Seriously? Under what logic is it okay to publicly disseminate, often for the express purpose of humiliation, someone else's private photographs whether obtained illegally, surreptitiously, or shared in confidence with you?

You're missing the point. It's not ok, but it is a highly foreseeable consequence of taking nude photographs, much less disseminating them. You'd have to live under a rock and have a Pollyannaish view of human relations in 2014 to have no idea that this is a common consequence. Most often now, it probably happens because someone believes they are special and they won't fall victim to what so many others in their demographic have suffered. In that sense, it is precisely the sort of behavior one expects of a child because children and adolescents are almost completely incapable of believing "you're not special and it could damn well happen to you too."

Don't want your nudes to end up in public? Don't take nudes that you wouldn't want the public to see. Then you can be a true victim. The whole concept of "revenge porn," insofar as it applies to nudes and porn freely made and disseminated, is ever so much "I want my freedom.... but I don't want my choices to have consequences of which I don't approve."

We have a term for that behavior. It's called behaving like a child.

We live in the golden age of low barrier to entry programming. I'm 31 (upper bounds of millennial). When I started, JavaEE in its earlier stages or .NET were the only choices outside of C/C++ that a typical graduate could get. Now you have Node, Python, Ruby, PHP, Groovy and all sorts of easy to use languages. FFS, JavaScript is now a serious career choice where it was considered a skill that no serious developer needed when I was in college (2001-2005).

I swear, some people won't be happy until the machine becomes sentient, writes the code they really meant to write (originally express in plain English, probably at a 6th grade level) and then gives them all of the credit at review time.

If we were to lock him up for ideas that if acted upon would be dangerous, the moderate left, center and right would be justified in openly exterminating the entire registered member list of every Socialist, Fascist and Communist movement in the US. Ideas do have consequences, one of which is that if you are going to declare that a hypothetical cannibal is a threat to his neighbors because he might snap and eat them (despite showing no signs of willingness to act on his depravity), then society would be justified in wiping out those political movements known to have a historic predisposition to slaughter their opponents.

but bullshit as in, contrary to a reasonable reading of the Constitution by a citizen of normal intelligence.

And how so? He waved his ability to execute their search in their faces and then suddenly is surprised when his failure to STFU per the 5th was held against him.

If an ordinary person believes they can give a cop legally valuable information about a case against them and not expect to have that used against them, their intelligence doesn't even rise to the level of pop culture references (you have the right to remain silent, anything you say...)

And let's be clear here. This was a lawyer, not an ordinary person. Odds are higher an ordinary person would have been smart enough to just shut up whereas this guy probably thought he'd use some fancy legal maneuvering he learned along the way to win on a technical point.

I think the correct response here would be to say that you can plead the 5th on the question of whether you can decrypt it or not, and if you claim the 5th compulsion is illegal. However, once you make an affirmative statement you waive the right to not be compelled. In terms of a key, it would be like if you had an almost impenetrable door that used a single key. The police ask you if you are in possession of said key while they have a valid warrant. You say yes, which means they have a right to compel you to hand over the key per the valid warrant. However if you shrug and plead the 5th it should not be on you at that point.

Men, particularly blue collar men, have been disproportionately impacted by the bad economy. Where is the same level of enthusiasm about training blue collar men for an "exciting career as a nurse, nurse practitioner, etc.?" Those are high paying, skilled, wildly disproportionately female-dominated positions. They could easily accommodate an influx of men. There is also a true shortage of qualified people, unlike in computer-related fields. Why no interest? Because if we suddenly gave men the opportunity and incentive (ex aggressive recruiting, preferential college admission, etc. ) to pursue those fields, a lot of women might be pushed out and that'd be "sexist."

Build a "common operating environment" version of Android, just like how the DoD has a common build of Windows that meets all of its needs. Have a variant that has all wireless hardware and external storage drivers removed. Problem solved.

It's becase everyone here knows that Verizon, Comcast, etc. have not invested te resources needed to ensure that your 50mpbs plan is actually providing 50mbps reliably. There's always an asterick and that leads to a note that says "well, you'll get 50mbps provided the rest of your neighborhood isn't trying to hit the pipe hard at the same time." You want neutrality and speed? Pay up. When the average consumer is willing to pay the cost of delivering Netflix to them without hosting their content on the ISPs' networks, you won't see the ISPs fighting over net neutrality. Heck you might even see Verizon sell off the TV side because their Internet side would be the cash cow at that point...

And when the government's mismanagement of the contract leads a successful contract into ruin, guess who gets the blame? The contractor because the public doesn't get the benefit of seeing how the sausage was made. They'll never see how a contract that may have been a pretty good product got tuned into a clusterfuck because someone changed priorities and an architecture that was mean for one set of requirements "for some strange reason" couldn't neatly be refactored to a different set of requirements.

Can be seen in those who defend the taxi system on the grounds of "consumer protection." People might get overcharged? Not a justifiction for a system so blatantly anti-consumer as the taxi regulations across the country that turned what should be a low barrier to entry job with modest pay into a very lucrative position that blatantly uses the power of the state to shaft customers out of competition. I mean FFS, the car has an odometer. All you need is a law requiring the driver to provide the start and end mileage to the customer and to have them agree verbally to a rate per mile.

How can we expect regulators to keep a careful watch over industries when high-paying jobs in those industries await them after retirement?

The post government employment surtax by libertarian Glenn Reynolds:

SO OBAMA’S PEOPLE ARE TALKING TAX INCREASES AGAIN. Here’s my proposal: A 50% surtax on anything earned within five years after leaving the federal government, above whatever the federal salary was. Leave a $150K job at the White House, take a $1M job with Goldman, Sachs, pay a $425K surtax. Some House Republican should add this to a bill and watch the Dems react.

50%, no deductions, no credits, just outright confiscation to ensure less profit from leveaging any potential leads from the government to win insider deals.

I don't know about other states, but in Virginia you can go to community college and then get a guaranteed transfer to a 4 year state university if you have at least a 3.0 upon graduation. If you live near Virginia and your state schools are subpar, then all you have to do is move to the town where you want to start, declare residency and apply after one year to the community college to get in state tuition. Want to go out of state and find it a burden to pay $25k/year instead of deferred gratification of one year for less than $5k-$7k/year? Only got yourself to blame. It's not fair, but I doubt most of the world's poor would cry a single tear for you due to your inability to wait one year to save $15-$20k/year.

Do exactly what they say to the letter. After the second "patch Tues" where they pound the ever lovin fuck out of Windows Server with updates and the CAB has a pile of paperwork big enough to roast a wild boar they'll suddenly regain a measure of common sense.

Is it in the realm of possibility, at the prices that customers are willing to currently pay, to deliver on demand content near blu-ray level quality to a whole neighborhood? If 25% of my neighborhood suddenly decided to stream the new Hobbit movie, I doubt Verizon could cope with a few dozen households suddenly demanding reliable streaming of upwards of 50GB of content unless that content was hosted on servers with preferred QoS rules or something.