exorbitantly wealthy publishers who profit from them. Do I like copyright laws? No, I don't, but to jump blindly to the other extreme is just naive. Just my two cents.

Just a thought... what if your boss reduced your pay by 50% and told you that "if you're only doing it for money, then you're doing it for the wrong reason"?

Of course the only reason I write is because I enjoy it. And submitting any of my work for publishing would have reward in and of itself, but to do so would require that I devote an enormous amount of time that I could otherwise spend earning money and providing for my family, which, right now, I consider the more important task.

The year is 2016: Every book that has ever been printed is now considered "public domain" since copyright laws have been abolished and you can find any literature you want just by googling the title and author. Sound great? Well it also turns out that books have annually been published 80% less since the copyright laws were struck down. Why is that, do you think? Perhaps it's because there's no longer any motivation for authors to publish their books since they aren't paid any money once they are published. They are made immediately available for the public's viewing. All the author gets is good feeling that people are reading their work. Reward enough? 80% of authors would say no.

Obviously it's a hypothetical argument, but I can say that as an aspiring novelist, my motivation to finish my book would be lessened if I knew that even if my work went viral, I would have nothing to show for it except for a few book readings at coffee shops.

Within -- "An amateur gunsmith has already used a 3-D printer to make the lower receiver of a semiautomatic rifle, the AR-15. This heavily regulated part holds the bullets and carries the gun’s serial number. A German hacker made 3-D copies of tightly controlled police handcuff keys. Two of my own students, Will Langford and Matt Keeter, made master keys, without access to the originals, for luggage padlocks approved by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration."

The lower receiver is heavily regulated because it is the piece that can convert a semiautomatic rifle to a full automatic if you are able to manipulate it properly. A 3D printer could circumvent what was previously an extremely difficult task to convert the receiver from semi-auto to full auto.

And in the latter half of the paragraph, yet another reference to the TSA. How ironic.

Not so my friend... http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138154/neil-gershenfeld/how-to-make-almost-anything?page=show

You'll people are already making parts to guns and master keys that can unlock anything from baggage padlocks to police handcuffs. Yes, these are probably laboratory grade 3D printers, but it won't be long before the public can get their hands on something similar.