I have to really take issue with this - right up until the black boxes were recovered, everything the BEA released implicated Airbus, to the point that Airbus had to issue several Airworthiness Directives regarding pitot tube icing and other things.

It was only when the flight data recorders were recovered that the BEAs stance shifted, and the pilots actions were called into question. Its highly likely that the BEA will implicate both the pilots and Airbus in its final report later this year.

So I think your assertion that the BEAs objectivity being in question is absurd.

So what would be the point in using the Facebook phone? Well, remember, it will be cheap. But so are lots of Android phones. If Facebook makes a phone, then, the device will necessarily spark a battle for the low end of the phone market, with each company offering ever-cheaper devices in the hopes of cashing in on some future advertising bonanza.

So why doesnt that apply to anyone looking to launch a new Android phone, or why didnt it apply when Android entered the market after the iPhone?

Money? C'mon, be a bit more creative.

Hint: You cannot post critical political comments from a PMITA jail.

My hope is just that this trojan infects the same bunch of people that kept cheering on when some BS laws got proposed and passed.

I cannot wait for the first politician infected with it. Please let me be the one who gets to analyze the computer, please... it will be the first NDA I violate.

Umm... in the other cases you mention, the crime is actually not the sexual act.

Rape: assault/bodily harm
snuff: murder

What else is there? Aside of backwards laws that outlaw stuff between consenting adults, every "sex crime" has an element outside the sexual act that is actually by itself a crime.

I can see toxic/dangerous substance, because I can cause a lot of people harm with it. With CP, I guess the harm has happened before someone got into possession of the material.

You mean, like, say, Communists?

Oh, the ironing.

And that's the part that scares me more than that ransomware by itself. Because it can only mean one of two things:

1. That there ARE actually that many people looking at CP and they feel guilty and don't get help for that reason.

2. The CP witch hunt has crossed the line where people don't even dare to get help if accused wrongly because the allegation alone already puts you on some stupid list.

Why would it be a perjury issue - fair use is a defence, not an exclusion so making the DMCA claim would not be false at all, and it would be up to the alleged infringer to make the case for fair use.

Not sure how you get there, except by the most tortuous, desperate reasoning.

It's amusing when seculars sound as desperate and reaching as bible literalists. You folks have a lot in common.