Where are the hosting providers that make end-to-end encrypted email/web/VOIP/XMPP easy and automatic for all my clients?

It is up to the user and the mail client to do the encryption. If your hosting provider plays any part in that they will need the keys and can therefore hand them over to others - or do decryption for others and keep the keys. Any way you look at it, end-to-end encryption requires that it be done AT THE END which means on your own machine.

should have the guts to just shoot those people

Utah had this till 2004 and 3 people who chose it prior to that date may still get it. I looked this up because I recalled someone using it just a while back.

IIRC the tap on top causes a low pressure wave starting from the bottom that allows the trapped gas to escape and form bubbles. This is not the first time the subject has been researched by a long shot.

I'm not sure about the loser paying when the loser is the defendant. That means you can pay arbitrarily high fees to a lawyer to sue someone as long as you think you'll win. Violate a patent - be bankrupted by someones lawyer fees. OTOH this means individual inventors might be able to defend their patents against large companies easier. It really seems like a windfall for patent lawyers though. Not sure if it's good or bad.

Call me a Polack. ?!?!

Hieu Minh Ngo, the website owner, was recently been indicted for 15-counts filed under seal in November 2012, charging him with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, substantive wire fraud, conspiracy to commit identity fraud, substantive identity fraud, aggravated identity theft, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, and substantive access device fraud.

Why does someone at one level of the crime get charged but not the one at the top. Remember:

Experian — one of the three national U.S. credit bureaus — reportedly sold SSNs through its subsidiary, Court Ventures, to the operators of SuperGet.info

Why are they not being charged? Using SSNs for certain things is illegal, and selling them probably is too - otherwise what did the other guy do wrong?

Put the cover crops down before winter?

Is this guys practice a good idea? Seems to work for well for him.

Apparently proper crop rotation along with cover crops in the winter does wonders for the soil. They should change their farming practices even if they insist of trying to fight CO2.

It seems to me that the redundancy in the code allows some triplets to be more stable than others. A random change from one letter to another shouldn't be a problem as long as the new triplet codes the same amino acid. In this light I would expect very important pieces of DNA to be coded in a way that allows more variability without changing function. How or if evolution deals with this would be interesting to study.

Nobody has requirements. What they have is problems, and it's the engineers job to build something that solves those problems. They may be able to offer some requirements or offer an idea what they want it to look like. The only way they have complete knowledge of what they want is when they already have it - when it's complete. It drives me insane when people put together a development process that shows requirements being complete at the start, or they show the "V" model of development and forget that a big circular arrow goes in the middle showing iteration (this is never accounted for in the schedule because it can't be).

If you expect complete requirements you don't fully understand your job.

I name all of my classes and variables "George." Problem solved.

We were coding with Simulink (diagram based thing). When things get complex you take a group of blocks and group them into a subsystem so you get a hierarchy of block diagrams. Each subsystem displays a name under the box, and everyone tries to give each block a name. People choose names of varying quality, but we had one guy leave the default name on every block "subsystem". To avoid name collisions it adds a counter as a suffix. I expanded the tree-view on the left side of the screen once and was able to fill it top to bottom with "subsystem2" "subsystem3" nested 5 levels deep. There is no way to navigate the code except by looking at the diagrams, but those consist of basic blocks (mostly math operators) and bigger boxes named subsystem. Fortunately some of the signals are labeled.

And of course the guy quit right after delivering this piece of shit to production.

FBP claims to make it easier for non-programmers to build applications by stringing together transformations built by expert programmers.

This notion of allowing non-programmers to do programming is flawed on its face. The challenges of programming can not be overcome by drawing some cute pictures. And if you have expert programmers making the building blocks it will only take them a few minutes more to connect them which eliminates the need for the "non-programmer" entirely. Then there is this notion of "pure functions". Dude, functional programming is a fad. Real programs manipulate data.

I've been "programming" with Simulink for 5 years now and it's great for control systems but shit for most other kinds of programming. So let your controls engineer use it to design and test and even generate C code. Then drop that code into your app and call it as a function. Never let that guy convince your organization that this is the way to go and ALL of the software should be created this way.

This goes far beyond the third party doctrine, effectively prosecuting someone and depriving them of the ability to defend themselves by declaring that they have no standing to refute the evidence used against them.

It sounds more like he wants to have the evidence thrown out by claiming it was illegally obtained. That is not the same thing as trying to "refute the evidence".

Are you familiar with the work of Yves Couder? Macroscopic Newtonian systems exhibiting features of quantum behavior. All this voodoo is probably just a lack of understanding.