Sure, there are "political realities" (which should be an oxymoron) dictating that Snowden receives some kind of punishment.
And I would consider letting him run it.
Alternately, and perhaps even better, I would "sentence" him to get together with some very smart people to put together a system which restricts the possibility of these sorts of abuses and the secret rules that make them possible. Then I might put him in charge of a board that oversees the NSA and other agencies, and their uses of their power.
I'm sure the product keeps him from starving to death; I'm just not seeing how his doctor saw the fat loss and other things as such a mystery. Is there something I'm missing here?
If you think a comment is necessary, then consider the above.
Friends of mine who are very serious about information security are not interested in having Android smartphones for several reasons - but the fact that Android is built on top of Java is a main and important reason.
You can not like or agree with this if you choose.
Well, those are the people who are too stupid to figure out Java, like OP stated.
Sure, except they're not. I'm talking specifically about people who's living is security, and who don't like the language itself. Whether or not that somehow gives you butthurt. http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/06/03/oracle-promises-secure-java/
But how many people would like to sit behind the wheel to drive to work, and suddenly find their entire dashboard reorganized and the wheel moved to a different angle six inches to the left?
As only one example, it always amazes me when supposed computer professionals are surprised when users were just fine with things exactly how they were. I still don't like the stupid ribbon interface of MS Word, and I have yet to find a single office person who actually prefers it.
It's only the legacy of the corporate purchases of the Windows OS and Office that keep the Microsoft going.
Everything else, but especially this. And the Windows OS has always been given away with little or no visible cost to the consumer, as a delivery system for MS Office. Which means that the MS Office division has ALL the clout, calls ALL the shots, and when something else interesting starts happening elsewhere in the company the MS Office division starts raiding to get control influence over that project, snag all the smart people, and end up scuttling the technology as a threat to their hegemony.
Probably the only reason Xbox did so well was that its market was in no way a threat to MS Office's power. As a game console, it was entirely unrelated and stepped on no toes, so it was able to actually organically develop.
Of course, they would probably blame it on Obama's weather machines. And not their own hot air.