People overclock their stuff and then tells it was faulty when it meltdown. Sure they can then check the board and find it was OC'ed to death (the board usually set a bit in an eprom to show it was OC'ed), but it cost money and ultimately it is much easier to remove the ability.

Copyright infringement is about the distribution of copyrighted material without the authorization of the original copyright holder. It has never been about posting instruction on how to get the file, which is what TPB is. The GP is correct : there is NO infringing file whatsoever, which is why the swedish prosecution tried to make up "an aiding" gambit, as no infringing file can be found on TPB server. As for traffic being majorly about copyrighted material or your pharmacy example, it is legally *irrelevant*, which is mostly why over the year TPB was not prosecuted successfully. You can legally tell people where to buy crack cocaine. That fall under free speech. Again, TPB is not the pharmacy selling the 1% crack, it is the street board telling you precise instruction on how to reach that pharmacy. Perfectly legal.

If you are asking for specific knowledge you will have to go thru vast amount of developer, and when you find those, they will lack other knowledge. But what differentiate a good developer to a bad is : what question to ask to get the requirement, and how to proceed to research for lack of information. So not knowing about a specific encryption is not bad, if the developer ask the correct requirement question and demonstrate a willingness to search for correct source depending on such requirement. the specific question does not matter, it could as well be about a robotic software to remove feather from dead chicken in an assembly line. In your specific case i would ask why you chose this specific encryption, if you have a specific vendor or open source in mind, what would be the timing requirement (can it run slow) what would be the memory footprint requirement , how often it is used, what would be the liability for vulnerabilities, how are the key managed, are there legal requirement on the key management etc...etc...

As long as you can hide to the software you are debugging it, you can step by step through it until it is decrypted. So for all the money, all the added complexity, all you won is only a slight bit more time. The only real copy protection is when part of the code is not run locally but on a different remote machine. For example if you have something on a server which needs to be queried and allow you to continue with the software, like some of the online authorization.

"worker bee" have brain too, and in many cases in small enough organization, have enough access to the financials and the decision process to see how bad and stupidly short sighted some MBA decision are. On the other hand MBA's in financials have most of the time neither the overview of the business process nor the understanding of the fine working, as a general rule. There might be exception, but they are rare. That you use the monicker "worker bee" as if we were brainless drone shows a lot more about your lack of understanding of a highly educated workforce (as it mostly is in IT) than it says about bobbied's statement.

I have a budget for "fun" activities though, and I consider powerball to be one (i.e. money I throw away for my own amusement). So why would drink a 2$ glass of wine be less "money thrown away" than buying a 2$ powerball ticket ? They are in the same class, and at 2$ your wine won't be that good that you have much more excitement than at the ball drawing.

Today you pay an OS and keep it for years, sometimes a decade. And it cost you 80-120 euro or dollar so it is a cost of maybe 10$ a year at most. can you imagine people suddenly asked a monthly or yearly subscription ? A lot of normal folk will suddenly be highly suspicious even if the price is lower.

Some service are socialistic in nature because not having them would break us all. Fire service for example or community security (police for example). So de-facto you have socialistic services in the USA too. The philosophical divide is how many of such socialistic service we need. Western europe more or less added social medicine to that common list, whereas some politician in the USA are viewing that as the apocalypse and are trying to brake such action by all means.

Bottom line you are already using socialistic service. You are in a society. Not an anarchy. Society have for basis that some common understanding and service will be shared. Stop making it as if it was only "pinko communist" which had socialistic shared services.

"The answer is clear. They make the bureaucrats look bad."

How about frigging human decency. This persons had a family, friends, and acquaintance. How about this was a HUMAN being. You see free speech as trumping *everything* including human decency. I see human decency as being more important than free speech. As for your qip about bureaucrats looking bad , frankly where do you pull that shit out ? It only makes ISIS or whatever flavor of barbar did that looks bad. It does not reflect on any administration badly, be it american or jordanian. Why do i get the feeling you analyze *ANY* events with the tainted political glasses ? At least that explain why you did not think of human decency first.

Realistically the first will be the pirate bay , isohunt and various other torrent site. I am pretty sure you will be able to find CP or terrorism torrent there.

It is a the4chnic which is solely about mitochondria. Which therefore does not even touch those subject. Once there is a doctor proposing to change dark hair to blond hair we can have that debate. But you are debating something which is neither possible nor even discussed. Why the heck bring eugenic up ? This makes no sense. This always happen when a scientist propose or correct a genetic illness , people immediately jump and yell "ethical concern ! Eugenic ! " as if it had ANYTHING to do with the proposal.

how about discussing the proposal at hand, rather than raise ghost of something which was NOT proposed at all ? We already have had that debate on genetic selection of positive trait. We already massively refused it. The debated stuff now is not eugenic, but the removal or selection against NEGATIVE trait. And I hardly see the ethical implication of that. Attempt to switch to the selection of positive trait is fallacious and not part of that debate.

How can we have an open debate when one side censors the other, through lawsuits, censorship, or even making discussion outright illegal (see Holocaust denial)?

Open debate does not include the fallacy of ad hominem. It does not include defmation. In fact ad hominem and defamation are attempt to torpedoe the open debate and attempt to deflect the thematic away from science toward the persona of the people doing the debate. If you value open debate then you value stopping ad hominem and defemation.

You do not gain 18 Kg of lipid tissues in short time with eating borderline normally. You have to eat way more than you need. It may be that some people have so inefficient guts that they metabolize their food badly, but the law on matter and energy conservation are still valid > when you get fat that quickly it is because you eat far more than you need and you do ntoyhing to rein yourself.

Except they get the money from you every month in your pay directly so it is probably not 100% comparable to the US system. You can make a formular to get some back once per year. I easily got a few thousands back for example a few years ago.

People are good at nagging doctor. So they will get them write off the exemption, for no medical reason whatsoever. And if that doctor refuse, there will be another one which accept. They pretty much gutted the law.