Too high a risk of viruses. Keep them quarantined.
Maybe the DICSS project is juvenile and crude, but ignore it if you don't like it. None of Github's business.
It comes down to whether or not the Stingray evidence was the only thing against him... if everything hinged on that evidence being admitted, then he'd be smart to push it to the end. However, if there was anything completely outside the Stingray evidence, the plea bargain is the smart choice.
I completely understand him taking it, but I sure wish he would have pressed it. If it had been pushed earlier, I'd have suggested starting a GoFundMe or something for the guy to fight it and force the prosecution to show the Stingray. What's 4 years in prison worth? (although you can't profit from your crimes... not sure how that would work legally, but it'd be worth trying to get this out in the open).
Supervision and education aside,
Try "Untangle" on a firewall box between them and the internet. Then it doesn't matter what OS they're using, or if they're using an iPad, iPod, or other device to access the internet either.
Untangle is free (at least the lite version, which is actually more than enough for home use), and will run on an old or cheap box. I have mine running on a book-sized PC I built for under $200, including an SSD HD. It's a Linux-based firewall/NAT/more.
It'll filter ads (common malware sources), malware, phishing attacks, intrusions, website filtering (whitelist or blacklist) by content type, block certain protocols (TOR, etc.). Basically, you can lock it down tight. My kids are still too young to intentionally get into much trouble yet, but it protects them from the inadvertent trouble. But - it was enough to totally frustrate my teenage nephews over Christmas - and the logs show they weren't able to get around it (which was a good test!).
Check it out.
Anything that involves me handing my unlocked phone to a police officer is a complete no-go... it would open any of the contents of that phone to their search.
Sorry, this idea should be shot dead.
So Copyright only applies to music and movies? Um, no. Just a few examples you've missed, but maybe you've never run across them: art, photography, literature, heck even software is covered by Copyright.
So, while I am totally against extending Copyright indefinitely, don't be so dramatic in your claims.
There's obviously a lack of sarcasm recognition around here...
Bull. you could say the same thing about temperature.
If one team set/checked the pressure at 80F at 4pm, and another team set it at 60F at 5pm, there could easily be a difference due to barometric pressure, as well as temperature. What was the barometric pressure at 4pm? at 5pm?
I'm not saying it's the cause, but that when you stack variables like this you may have a much wider window than with just temperature. You can't just pick one variable and declare that it's not plausible that they were at one point set "correctly".
So... you're saying there's more than 100 good songs a year? Have you LISTENED to the quality of music being produced these days????
What was the local barometric pressure doing over the course of that same time period? Pressure inside a football is relative - to the pressure of the air outside the football.
If you combine temperature's effect on air pressure, a local increase in barometric pressure, and possibly some effect of the temp/humidity change from locker room to field, who knows what the range of change is. Experiments will certainly be the best way to figure that out.
Example that might make more sense:
You download a program that appears legit (and may be mostly legit, or be a hacked version of a legit program), and are running it.
The program senses inactivity, opens a contextual menu on the screen to prevent the REAL screensaver from kicking in, and opens it's own fake screensaver instead.
When you get back to the computer, it prompts you to input your credentials.
Voila... it now has your credentials, and can wreak utter havoc and destruction (depending on your permissions).
For April fools jokes, isn't it?
"creates an auditable trail linking a person and their vote"
Being able to verify how someone voted defeats the whole point. You need ANONYMOUS, but verifiable voting, if that's at all possible. Otherwise, you get into the whole issue of vote buying, intimidation, public shaming, etc.
Christianity is not much better, if you actually read the bible. Thankfully most churches ignore the parts of the bible that promote exactly the same actions that we criticize "radical Muslims" for... but then again, most Muslims also ignore those parts of the Koran. The difference is that there seem to be fewer "radical Christians" that interpret the bible literally, otherwise we'd be getting it from both sides.
However, if there were more radical Christians, maybe people would realize that Islam isn't the issue... it's religion as a whole that's the problem.
Check out Deuteronomy 20 some day, before you reply.