1. Prepare an ad campaign with a so "badly" retouched photo that everyone having eyes can't avoid noticing it.
2. Wait for some famous blogger to pick up the bait, telling his readers how bad the ad is
3. Issue him a takedown notice, hoping that Mr. famous blogger goes doubly vocal on the issue as expected
4. Wait some months: nobody remembers exactly the issue, but in many minds, the trademark of the advertiser is permanently associated with something shocking.

The sad thing is that the famous blogger above has both every right to criticize the ad, and also he may gain further popularity in doing this. The only way for him to avoid being a pawn in the game is to ignore the whole argument, and that gains him nothing. It's an almost self-sustaining system, be prepared for more in the future.

Your analogy is flawed. Asking lawyers to drop legalese is like asking programmers to drop programming languages.

If laws had the same nature of programming languages, we'd have robot lawyers by now.

You know that you aren't really punishing anyone by taking away something they have explicitly said they don't want?

Since when does "through elected representatives" mean "explicit"?

A lot of these sorts of schemes assume some sort of fixed pixel size such as 96 dpi, a fantasy that hasn't been true since, well, ages. Some LED screens have up to 150 dpi resolution, others as low as 72dpi. If the scale is wrong, then the pixels won't line up and the decoder is then useless.

That's a problem only when the image on the screen is smaller than the one on the card. For larger on-screen images, holding the card a bit further from the monitor surface should do the trick.

I can't escape the impression that this is just security theatre and not serious security after all.

Same impression here, but I could be wrong.

If only Oracle documentation wasn't dry as desert

Probably it's part of their strategy to sell you courses, in case you didn't notice.

Weirdness: There's 2 clipboards in Linux. There's an XWindows clipboard and a Gnome Clipboard. Simply highlighting stores stuff in the XWin clipboard (middle-mouse pastes text from this buffer). The right_click-copy and right_click-paste does so from Gnome clipboard.

Actually, there are 2 mechanisms

• the selection, which is really interprocess communication mediated by the X server, with 2 processes exchanging data when you "paste". If the source process isn't there anymore, there's nothing to "paste". The destination process has a chance to tell the source process the preferred format of data.
• clipboards, where data actually gets copied into the X server memory, so it survives the closing of the source. The destination process must handle the data in the way it's stored in the X server, and that's why X clipboards were not as popular as the selection.

Both have to be mediated by the X server because, you know, you may have applications running on different computers displaying their windows side by side on your screen, and you want to be able to copy/paste things among them.

Whenever a trojan hits Windows, people are talking about how poorly designed Windows security is and how the user usually always runs as "administrator". People bring up how on Ubuntu and OS X, you have to sudo or login to do administrative things. Apparently that only works to a certain extend

Well, I'd say there is a difference between a software package that is a trojan from the very start and one that, by running with administrative privileges all the time, can also be exploited later at runtime into installing malware on your system.

There's a lot less software on Unix systems that requires to be run with admin privileges all the time. Call it bad practice on third-party Windows software developers (by often ignoring the principle of the least privilege), but it's not that the system really encourages developers in dropping privileges.

Well, the same is true also for Perl, PHP, Python and even Lua, so that's nothing radically new.