China is a billion strong, you're only going to see the best and brightest make it to top overseas Universities.
That reflects on what it takes to rise to the top in a large, overpopulated country with rampant poverty - you worked with the best of the best of the best.
I would love to mod you up for the insightful correction on what I said (and kudos on the citations!)
Packet switching - aka ARPANET- was US funded. The IP/TCP/HTTP/HTML stack was developed at CERN, EU.
Actually, ciphertext to ciphertext operations are entirely possible from a mathematical point of view, it's called Homomorphic Encryption.
This is semantic manipulation on the part of pro-choice groups. The term is pro-life, not anti-choice, anti-abortion. Otherwise, we may well refer to pro-choice as "anti-life, pro-murder," etc. It was actually documented by Steven Pinker that the Democratic party has hired linguists to shape their rhetoric using conceptual semantics, of which this is a manifestation.
This is a question of naming convention. You'd still be on the equator, because the equator is a circular belt around the Earth. You may be in a different location on the equator, but you'd still be on the equator. Further, Rotational mathematics is modular, so technically any direction is due south from the south pole. E.g. rotation along the complex plane from the positive real number line will always end up at the positive real number line again. Hence the roots of unity always end up back at 1, no matter how close to 1 they may start. Therefore poles is correct.
Eh, my first thought was "the equator." But poles seem to work, too.
How much havoc will a bunch of nails in the road cause? People have plenty of ways to do bad things with relative ease.
Apple literally has $178,000M in cash on hand, and the state had better ensure that $40M go to educating their future workforce.
Seriously. The good press Apple would have received to fund that project would be mind numbing, and probably pay for itself in terms of the PR and 'free' advertising that would result.
... Because Game Theory is math?
That's like saying we'll call exponentiation into question because a population's growth didn't follow an exponential rule. Mathematics is inviolable, therefore if observation doesn't line up with it, we must amend our understanding of our observation (i.e. find new mathematical models to use instead.) E.g. if science says animal populations increase exponentially, and we find a population of animals that has not increased exponentially, we don't throw out mathematics, we throw out the model that says populations increase exponentially!
Game Theory stands forever. Empirical observation, however, is infinitely more flawed than math. It's much more likely we failed to understand how natural selection works, and that our mathematical models were wrong. Calling into question fundamental mathematics when your science doesn't make the cut is absolute dogmatic thinking. "Math disproved my theory... MATH MUST BE WRONG!" Seriously.
Seriously, you never know when some previous programmed made a "duplicate" function to do something bizarre, like force a particular initialization order of static-class-member variables between translation units. Sometimes deleting pointless code can do... terrible things. Just be careful, test your changes, etc.
Noise helps pedestrians be aware of that two-ton piece of metal and plastic hurdling down the road. If a vehicle is too silent, it increases the risk of pedestrian-vehicle accidents. Noise is good, and we may as well may it something we're familiar with.