Then there are the political preachers, those that preach the religion for personal gain whilst not practising the religion except to break all of it's tenets. You look at many of those right wing pseudo Christians and for them the ten commandments are just a score card, how many of them they can break upon a daily basis. When it comes to that lot being ready for ET, well can they screw a profit out of it, nope, than you bet they will strictly adhere to denial, especially as publicised ET will be the world together and disrupt that whole divide, conquer and exploit thing.
You are talking about fictitious maybe, might be, could have possibly happened consequences. Something that is only really used in corrupted courts by corrupt prosecutors. Stick to the facts, of what actually happened and copying is never theft, copying is copying and theft is the denial of possession. So overall is seems they were far less naughty than the NSA, hugely massively less naughty then the NSA.
As for hundreds of millions of dollars spent on repairing security breaches, when will government agencies stop lying in court, it is a criminal act and these claims should be investigated and when proven false those who made the claims prosecuted for perjury.
Otherwise people can be charged for possibly starting world war three because they dropped a banana peel and because a particular person slipped on it, this could possibly set off a chain reaction of events which could possibly lead to world war three hence the person who dropped the banana peel needs to be charged with mass murder and war crimes.
The reality is when it comes to something like Ebola when they use the words 'completely contained' they are quite simply completely lying in order to protect trade and tourism. Reality is with any infectious diseases the correct terminology is 'was contained' or 'according to current information the spread has been limited'. Any claim of complete containment is a lie as it requires the complete knowledge of every person in that population and their current state of infection, something that is impossible in a modern western country let alone an African country.
So when countries in Africa start talking about the lie of 'complete containment' I find that extremely concerning and that an externally applied containment to the African continent is likely the only safe way to go and sooner rather than later will likely be beneficial.
Futuristic weapon of course do not really work they way people would think. The whole idea is about releasing the minimum required amount of energy at the target location to achieve a desired result. So when it comes to stopping a space battleship, the required amount of energy to shut down it's computers. Obviously the energy required at the target location is minimal, getting it there is the trick. There are many particles that will readily travel through objects, project those particles and fluctuate the amount at the right frequency at the target location and you will alter the energy balance at that location and achieve a molecular resonance, where the molecules at the target location release the energy to achieve a desired affect.
So it is all about hiding and attacking without being attacked or using really advanced technology to uncloak and shut down the opposing war machine. Using massive amounts of energy really is technologically speaking primitive.
Same with planetary attack, you are not attacking a planet, you are attacking a society on that planet and eliminating that threat. So biological attack, a gene therapy attack to eliminate the social threatening traits. The sustained technological shut down of energy generation, to allow the collapse of a society and it's re-evolution in a more desired form. Even a political attack, achieving political reform to eliminate the threat.
Looking at our own world we can see how we have revised war over the millennia, to be far more subtle, mainly in the last few years of course.
FYI; B52s are hard to fuck with.
Inventing bullshit under the guise of "common sense":0
Not assuming bullshit: 1
Ok. You are obviously much better informed than I am, and I guess you are quite pessimistic about the total amount of oil that would ever be found. But as prices rise, things which are hopelessly uneconomic become more plausible.
Mind you, I consider this totally the wrong way to go. But when prices rise enough there will be a lot more oil available. But there are lots of reasons that that it only becomes available when the prices rise dramatically. Small fields, difficult access, expensive construction, dangerous conditions, etc. Not to mention continuing CO2 pollution.
We *need* to develop renewable energy resources. I'm not really sure that we should be moving into full scale deployment now...except for cases where there isn't much downside, or whether the technology is already mature. (Hydro comes to mind.) But we need significant investment in developing renewable technologies to the "demonstration project" stage. (I.e., one step past the pilot project.) Some of the investment should continue to be in basic research, but more needs to be invested in moving from research result to useful plant. (Don't take that too literally. Rooftop solar isn't exactly a plant, but it falls within the pervue of what I mean.)
That's not really software though, is it? Think about the "ware" part, in means a vendable item.
That's the part before what the OP quoted. And all software is complex, or at least complex enough to have bugs.
Let's try a sanity reword and measure how much they added unnecessary(caveat: I'm prone to being overly verbose as well, and I won't do a great job)
We make open source middleware
Did I get it right?
That's great but how do sites counter bots nowdays?
Why would Silk Road want to censor Viagra offers?
Really, you think professional 3d modelers don't know what a vertex is? Really?
I mean, I can get that they might not understand how vertices are processed by a rasterizer, but that's not what they are.
Please, facebook doesn't want more programmer registered users. They want you to do more free work for them.
But how do I imagine them? It's not from nowhere. It's from a recurring familiarity with what goes wrong in software development. I didn't just get a programming language down and suddenly grasp the idea of field interdependency, did I? I mean, admittedly, it was before I got a job in the field, but the first time you try to save something where X interferes with Y and it crashes your program teaches you the concept.