Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
The "Docky" frontend is a fantastic dock experience as well.
Thing is, I can't tell you about it since it is, itself, a secret. Sorry!
If you can squish all the processing power of say an IBM Roadrunner supercomputer inside a 19-inch box and make it run on about 60 kilowatts of electricity, the government wants to talk to you.
Well then. I'm sure people will go with the more traditional routes of terrorism, theft, and tax evasion to get a one on one session with the government. After all, it just seems easier.
You misspelled "rampant institutionalized corruption at all levels of government".
And how is that different than the US?
Lose 1: So any permissions based system that requires privilege escalation is "buggy as hell and totally insecure"? I suggest you open a shell in linux and type "reboot". Oh, crap - we need more privileges to do that! Would you want any individual without the correct privileges to restart the system? (Although then again, you may be running as root, in which case I might have to ask - WHY?).
Lose 2: Seriously? Users come first. They want all their stuff to work just as it used to and they (sort of) want to be secure. There's a trade off here that Microsoft is making that is a completely understandable business decision. They are trying (and for the most part, succeeding) to please everyone.
Your position reminds me of this: http://xkcd.com/538/
In the real world, software development is about trade offs and pleasing your customer base - not perfect algorithms and rms everywhere... Most users can't tell the difference between a secure system or not - but they sure as hell can tell when program XYZ won't run.