This is the Detroit that didn't take Japanese brands seriously until it almost killed them. The Detroit that needed 30+ years to bring a small, efficient, powerful engine to the US.because they knew best what American wanted (big V8s for drag racing). The Detroit that hides the fact that Mitsubishi (Chrysler), Toyota (GM) and Mazda (Ford) built their small cars for 20-some years. But Google is arrogant. Right.

without their consent

What's actually more problematic to me is that the paper explicitly claimed they asked for and received "informed consent". But their justification is that users agreed to the Facebook EULA. That is a serious misunderstanding of what constitutes informed consent in research ethics; it does not just mean that someone agreed to some fine print, possibly months ago, in a transaction unrelated to the current study.

If they want to argue that this doesn't require informed consent at all, because it's e.g. just data mining of effectively existing data, that would be less problematic imo than watering down the standard for informed consent to include EULAs.

I think the real story here is that someone in Atlanta figured out how to use a computer. :P

Lower prices "leave a trail of blood in our balance sheet" according to Bernhard Guenther, CFO at RWE, Germany's biggest power producer

Sounds to me like "our production costs are so close to our competition's retail price, we're having trouble staying in business, pity us!"

No, this is not something for me to pity, and it most certainly isn't my problem to help you solve. You need to innovate and improve efficiency of your business, or close your doors. We don't do the "buggy whip" thing anymore. And your existence isn't critical enough to justufy subsdies/handouts. Innovate or die. (quietly if possible)

Why would suppliers provide electricity at negative prices?

Penalties include up to ten years in prison, or a fine of up to $1,000 and two and a half years in jail.

If you're going to bother at all, don't just quote the penalty, quote the whole statute. It clearly states that intent to use the tools for a criminal purpose is required for prosecution. This is the case in many states, and what it means is that you're free to carry around locksmithing tools as long as you aren't engaged in any criminal activity that would be aided by using those tools.

In other words, you'll incur an additional count if you possess lockpicks (or a sledge hammer, for that matter) while breaking into a house, and you might get charged if you have lockpicks while walking around wearing a ski mask and carrying a canvas sack with dollar signs on it, but other than that you're good to go.

This right here is why we should be teaching basic programming or scripting in middle school. Show young students how to automate simple tasks and they'll apply it to nearly every field that exists."

Sounds like someone who embodies the Three Virtues of a programmer: Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris. Well done!

I'm always amazed at what non-programmers are impressed by. Code up some major application, and... Why doesn't it have this feature? Why does it have that workflow? What kind of colorblind dyslexic idiot designed this UI? But whip up a simple script to automate some repetitive, routine task and you're a genius!

Exactly. He doesn't need to do squat. He's implicitly selling the idea that he will be using all those secrets to help out his clients, but it's a flim-flam; he doesn't actually have to do it.

And he was the head of the NSA, an administrator...what's the chance he knows much in the way of recent technical details anyway?

If availability is all thats required why can't a League of Legends team be coed? Just because team siren was awful doesn't mean that female players can't or won't play League of Legends professionally and/or on competitive teams at a high level. Considering how much effort has been put into making female players into placekickers in college football, in league of legends the admittance of female players should be a trivial non-issue.

No, as the series of court rulings have gone, the Fourth Amendment does not protect you from lawful search and seizure (such as a safe or hard drive). The combination to the safe, or encryption key to the drive, is not incriminating evidence and providing it to allow for lawful search and seizure does not violate your rights. They can admit evidence produced by oneself into court (such as two sets of books in one's own handwriting for a case of fraud) and that is not a violation of the Fourth (or Fifth) - just so with information one puts on a hard drive. What they can not compel one to do is testify against oneself (which is the Fifth by the way) nor assume guilt because you do not take the stand (not that a prosecutor won't toe that line with the jury). So, if one can keep all details of a crime in one's head and manage to destroy all other evidence which could be subject to lawful search and seizure - then you've got a shot at being a criminal mastermind.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with the line of thought - but I can certainly follow the logic as well as the precedence.

What would be interesting is if one's pass-code was material evidence with respect to the case - but a possible way around that would be limited immunity or ruling it as inadmissible evidence...It would make for an interesting case study.

Really? I don't find the legitimate ones bad at all. Much better than the SAT for testing raw, innate intelligence.

.