No, you just send some guys over with a National Security Letter and force Google / MS / Apple to put your backdoor into your OS or firmware. Who would notice?

I received the Slashdot Death Penalty for making fun of Roblimo's video Slashvertisements a while back, and even if my comments get tons of positive karma they will eventually be god-modded down. Read at -1, people, that's where we Slashdot political prisoners are.

The weapons are on chips, firmware or in the OS! Did you not read that catalog that the Snowden fella kindly leaked for us?

Ask Intel about iAMT and vPro. Ask China about Manchurian Microchips. Ask Microsoft about NSAKEY again, because if we didn't believe their lame excuses 10 years ago, we REALLY don't buy them today.

Sure, the NSA probably has a large virus arsenal too, but when you can issue a National Security Letter to MS or Apple or Google or Mozilla, or simply activate one of our many programmer agents in place (such as in the IETF or at MS or Google) and just put the exploits wherever you like, viruses start seeming pretty silly. Heck, even our geopolitical adversaries are using US-made cyber-weapons - ahem, I mean operating systems and applications.

Just stop this already. Before I get my driverless car, I want my oft-predicted jetpack, flying car, and robot maid.

Self-driving cars aren't a cool idea, they are just stupid.

Since Gawker is not just a journalistic outfit (and just barely that) but is also a business and a link farm, they were directly profiting from the theft of Quentin's work. They may not be criminally liable but Gawker and the author himself exposed themselves to a serious tort.

The issue has nothing to do with 'holding charge' but the colder temperatures slow the rate of chemical reaction. Batteries do not hold sparking electricity, they undergo chemical reactions.

Stallman is an ethnic Jew and I think we all know that sometimes Jewish folks are given to exaggeration and hyperbole. Listening to Stallman complain about software freedom reminds me of listening to my uncle complain about air travel. Sure, they are right, but oy vey!

Nintendo's problem is that they seem to think more is better, but you can only look at one fucking screen at a time. I believe that, while this kind of gimmick may not intrinsically harm the sales of a video game system (The DS / 3DS seems to do OK) it certainly doesn't help it, and simply adds to the cost.

The only kinds of games I can think of where having a second screen makes sense are something like a multiplayer card or Scrabble game, where you can see your tiles or cards on your Wii U controller's screen but the main play surface is on the TV, and how many games like that are there for the Wii U? It seems pretty expensive to buy a couple extra of the big tablet style controllers just so you can play Scrabble or cards.

Apple has still failed to take responsibility for the massive failure rate of the 2008 Mac Pro. They also never fixed the Titanium PowerBook hinge issue. Apple's generally tried to sweep any massive issues like this under the rug.

Just use a high powered rifle and turn his skull into pink mist. It's not cruel, death is instantaneous, and it only costs a dollar. Less if you use surplus ammo.

That is really an amazing speech codec. You could fit 18 (9 full duplex) voice conversations on a standard 5.6 KB/Sec modem link with it.

One of the techniques mentioned in the catalog sends 2W of power over a 150 MHz (!) bandwidth. Just how would you detect this transmission? I don't really even know if there are receivers this wide-banded but the NSA must have them if they are receiving the transmissions.

Please explain how a transmission with such a small power density can be 'easily' detected. I'd like to know - I have been thinking about this for a while and I have no answer. I'm a radio amateur so I know a bit about the subject.

Where in the Constitution does it say anything at all about marriage? This is the problem with education these days - people have no idea what the Constitution even is.

I'm afraid you don't understand the purpose of lobbying. When AT&T buys enough lawmakers to get a big bunch of free money, they are also buying a promise for regulators to look the other way. In any event, did you read the bill(s) that granted AT&T this money? Somehow I doubt if they are even obligated to lay one inch of new cable, though the wording might imply otherwise to a non-lawyer.

It must be nice to be as idealistic as you.

It seems that firearm ownership rights are the only Constitutional issue that this Supreme Court intends on correctly dealing with. At least it's a start - our other rights emanate from the 2nd Amendment.