According to RTFA, the courts would decide. The guy is talking about convicted criminals.
It's not hard to misinterpret a summary that's outright misleading. It's also not hard to misinterpret a study that makes a strategic omission about its main result: they only measured critical thinking about paintings, but that fact doesn't appear in the paper's title. An honest summary of the results would be that 'art makes you know more about art', which is hardly surprising.
Because high end phones are PCs that also have to fit in a small case and operate on battery.
Most of Australia is uninhabited desert, where even a nuclear accident couldn't cause much trouble.
Not to mention that this robot has to be remote controlled by a human operator, making it far inferior to a dog.
But where would they hire the hitmen after the site has closed?
And the notion that young people can't have routine isn't ageism?
You forgot the psychopats who want the power and the best toys. There are already many geeks who spy on other people (usually young women), now they can get paid for it, and will have access to the most powerful machines and the biggest vulnerability database. As ordinary hackers they couldn't even dream of power of that size.
That was my first thought. It's weird that the posters here filled pages with countermeasures like masks, projectors and damaging the system while ignoring the obvious solution. The day my local Tesco starts this shit will be my last day shopping there.
'I had to deal with their legacy code from the Stanford days and it had a lot of problems. They're research coders: more interested in writing code that works than code that's maintainable.
I don't think it's fair to criticize old code by today's standards.