Often if you're "causing offense", you're talking with a thin-skinned person who wields their pain and/or nuttiness as a mallet to shove others around.

You have the right to decide that you should be able to control how others speak; that their mouth is put on the earth for your comfort and not for their expression. You have the right to decide to nag people who have no ill will towards you into talking in ways that you like. You have the right to conflate past oppressors with modern folk who have no such intent, and to try to control the latter.

Doesn't make it cool.

I hope the voters abolish Ron and Rand() Paul at their next opportunity.

+1

Article amounts to trolling, but it goes all conspiracy theory at the end. "if you know where to look" indeed. Suuuuure, I'll keep all that under my hat.

Grade: D+
Try harder next time.

If you're buying a company because you expect it to win big in IP lawsuits, you're doing a bad thing.

Having had a company for 4 years might not be enough to qualify for giving advice people should listen to.

Catching polluters, for example. We probably don't want them seeing every detail, but there's at least a useful tension between having a pair of eyes and seeing everything. I wonder if existing property laws (defining airspace above property) are enough. Might be on a state-by-state basis.

Depends on what you mean by conclusive, but there's a motive and there's a capability. For the capability part, see:

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/05/backdoor_found.html

While I agree with your sentiments, I think your idea that this would amount to unreasonable search/seizure is off because we're not talking about behaviour of the government. The bill of rights don't incorporate to private behaviour, alas.

I am opposed to bitcoin based on reasons other than trust, and those reasons are more important to me.

Why do you think that?

That's not true. You can't sum up all of a diverse movement with such a curt dismissal and expect it to be convincing.

It'd be best to avoid phrasing this in a way that suggests that any other feminist would be the same; feminism is a very diverse movement, and there are flavours (like mine) that are very anti-PC-policing.

The bits in parentheses above are meant to clarify how to handle situations like complaints from someone who prefers being referred to by weird extra pronouns if people don't agree to do that. Or therians. Or "transsexuals". Or any other group that makes demands of the conceptual frameworks of others beyond "no malice".