I see. However, to use the analogy, there's no camera. There was no innocent acquisition of the material. The tape is stolen with the express intent of using its contents. Tape is given to someone else - who uses its contents. More so, the secondary person (in this case, WikiLeaks), *knows* the tape is stolen, as there is no other way to obtain it. In this case, WikiLeaks isn't an innocent 3rd party - they are an accessory to theft. The only thing preventing them from being treated as such is that they aren't in the U.S.

We can argue the value of the material being leaked, but I think there's much less of a case to say that WikiLeaks is a "3rd party". They knew exactly what they were being handed, and why.

In a U.S. court of law, information that has been deemed to have been obtained illegally will quite often be throw out, and for good reason - not the least of which is that allowing it sets a precedent encouraging the use of anonymous third-party players who step outside our laws to obtain “proof”. If we allow such information “for the public good,” couldn’t the same logic also be applied to our own government? i.e.: they are violating the Constitution and local and federal laws to obtain information on potential “evildoers”.

If a journalist needs only go to an outside source to obtain something they couldn’t get legally otherwise, doesn’t that sort of make our own system moot? There *are* consequences to accepting an “ends justifies the means” attitude for “truths” from the likes of WikiLeaks, no matter how “important” we might see that information at the time.

If this judge works 52 weeks a year (no vacation), and a typical 40 hour work week (without breaks or lunch), and we assume that "conversations involving 44,000 people" requires that each call (warrant) requires at least 2 people (22,000 warrants max), then this judge would need to approve one of these more than once every six minutes!

You could just slather it in ranch dressing or cheese. If they're debating whether to eat the chicken nuggets or the broccoli, the veggie is *not* going to win that one - *unless* it's covered in delicious CHEESE.

"When next the driver uses the same road again, the headlights adapt to the course of the road automatically."

Which means that it remembers everywhere we have driven. I don't think I like the sound of that.

Official: "The US government's PRISM Internet spying program exposed by Edward Snowden targets suspect email addresses and phone numbers but does not search for keywords like terrorism."

Public: "So, how many email addresses and phone numbers are suspect?"

Official: "Er... Well, all of them..."

Please. My cable internet bill has been increasing about $1 every other month for the last five years. Sure, it's faster, but my data cap hasn't increased. If I don't make use of that speed, then it really doesn't matter that I have 57Mbps or 1.5. The constant incremental price increases are maddening. What other industry does that? They know that if they just raised my bill in one lump, I would consider alternatives.

Sorry, but giving you more throughput shouldn't really factor into a standard price anyway unless that throughput is significantly above the average (FiOS). It would be like comparing price/throughput to phone modems in the early 80's, or hard drives from the same period.

And if you're getting 57Mbps for $43 through Comcast, then you're definitely getting a significant deal (a bundle perhaps), because that's nowhere near what they are currently advertising. Not even close.

Do they have an open season?

Seriously? That's their argument? That if they are just "good enough" people will buy them on their own? You could give them away for *free* and people would still find some reason to prefer incandescents. Human beings are notorious idiots when it comes to choosing things that do or don't benefit us. Just ask the tobacco industry. Even faced with a long, painful death, we insist that 'we know what's best' for us. I'm not saying that CFL's are wondrous mana from heaven that will save the world, but sometimes mankind needs a serious kick in the ass in order to 'make the right choice'.

How long users hovered over specific ads? There's so much rollover event crap going on that I usually move my cursor to the edge of the page just to be able to read.

ED 209.

More important to me are my legal protections from the authorities if they wish to use my fingerprint to unlock my phone. I don't have to give them my pin code to unlock my device (at least in most states in the U.S.) but my fingerprints are on almost anything I touch. Would it be legal for the police to hand me a glass of water, take prints from the glass, and then use those prints to unlock my phone without my consent?

Or, they could, you know, go low-tech and just have a sign by the shirts that says, "Matching Shorts - 20% Off". Or even better, put the shorts on the next table.

Want to *really* upsell me? Have a pretty girl at the door hand me a coupon for an extra 10% off any purchase of $25 or more at the register. Good for two days.

I mean, sure, you could record a few million people sleeping for eight hours a day, or watching 4 hours of Simpsons reruns a night, but why? If you're recording the 1-2 hours most people spend on the phone a day (max), then 3 exabytes might actually work out okay.

How about reducing the number of days mail is delivered to the door based on the distance you live from a central USPS mail center. If rural delivery is the problem, then changes to rural delivery based on the time it takes to get to your home would be the answer as well. If you live 5 miles or less from a central office, then you get your mail 6 days a week. 8 miles - 5 days. 10 miles - 4 days 15 miles - 3 days. 20 miles - 1 day. More than 25 miles - you pick it up yourself. Sounds fair to me. There's a reason that cities work. Living in the quiet outback is great, but why should everyone else subsidize that? Something like 80% of the population lives in a major city.