It doesn't establish a religion, it simply respects it's existence.

Make an important practice within a religion illegal and you're banning a religion.

Contrary to how it plays on TV, the same respect is granted to any religion that has a practice of confession or pastoral counselling. Respecting one but not others would actually be establishment of a religion.

You should probably drink less. You're not even making sense.

SSD $/GB is gonna be going down across the board. It's nice to see the competition heat up.

-Matt

Three people in the cockpit at all times. One to fly the plane, one to take over if he gets sick, one flight crew to watch the pilots and one to FOUR! FOUR people in the cockpit at all times :-)

So the crazy suicidal pilot immediately makes a few of those maneuvers you must never make and commits the plane to the crash.

One last chance for someone to be talked out of doing something we wish they wouldn't do? Separation of church and state? (The sanctity of the confession has existed much longer than the U.S.)

Because it does business in America and wishes to continue doing so.

I'm guessing you haven't read "The Wealth of Nations". You know, one of my "imaginary" references. Go give it a shot.

Google it, there's a bazillion books and academic papers on the subject. Read The Wealth of Nations, it's free.

You can assert that the moon is actually made of cheese all you want, but it'll only get you laughed at.

That's where the capriciousness of Apple's review process comes in to play. It's hard to justify spending the kind of resources necessary to produce an app that competes on quality when you have no way at all to know if the app will EVER reach even a single customer. That makes cheap throw-aways the best bet and even that is a losing proposition for most.

The hope is that the schools, law abiding individuals and corporations will obey the law and not pay (admittedly, the corporations might be problematic, not a lot of respect for law there).

The idea is that if the targets won't pay because they aren't willing to break the law, then the crooks end up with an all risk but no reward scenario and move on to something else.

No, but the fact that they don't shows that they are fully committed to the idea that American Citizens are the enemy.

Well, we know the NSA doesn't mind sharing info w/ the DEA.

At least they could for once do something helpful. Unlike the DEA cases, there is a high probability that the bad guys are not U.S. citizens or operating within the U.S.

But looking at the comparative benefits, a lockable door still wins. Let's say the door could be unlocked with a oin. Copilot physically jams the door, still no entry. Pilot manages to force the door anyway, copilot overrides everything and barrel rolls the plane to death.

Bottom line, if the person currently controlling the plane wants a crash, there will be a crash. No door design will change that.

OTOH, if terrorist wants control of the plane, a locked door rules that out.