Oh the irony. The NSA are dishonest from the leader on down.

If you're a leftie, you're holding it wrong.

Lefties should have their knuckles smacked until they repent.

It's splash proof. i.e. it can withstand casual exposure to water.

Battery life: I think there was some mention of charging it overnight, so you can assume I think 1 day of battery.

You're going to blame Apple because your Mandarin isn't up to scratch? Such a pedant. If you'd gone to iTunesU, I'm sure you could have quickly downloaded a course on it.

I didn't hear Apple say explicitly that they are not somewhere getting their whiskers wet.

It's counter-intuitive that a low-density substance would conduct heat well. It seems the opposite with solids, where low density substances are good insulators.

Well.... to be a genuine issue it would have to be statically linked, otherwise you would do the obvious and just distribute them separately. So is that what's happening here? I doubt it, since the original server is presumably unmodifiable.

It would only take bandwidth if it crossed the divide between ATT and the customer, and then was lost. But if there are packets getting lost at that point, one would presume an equal number would be lost going outwards, in which case the customer would record them sent, but ATT would not. In other words, any packet loss should be a net nil.

Yes, the whole point of sending folks into the space station is to do experiments in microgravity. Otherwise, might as well stay home and watch TV.

Here's what you should do: nothing at all. Life is too short and there are better battles to fight.

Or at least, losses incoming and outgoing should cancel each other.

Errm, if any packets get lost that should *REDUCE* his billing, not increase it.

I don't buy it. A petrol station might have an irreducible overhead of evaporation in storage, but the point is when I fill up one litre or one gallon, that's how much I expect to get. If there is irreducible overhead, that's their problem.

I can picture a scenario that if they were encrypted, the recovery key would be lost, or the person holding it would die or resign or quit and suddenly all the backups are unrecoverable. You can say ok, so the key should be kept somewhere secure, but where? When you answer that question, then why not put the actual backups there? It's not like you could have just one key forever either. That would be insecure to never change it. But to change it means having some filing system to keep the whole list of them from years and years back and storing them so people can find them. Then how are you going to encrypt THAT?