Sure you don't want that to be GNU/LS?

To be able to determine that someone has a hidden volume, you would have to be able to look at the volume twice - the first time after you first suspect that there is a hidden volume, and the second after someone has changed something in the hidden volume.

There are a few ways this "threat" could be countered in my opinion.

1. Always "overwrite" the free space with random garbage when you use the volume. This gives plausible deniability. if the free space has changed a lot, then it could be because you have written to the hidden volume, or because the programme has just overwritten some portion of the free space like it always does.

2. Assuming the program doesn't allow (1), don't make any changes to the hidden volume once your encrypted disk has been inspected once. Basically, if the only thing that could give you away is making further changes to the hidden volume, then don't make the changes. You will still have access to your files, but won't be able to change the volume.

Influenza is a disease, which also causes illness!

Umm, if parents are being stupid, then yes.

Travel in business class then!

Why does everything have to be universal or bad?

Is there anything stopping Haiku or Amiga offering to pay for the implementation of the DRM on their systems. Companies will support any platform that can add to their bottom line. If Haiku users want support, they can just pay for it. Or download Linux which is equally if not more free, and comes supported.

Just because things are done in software doesn't mean the choice should be works everywhere or not at all.

I would also add that unless AMD plans to have a business where it can migrate cheaper chip business to use the older fabs, AMD might well find itself having to manage fabs i.e. run a foundries business to recoup its investment. AMD doesn't really make the cheap as chips chips (the kind of stuff that Broadcom makes), then they should not be in the business of fabs. They ought to let the likes of TSMC who can manage that migration much better than AMD be in that business.

This is a concept. Concepts can be improved!

As long as your commute doesn't run your battery down completely, and as long as you charge tend to recharge more than you discharge through use, a car port like this will keep you topped up.

This could also be hooked up to your mains to supply most of your own electricity.

Maybe, if car makers came together and created standard battery sizes, capacities and forms, you could build in battery swap station to allow your battery to be recharged when you are not at home, and allow your EV to always be swapped onto the battery with the most charge.

It can be even worse. When I was looking to upgrade the last time around, it worked out that I g=could get a cheaper plan if I also bought a phone from the provider.

I don't know about the USA, but the last time I was looking to buy a phone, my phone company was willing to give me an interest free loan for 2 years, and give me a cheaper plan than I would have gotten had I kept my old phone. It did surprise me a little, but I reckon they get to make a profit on the upfront sale, so they are happy to sell a phone to me at cost, and they probably can borrow very cheaply, so they weren't even bothered to charge interest on the upfront loan.

So it is not always as clear cut, but then again, I live in the UK where there is actual competition between the phone networks (Vodafone, O2, Orange/T-Mobile and Three).

What is clear is that it is not always the no-brainer that the article makes it out to be.

If you think buying a car and an institution buying a large number of shares in the markets are anything alike (asides from exchanging cash for an asset), then you are hopelessly misinformed.

This isn't predicting the markets. This is gaming them. If I know that a big pension fund want to buy Apple stock, having gleaned this information from unfulfilled orders on some exchanges, I can go out and quickly buy some Apple stock, and then almost immediately sell it to the fund. Why should we allow HFTers to have information before the rest of us. They should wait in line like everyone else. Why can't orders be queued so that the last to place and order is the last to have it filled. And why can't we impose a delay (even a random one) to ensure that one cannot jump ahead of the queue by going to other markets to find the same shares when they find out that someone else is looking for shares.

The fact that a service cannot be guaranteed does not give someone the right to sabotage it. Everything we depend on in society depends in part on society agreeing that we behave in certain ways, including not sabotaging services that we depend on as society. This is why we don't allow people to pollute rivers unnecessarily, we don't allow people to fly their aircraft without agreeing to obey the instructions of air traffic control etc.

There was a time when hard-line services would not have been considered essential - when just two people had telephones for example, and quite possibly for a long time after that. That changes when people began to depend on them, and one could argue that people now depend on wireless services in the same way.

Hardwires can also be cut (see recent tornadoes) and wireless service may be a lot easier an quicker to restore in emergency situations.

70% (and now possibly more) of emergency calls are now done using wireless devices, so the argument that we should not depend on them is incredibly silly and shortsighted at best.

You are not thinking far enough.

Smart meters and thermometers could allow smarter uses of electricity, e.g., at peak times, if your temperature is only marginally above the set temperature, your AC could be switched off automatically. If you are way above the set temperature, the utility would let you keep using your AC until it comes down to a comfortable temperature.

You could even have peak pricing, and maybe you could instruct your AC to only turn on when the price per unit of electricity is below a certain level, unless your house is too hot.

This could be preferable to building excess capacity which will hit your bills, even when you are not using it.

Don't know if you are serious...

A failing road car stops on the road. Not always ideal, but generally a controllable event. A failing flying car drops out of the sky. Therefore it has to be orders of magnitude more reliable than your typical car.

Countries around the world have systems in place to control the airspace. Can you imagine how difficult/impossible this task would be with a million cars potentially in the air at the same time.

A flying car belongs in the science fiction category for good reasons.