Considering the manufacturing is already in SE Asia and Eastern Europe, they could ship directly from those locations to their global markets. There's no reason to bring the product back to the U.S. and then send it out to Europe and Asia again.

Granted, the NSA would still be able to tamper with anything coming out of their North American warehouses, but this at least will satisfy the concerns of their foreign customer. And they may still be able to plant moles in those foreign locations, but that's no different than any location in NA so it's not exactly increasing attack surface.

Forget the artwork. Some of the titles are hilarious too.

That was, until the genius who came along with two mirrors.

If they can filter out telemarketing calls via behaviorial analysis, they can simply ignore the junk data coming from those sources.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Simpler to just get rid of the telemarketers.

You've shown you're willing to pay. That means you might be willing to pay even more.

As for the Samsung TVs, there's no school like old school.

In a word: entropy.

Sorry, quiet and polite would be the British. You're just the incredibly friendly sidekick.

That is incorrect. The American justice system is based upon the opinions of judges on the laws written by the legislature with respect to their adherence to the Constitution, the Declaration, other founding documents, British common law, and the founding principles.

That having been said, a case like this would have to reach the justice system first before it could be subject to American justice. And in this situation, just as in say, Assange's situation, there's good reason to believe that these people would never be subject to the American justice system. Instead they would probably be first subject to the American vengance and punitive systems, namely the military and civilian law enforcement. They'd be lucky to face justice alive and mentally and physically whole.

More than likely, Snowden would end up like an American Alan Turing: one who did a great service to his country, only to be driven to an unjust end by its government.

I don't think you're libertarian, even if you identify yourself as such.

Government regulation can be both bad and good. You know this. You've pointed this out in the very post I'm replying to. There are situations that deal with the public good and interest where government has to step in. There are situations where government should sit the fuck out. In this situation, even you recognize the government has to regulate. You've also recognized that the government shouldn't have regulated local communications monopolies into existence. The key is knowing when the government should regulate, and when it shouldn't.

The writers of the Article of Confederation found this out the hard way. That's why they rewrote it into what's now the Constitution. This country needs a strong central government. Just not too strong. Industries need government regulations. Just not too much.

That's not a libertarian ideal. But it is a sensical one.

In my experience, Google does not offer good support. They're primarily engineers, and engineers typically have no sense of the needs of anybody else but themselves. Remember, you're the product, not the customer. They are assuredly not a "decent" vendor by any means. They're a tolerated vendor, and not because they're necessarily such great products, but tolerated only because there's no one else.

Rather than any conscious decision to deny you support, the woes you experienced was probably a result of that prevailing corporate mentality. Don't ever count on Google for support. Some of their engineers may be helpful, but there's no corporate policy and in particular, no corporate culture of thinking of their users.

IEEE is an engineering journal, not a scientific one. These are two completely different fields, with two completely different mindsets. If you don't know the difference, I'll give you a hint: one is binary and the other is not.

FTFY

No. GP is actually a limited, unreliable, and gimmick-heavy choice.

If you did this every time, you'd be identified as the guy who runs his code through Google Translate prior to release.

Non-normal behavior is the most easy to single-out. In order to avoid detection, you basically have to become noise. And if you're the only one, then even that is a pattern.

Sure, you could run some things through Google Translate and leave some things alone, but that'd be the equivalent of having two online personas.

It's 50,000.

Or for the study, the 12 people who code exclusively in assembly.