Shouldn't the headline more accurately read "Serious Flaws In iMessage Crypto Used To Allow For Message Decryption, But Don't Anymore"? Or am I missing something?

From the engadget/Wired article ...

"To use Project Shield, a site has to give Google visibility into who's visiting -- something likely to rankle the company's privacy critics. But Google says that it'll only keep logs for two weeks, after which the data will be stored in aggregate and used to learn more about attacks. The company also notes that the data it collects won't be used in its advertising programs."

The company also notes that the data it collects won't be used in its advertising programs. [But by using Project Shield you and your agents and seven generation of your children's children agree and that we can change the Terms and Conditions of use, in a 64 page-long document of legalise, that only 1 in 100 people will ever read and/or notice, at any time.]"

Thanks to Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia, and all the other astro- and cosmonauts whose sacrifices are to help get us out of the cradle.

Instead of focus on CS, how about we start with something more fundamental ... a science-based and medically accurate, single term, comprehensive, across-the-nation, practical sex education course instead. That'd solve more social problems in the US than teaching a single term of CS. Lower rates of teen pregnancy, lower rates of STDs, healthier relationships, better understanding of the range of normal sexuality, etc. Despite the abstinence-only crap being taught in so many districts, the false info floating around about how one can get pregnant, and the fear-mongering, patriarchal religious nut sacks who equate teens who have had sex with used chewing gum and who think women should have no say in their sexuality, 97% of the population lose their virginity before they hit the age of 20. Maybe we should make sure people know about what the hell they are doing that before teaching CS?

No it wouldn't get by. This exact practice has been ruled discriminatory in several cases. Several restaurants throughout the US over the past decade have found out that offering "10% off meal on Sunday's, when you bring in today's church bulletin" is a fast way to get a lawsuit happening and all of them have been forced to stop it. Offer 10% off to everybody or to nobody, but you can't offer pubic services to one group (Christians) and not the same to another group (anyone else who doesn't attend Sunday church) unless you're a private club. Again, it's a matter that if you offer something to the public, you can't pull this sort of discriminatory shenanigans.

Bastet (praise be her name) is very powerful. Domesticating the hairless ape species into becoming nothing more than servants/staff for her creatures was less work than a languid stretch in a sunbeam.

The problem, Lumpy, is that stupid people often kill *other* people with their acts of stupidity. Whether it's mishandling a firearm, or in the area we're discussing, choosing to get themselves drunk then drive their pickup headfirst into a family's minivan as they try to make their way home from the bar/friends house. If this happens, and a drunk driver kills someone, who is responsible? Who should mete out punishment? What should that punishment be? What is a fair punishment society should impose on an idiot drunk driver? We can't even agree on that. I have no issue with stupid people doing dumb things that wind up killing themselves ... you want to waste your life, go ahead ... but what about when stupid people kill others too? 181 children were killed by drunk drivers in 2011. I'm not one to say "they had so many years of life ahead of them" because that's an illogical argument, but what should the punishment be for the stupid people who killed those kids?

BS. Utter BS. Here is the one documented fact about the end of the PTO war that everyone in your country who spews this BS about a necessary invasion of the Japanese homeland islands wants to conveniently forget ... The Japanese had made it clear through diplomatic channels by June of 1945 that were willing to completely surrender and end the war with one condition ... the Emperor (alone) would be immune from any war crimes charges. Military generals etc were fair game, but the Emperor gets off without any war crimes charges brought against him. (Remember that until May 1947 when the Japanese Constitution was changed, Hirohito was considered by many a "living god" and remained even afterwards "a descendent of the Sun Goddess".) The United Sates refused to accept this single condition for surrender and carried on with the plans to use atomic weapons so that they could dictate the surrender terms.

Chump change. Just the cost of doing (sloppy) business these days.

Neil Turok's cyclic universe theory *is* a simpler theory, without any of the fudge factors needed to get inflation to be correct, and everything in it can be confirmed by observation. It has yet to be falsified, and the lack of gravitational waves is another factor supporting the theory. Furthermore, if the lack of gravitational waves actually falsifies rapid inflation, which means there is evidence that shows we must throw that one out.

This means that Neil Turok's much more elegant and simpler theory (cyclic universe) may actually be the correct one. No gravitational waves, no Big Bang inflation. Rapid inflation has too many fudge factors built into it to sustain it to be correct, and many of them scan not ever be falsified. It's simpler than that. I think Mr. Hawking will soon be paying Neil is his money.

Alcohol consumption hurts public safety. Firearms hurt public safety. Tobacco hurts public safety. Irresponsible drivers hurt public safety. The Koch brothers hurt public safety. Influenza hurts public safety. Anti-vaxxers hurt public safety. Obesity and the food industry hurt public safety. This sort of public shit kills hundreds of thousands of your citizens a year, and you're worried about encryption on my smart phone?

Why promote a PhD? 75% of US professors are adjuncts and earn less than $24,000/year. Good luck with that ivory tower dream. Learn plumbing.

Former and current employees of Bell and Rogers, members of their former lobbyist groups, and lawyers and other "VIPs" who have strong ties to Rogers and Bell. They're about as neutral on this matter as PM Harper is about his evangelical religious ties. Not very. The CRTC is looking out only for the entrenched players in this market, not consumers. Just yesterday a report came out that once again showed that Canada pays more than any other developed country except Australia for it's wireless phone pricing. The CRTC ignores this fact. Bell and Rogers are the incumbents and don't want anything changed. hell, Rogers has testified in front of the CRTC that wireless rates could be much lower here ... they just don't want to (obviously). And when competition threatens? They twist the CRTC's arm and they are safe again. The CRTC needs too be abolished and we need some real competition up here. The fact that Rogers and Bell so easily control the CRTC and the CRTC just bends over for them and it's decisions is disgusting.