The Jaguar/Titan system mentioned in your link is used for unclassified scientific computing. The NSA is building a computer facility at ORNL, but that's a different system (and was never claimed to be for stockpile stewardship). They don't put classified jobs onto unclassified systems.

Exascale computers would be helpful for climate modeling. Right now climate models don't have the same resolution as weather models, because they need to be run for much longer periods of time. This means that they don't have the resolution to simulate clouds directly, and resort to average statistical approximations of cloud behavior. This is a big bottleneck in improving the accuracy of climate models. They're just now moving from 100 km to 10 km resolution for short simulations. With exascale they could move to 1 km resolution and build a true cloud-resolving model that can be run on century timescales.

Funny you should mention that; apparently someone has gone and invented a book that, get this, you can use to look up the definitions of a word!

Name one spoken language, where there is an authoritative source of definitions of words. Anybody can go write such a book, and none of them will actually be authoritative.

without government regulation or fear of monopolies.

How would you avoid monopolies without government regulation?

it should be abundantly clear at this point, there is not and never has been such a thing as a free market

Before you even try to answer if there is a free market or not, you need to figure out what the words free market actually means. Do you have a free market if a single established player in the market or a small group of players can force newcomers off the market? I'd say no. But then you need regulations to protect the free market. There are people who say it is not a free market if there is any sort of regulations. And by their definition a market controlled by a monopoly is more free than a market with multiple competing players subject to government regulations protecting consumers from the most immoral business practices.

If your definition of a free market is one where there are no regulations and a newcomer can take a part of the market by producing a better product than the established players, then such a market cannot exist. Because without regulations established players can and will squash newcomers.

I don't really care much how people define the words free market. I care more about how the market actually works. And I consider some amount of regulations to be a good thing. At the very least consumers should be able to know what the products on the market are, such that they can make informed decisions on which products they want. Misleading information about products undermines fair competition, so regulations to prevent such misleading information is a good thing.

Against what? The NSA spying on US citizens?

The Laffer curve is on record as having been dreamed up on the back of a napkin by Donald Rumsfeld during lunch hour. I am not making this up.

When it comes to Microsoft, I must paraphrase:

Never ascribe to malice, what can adequately be explained as incompetent malice.

Studying (and trying to create) hard AI is my day job.

I just want to let people know that not everyone shares the opinions or urgency of the people in the story.

I for one am trying hard to condemn humanity to death and/or enslavement at the hands of intelligent machines, and I know a number of AI researchers trying to do the same.

So don't worry too much about these guys - they are definitely in the minority. Everyone will get their chance to (as individuals) welcome our new robotic overlords, however briefly.

Not if the NSA's intent in doing so is to spy, directly or indirectly on US citizens. As I said, they can spy on me or random Russian/Saudi/Chinese guy no problem. But they're not meant to be snooping on US citizens any more than the US airforce is meant to be dropping bombs on Atlanta suburbs.

Meanwhile geeks, who do understand how computers work, instead of developing technologies supporting encryption and pricacy by default, have instead hopped into bed with big data and the NSA. There are more geeks helping the NSA builds a Stasi apperatus than there are geeks working on building a truely anonymous and untappable internet.

The more I think back to the likes of the whole Firefox self signed certs debacle, the more I see the NSA survellance apperatus collectively roaring with laughter at geekdom's heedless self-destruction of itself and the internet.

Reading history, you frequently come across periods where you wonder "How could people put up with this?" or "Why didnâ(TM)t they just do X" where X is the solution which was eventually reached 20 years later.

Looking at the modern world, I realise I'm living in just such a period. A pity I'm not longer "smart" enough to figure out what the current X should be. I guess I may have been a little too hard on all those "stupid" societies in the past.

Then again, maybe it's not wrong to think that they and we are just, actually stupid.

you know, I'm really upset and concerned about spying on me because I feel it violates my 4th amendment rights and is a slippery slope, but I'm relatively indifferent to spying on foreigners. Isn't that the point of the CIA/NSA anyway?

Yes it is. That is their whole point, and it should be only the whole.

I'm from Ireland, so it's actually OK for the NSA to spy on me and my communications. Americans should actually expect that the NSA is up to this and indeed a few shady activities abroad. That is what a spy agency is for, and should be paid for,

However, a spy agency is not for spying on domestic citizens. The NSA and CIA are absolutely not supposed to monitor domestic US citizens. That is not what they are for, or what they should be paid for.

This isn't very complicated. The NSA is an intelligence weapon, and can be compared to a missile or bomber. Americans might argue about targets, but most will agree that the US should have missiles and bombers and should use them abroad when nessessary. Most Americans would be outraged to discover that those missiles were being used at home on US citizens, and should be equally outraged that the NSA is being used at home as well.

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." If Snowden hasn't committed treason using this definition, I don't know what is then.

You're probably trolling, but the simple answer here is

a) He has not levied war against any of the States or the whole of them, and
b) If he has given aid or comfort to enemies, then you should be able to name those and state the aid and/or comfort given them.

If you can spin either of those into a charge that will hold up in court, I'll be impressed.