Reasons I can surmise:
1 no decryption operation required on server
2 the data can stay encrypted in transit
1+2 = more security than on-disk encryption

Have thought this so many times. If only Wolfram would turn his mind to economics rather than Grand Unified Theory which he is apparently now working on, I think it would bear a lot more fruit a lot more quickly.

A nut? That's hilarious, Wolfram is probably the smartest man alive. Like Da Vinci and others his legacy won't be truly appreciated for centuries. Read NKS and if that doesn't give you some concept of his abilities, well, I don't think anything will convince you.

Internet Rage is so last decade. In my view internet use in general has matured a great deal, where unlike a kid who's suddenly learnt a new swear word and must say it to everyone everywhere, people show remarkable restraint considering the relative (kinda) anonymity of the internet. Yes, the internet has become an extension of society itself, rather than a novelty activity for scruffy foul-mouthed juveniles. Even teenagers seem to consider it bad form to flame, rage or troll (slashdottersyou are a special case.. because you are SO damn witty when you do it). As such this article is over 10 years too late.

Absolutely right. Couldn't believe the laughable security system when it came out. Has anyone else converted all their dropbox folders to truecrypt volumes?

Interesting. Now I can actually understand all those lawyer shows that come out of the US a lot better. I used to think the grand jury was just grand because of the outfits.

Every ISP does too.

Well that's ridiculous. You're second guessing evolution and almost everyone's natural instinct to talk 'baby talk'. Do you really think you know better?

I pretty much agree. But also what is the point? Another scientist conducting years of research only to state the obvious. And as though the research itself gives validity to our behaviour. I'd rather rely on 4 billion years of evolution and a few decades personal experience.

A slightly misleading article. Apple may well be talking about 24-bit audio, but 24-bits is hardly necessary for a large improvement in the perceived quality of audio. This real issue is with lossy codecs (like mp3) versus lossless codecs (like flac). Flac is far superior, and even the average person should be able to tell the difference with some practice - to the average musician its chalk and cheese let alone to an audiophile. I would be surprised if many people could differentiate 16-bit from 24-bit except via the increased dynamic range (number of discrete volume levels). And frankly this dynamic range is inappropriate for listening to most music, with the possible exception of classical and jazz that could use the extra headroom. The reason why you have to constantly adjust the volume of your DVD when watching at home? Too much dynamic range. Do you want that for you music as well? (not aware of any musical genres requiring explosions, gunshots etc at this time)
So, no, no-one will be able to tell the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit, but almost everyone should be able to appreciate the diifference between a lossy and a lossless codec. Flac, 24-bit or not will be a good thing.
For the record, most audio that is digitally recorded in 24-bit/96KHz or higher anyway. It is only 'dithered' down to 16-bit/44.1KHzas a last step in preparation for CD. For various technical reasons this results in a higher quality 16-bit recording than if it was tracked in 16-bit.

Not being a US citizen all I know about N*ggers is that only N*ggers can say N*ggers.

Seconded

Been using one of these for 4 years. This is really the only decent attempt at an ergonomic keyboard that I know of, and actually had some R&D to back it up. The main drawback is that it's not cordless. I have found it a particular problem moving between this and a non-ergonomic keyboard when necessary, although there's always a minute of two of typos until the new mental map kicks in.

This guy was NOT an Australian parliament member, he was a state politician. There's a big difference. It's like saying Arnold Schwarzenegger is a member of Congress.

Well ok, but doesn't this depend on whether you consider a theory Not Particularly Complete without a proof?
Bazinga.

Aren't the best theories supposed to be elegantly simple? This looks a mess.
Wait.. that's just how my head feels after reading the abstract.