Man there are a lot of future implant recipients waiting out there...

Has anyone considered looking at this from a Second amendment perspective? If we are not to pass laws prohibiting the right to bear arms in order to establish a proper militia, has it not been considered that the command and control of said militia would also be as equally important? If so, then would it not be fair to assume that military grade encryption standards (read: non-exportable encryption) would by nature also be protected weapons systems? Granted, I know that arms exports has a litany of laws and the average Joe American can't just walk down the street buy an over the shoulder rocket launcher, but one would think that the ability to communicate securely for defensive purposes would in and of itself constitute protection under the Second Amendment? Or am I just reaching here?

So, what do we think? Will the Chinese Government use this opportunity to provide valuable input to Apple on security vulnerabilities that they discover to help better secure Apple products? Or will they squirrel away the things they discover to their Intel agencies? My bet's on the latter.

But that's the NSA's job. It's posted in their mission statement on their public website. And news flash. If you think that whatever country you're in isn't doing the same damn thing... Then you're delusional.

... declared itself to be legal ...

I love how we use this phrase as if to imply that the government has somehow changed the rules on it's own without the consent or will of the people. All of these changes stem from the Patriot Act that followed September 11th. Which was voted into law by the Representatives that we elected. How many people actually read the Patriot Act? How many people chose to attend the House and Senate sessions where the nuances of the act were debated? How many people actually wrote to their legislators in opposition of the act? How many people actually chose to vote against the law makers that made this legal? The US is not a surveillance state that declared itself legal. The US is a Republic that grants the authority to pass laws into the legislators that we elect. Those law makers represent us. If we're not happy with the work they're doing we can do a number of things, first and foremost we can kick them out of office, next, we can choose to run ourselves and work to change the system, and third, we can actively protest our grievances. If people don't like the way it works, then it's incumbent on them to work to change that system.

The problem is when someone like Senator McCarthy comes along and decides that some group of people (Communists) are a threat to our society and need to be systematically monitored, imprisoned, etc... Question is, how will the protections by the Church commission come into play in this broadened surveillance scheme?

With the increasingly violent actions of some of the radical offshoots of Islam like ISIS and BOKO HARAM, how long do you think it will be before we have Senators asking for ISIS to be kept in check? And what if that look for ISIS extends to inside the US? Then what?

Seeing as how 15 year old school girls make a point to hack their boyfriends twitter feeds on a regular basis, I'd hardly say that the efforts of the cyber caliphate qualifies as "leet". And as for the threats of watching their backs, US military personnel have been involved in deployments overseas non-stop since 2001 and even before that. I think they know that already. Think I'd have to agree. It's embarrassing (kinda like getting caught with your zipper down) but ultimately, an annoyance and nothing more.

So by shunting the extra energy causing global warming into the power grid, would it be possible to recapture some of the "global warming" into a green energy production thus lowering the "global warming" to previous levels and reducing CO2 output of traditional energy production methods?

I mean after all, did Slashdot get his permission to use his name in print? ... Oh, wait, there's that whole little first amendment thing. Hope the EFF can step in to help remind the kind councilman...

That when industries raise rates and lower service to unacceptable levels (Blockbuster) that someone will come along with a better, cheaper, and more convenient alternative (Redbox, Netflix) that will kill them. And in the end, the content makers will find a new, albeit, less lucrative alternative distribution model.

Oh no, it wasn't lost. It was very intentional. If we don't dwell on race as a stumbling block impeding our success, we free ourselves to be successful. Tyson is a excellent example of that. I wouldn't doubt he's had to face racial issues in his rise to success, but he never shines light on that. He never dwells in the negative, instead he focuses on success. At least that's the public persona he presents. It makes him a good role model for other young African American youths to aspire to.

There will always be critics, regardless of race. Dr. Tyson probably deals with more than his fair share given his propensity to eschew religion on the side of science. But he doesn't let the critics get in his way, instead, he moves forward and ups the bar.

Of course, the same could be said about a 1990's Bill Cosby as well, so who knows, maybe I'll eat those words in the future. ;)

My point exactly, thank you. Lego spent millions studying what interests young girls and they developed that line in the hopes of expanding their target market into young girls. And it worked. But you wouldn't think so if you saw Anita's video on the topic.

Ouch. Mod parent up as insightful!

I'd echo this vote. I also like how Neil Degrasse Tyson has managed to essentially debuff race as an issue to be a giant in his field. His pursuit of science to leave behind the shortcomings of mankind in a bid to better understand the Universe in which we live is admirable. We watch riots over Ferguson, Mo while he's watching quasars and postulating the effects of gravity in environments unheard of on our planet. That's inspirational.