Actually, public health policy based solely on abstinence has not been shown to be effective.; it has a failure rate at a population level.

"They certainly have done due dilligence."

Is shipping the data to a country where it is known that you run an increased risk of agencies and interested 3rd parties taking a peek at the data 'due diligence'? Is that a 'reasonable' action in protecting the privacy of individuals and the execution of commercial contracts guaranteeing that privacy?

What if you zipped it up and put it on a public website with a readme.txt that said "don't download this"?

I don't have any particular knowledge about the increased accessibility of data in the US versus the EU, but it seems to me if you knowingly increased the exposure of the data that you're contractually meant to be keeping private, that might be a breach.

No, the inference devices in Wolpert's paper can be as simple as answering yes/no questions about the worldline. Essentially there always exists a question that can't be answered by a device from within that worldline. That "future we end up in" can be defined as a paradox and hence not exist.

Even at a slower rate than real time you cannot simulate the universe from within the universe. This has been proved by Cantor diagonalization (see Wolpert's "Physical limits of inference" paper).

I actually choose to reboot (Mac OS X) because it is much faster than saving/restoring 4GB from a slow hdd.

That seems like an error, especially with a CP project hanging over your head. Debugging deadlocks with no sleep is depressing times... *recalls cits3213 fondly*

uh, what were you smoking?

The bricks of my house have proved secure against *all* remote attacks, and I suspect they may be capable of RFC1149. If I start advertising them as a secure competitor to OpenBSD (0 is less than 2, after all, and who needs useless services like SSH), I'd have no reason to feel embarassed, right?