The Soyuz has 3 sections: orbital module, descent module, and service module.
After undocking the Soyuz will fire its engines to deorbit. Before re-entry, both the orbital module and service module will be jettisoned and will burn up on re-entry. The descent module survives re-entry and parachutes to a landing.

The orbital module and descent module are both pressurised. The article's wording might be considered to be wrong since it could be argued that even the 2 modules that burn up actually return to earth. Based on the article and design of the Soyuz, they are implying the leak is on the orbital module.

So, the problem will be solved when the Soyuz undocks.

Nextdoor doesn't name any of the "neighborhoods" they list. When a person that doesn't live in one of their existing "neighborhoods" creates an account, that person can name the area they live in and define its borders.They become the Lead and/or founding member of that "neighborhood". It makes for crazy "neighborhood" names and boundaries but at least it is zero work for Nextdoor.com.

In other words, the military weapons of the time.

The Dragon capsule (aka Dragon 1 capsule) doesn't have Super Draco thrusters. It is only capable of parachute splashdown at sea.

The Dragon 2 capsule is the one with Super Draco thrusters. First flight of a Dragon 2 capsule is currently planned for November 2017.

The only mention of life support capability for Dragon2 that I can find says 30 man-days. So I'd assume 1 crew and 2 passengers so that they have enough life support for the mission and a few days in reserve.

Walker was the passenger.

So, Samsung exercises due diligence by creating this update that will prevent further burning phones and the property damage and injuries that result.
Doesn't Verizon blocking the update make Verizon liable. Did Verizon run this past their lawyers?

... also available, unlocked, on the Google Store.

That is in the articles but is not an answer to my question.
Still no explanation of what exactly the court was demanding nor whether WhatsApp is choosing not to comply or is unable to comply.

That is in the articles but is not an answer to my question. I've found a few other articles but the reporting is very lazy.
What, _exactly_, was the court demanding?
Is WhatsApp choosing not to comply?
or
Is WhatsApp unable to comply (for whatever reason)?

The articles mention that a judge ordered the shutdown because Whatsapp didn't provide customer data for a court case. Is Whatsapp refusing to provide the data for some reason or is Whatsapp not able to provide the data (i.e. doesn't have it or it is encrypted in a way that they cannot decrypt)?

My read on it is they mean the vendor has zero knowledge of how to break the encryption to gain access to a user's data.

If you want to eat cigarettes, go ahead.

Grrrr... formatting fail

Wait, wait! Time Out!
unlock phone
start app
lock phone
OK, I'm ready now.

Yeah, I totally see how that would work.

Wait, wait! Time Out!

OK, I'm ready now.

Yeah, I totally see how that would work.