Actually we have more than enough food to go around right now. We don't have a food shortage problem we have a wealth inequality problem. This is a political/moral problem. A replicator would not change this any more then refrigeration, fertilizer, or tractors solved the hunger problem (despite the huge increases in food production they enabled).

The researchers who found this noticed it will only activate on certain controllers that are controlling centerfuges built in either Iran or Poland I believe. There are additional restrictions, I think something about a certain percentage must be or Iranian manufacture of something. Since there are virtually no Iranian centrifuges outside of Iran it is as targeted as it is possible to be to only Iranian nuclear processing facilities.

While I tend to agree with you about jargon, the ironic thing is that jargon is explicitly created to communicate more clearly. It is all about speaking to your audience, if you are talking to a fellow slashdotter you say "dual core CPU", if you are talking to your grandparents you say "computer with two brains". Both are very clear to their target audience and incomprehensible drivel to the other, so which is "communicating clearly"? Many concepts are very hard to break down into terms of microwave ovens, buying groceries, and fixing your car analogies. But I agree that just because something is hard that we should quit trying.

The real issue here isn't an Android problem at all, it is the fact that manufacturers/carriers never upgrade the software. They have no incentive to, they already sold the product and made their money, why would they waste time/money making sure the new version will work? It actually works in their favor not to as the customers have to spend more money getting a new phone with new software. Until you actually own your phone and can upgrade it at your discretion this will continue to be a problem. Or buy something from Apple who actually understands this and has the clout to force it on the carriers.

If 99% of the people are idiots and 1% of them ask a question you cannot immediately answer; congratulations: you just got 1% smarter and 1% is a HUGE gain in any endeavour worth earnestly chasing.

That sounds very good until you have to deal with that 99% who are trying to discredit you and ruin your career. You should read to get a little taste for the kind of "questions" you usually get: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Lenski_dialog The whole question is a little bit mute anyway as a mechanism for dealing with this, any many other problems, is already used: replication of results. Published results are generally not widely accepted until they can be replicated in a different lab. This overcomes any coding errors, but more importantly, equipment errors, user errors, random chance, and even active data manipulation. I think what most people who are not actively involved in research fail to realize is what an iterative process science is. Early results are often, maybe even usually, error ridden. This can come from bad code or anything else. But as more people work on it and improve it the errors are removed and the final product is something very close to ground truth, and the longer it is discussed the closer it gets to that goal. If you don't believe me I would ask you where you think computers, automobiles, pain killers, vaccines, rockets, cameras, genetically modified mice, and skyscrapers come from. All of those required an incredible detailed, and accurate, knowledge of how the working components function. Science, it works bitches.

This functionality and resolution is easy to get and can be obtained from a normal single photo, not 1655. All you need is a standard "enhancement" filter found on any movie of TV show worth its salt. You zoom in, everything is blurry, enhance, it gets clear again and repeat ad nauseum, or at least until the scientists in your audience are nauseated.