And how do we know this is really Anonymous?

I think your assumption about lack of sensitive data is incorrect.

Virtually all android phones have a Google account password that should be protected. Many (probably most) phones have other passwords, personal data, financial data, credit cards, and other information that needs to be protected. Really, the idea that all phones need to be encrypted to prevent loss of data in case of phone theft or similar event makes sense as a default assumption. It may not protect you against the various governments, but it will help protect you against common criminals.

For Department of Defense. And it's not 'ADA,' it's 'Ada,' from a mathematician's name, Ada Lovelace.

If true, this would prevent all photography that could potentially include an image of all or part of a product, on the grounds that it could help someone duplicate the product. It's true that a photograph might help, but we don't accept that argument for any other class of objects [cars, buildings, the RonCo Inside-The-Eggshell-Egg-Scrambler, GMO wheat], and there's no reason to think that cooking is somehow special.

Also, I believe that once you begin talking about imitating manufacturing process, you're no longer talking about copyright, but about patents.

This is tough, but you need to hear it... It's not the industry. It's you.

You didn't lose an IT career, because you never had one. By your own description, you don't have control over the technologies that you've tried to use. I also notice that you didn't mention any business domain knowledge.

I could sugar-coat this and tell you that it isn't fair, but this really how economies have always worked. If you want a job, you have to bring something of value to the relationship. It is not up to potential employers to train you so that you can take their money. Face the fact that with less than 3 years of experience, no evident business focus, and weak technical skills, you rate as entry level at best.

Figure out what you want to do, learn how to do it, and find opportunities to use your actual skills. You may need to make tradeoffs and compromises along the way, so think about your choices carefully.Getting started is tough--I've done it more than once--but putting it off just makes it harder.

Last, if I was interviewing you, and you blamed your lack of success on the ethnicity of your co-workers, I would end the interview and not call you back.

I know it is hard to hear criticism, but I hope it helps. All the best in your search.

So this wouldn't apply to the sample food items displayed, for example, at sushi restaurants. These items are often visible from the street. What if I stand on the sidewalk and take a picture of the food served at an outdoor cafe?

How can you possibly contend that there is a trade secret revealed by the visible aspect of an advertised item? This is just a picture of an event that is occurring in public.

So if the meal is IP owned by the chef, and not transferred to me when I purchase it, then I suppose the chef has to take it back when I'm done with it....

until this thing accidentally targets a wedding party.

Well done. I tip my hat to you, sir or madam or whatever it is that lurks behind AC posts.

This is a false analogy for two reasons:

First, in the candlemakers' appeal, the requst is to kill the competition. In the Uber case, the question is which body of law to apply. These are not parallel questions.

Second, Bastiat's appeal is fictional and based on satire and oversimplification to make a point; the Spanish judge's request is based in actual events and law, which are much more complicated.

My God, will no one think of the fingerlings?

How is this going to increase revenue and profits? You're essentially telling customers that you don't want to do business with them. That will probably cause greater damage to profits than coupon fraud. For most vendors, it would be better to detect fraudulent coupons and reject them on a one-by-one basis, even if some percentage of fake coupons get through.

I'm not sure how to connect "virtually every adult driver in the U.S.," with "Its database grows by 2.7 million records a day."

That would amount only a handful of observations of each driver per year, average. Still a privacy violation, but not very useful if the interest is in building a model of an individual's behavior or knowing the individual's current whereabouts.

One of the risks here is that the system will seriously jeopardize individual privacy at the same time that no useful benefit will be created. This has the potential to void even the morally bankrupt "the end justifies the means" argument for the system.

Depending on whether that's 38 in Fahrenheit or Celsius, you were either very warm or committing an ecological crime with your A/C.