Let's be clear; the encryption has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with protecting your data. The encryption is 100% about protecting the walled garden. That is the only purpose of encryption on an iPhone. That was the only purpose of encryption on a Kindle.
I absolutely agree with this and this is the only thing that makes sense. Why else would Amazon have encrypted publicly available books on the Kindle in the first place? I suspect Amazon largely made the decision because they considered the encryption unnecessary and their DRM that they kept in place was all that they really needed.
Apple is largely insuring that their devices are in no way accessible except through means controlled by Apple. In fact the current FBI case and other cases have nothing to do with encryption and really only deal with normal access to the device (i.e. 4 digit passcodes or fingerprints)
That's like a car company disabling half the cylinders in your engine after you buy the car.
Reducing the functionality of a purchased product post-purchase is sleazy and probably should be considered illegal on some level.
Encryption and decryption of mostly non-secret text actually slows down the performance of your device. So the effect would be the opposite that you describe. It would improve the performance and would be like adding a supercharger to your car. So they are providing a benefit and not reducing the functionality of your device.
I see that Mozilla is now using the same brain-dead customer feedback method that Microsoft used to remove major features because they were supposedly not used. Microsoft said that no one really used the Windows Start Menu so they just took it out completely in Windows 8. Well we see how well that worked for them. Millions of people were loading Classic Shell and other add-ons to get their Start Menu back. It was a total disaster! They probably lost billions in sales before they realized their stupidity and restored it in Windows 10.
This automated feedback method to determine which features are used has been shown to be worthless. And to hand it down in this dictatorial manner without getting any feedback beforehand just shows how out-of-touch Mozilla has become (they have probably been more concerned about the voting record of their upper management to see if they pass ideological purity). I only use Firefox for the YouTube downloader and I use SeaMonkey for my everyday browsing. So it won't affect me unless this stupidity extends to the SeaMonkey team as well. But the power-users who are usually completely ignored because they've opted out of customer feedback will be screwed. The SeaMonkey team has been good at not dropping UI features (in fact that is the primary purpose in life of the product - to maintain a consistent interface since Netscape Navigator), unlike the Firefox team who have been just trying to emulate the most popular browser of the day which is now the horrible Chrome interface.
Millions of farmers in India committed suicide over this.
While I haven't invested any time in Indian agriculture research, I do find it pretty hard to believe that "millions" of farmers in India committed suicide over Monsanto contracts. This would place this as one of the greatest disasters in human history if millions of people committed suicide over a short period of time. Could you provide some documentation for those figures or if this was just an exaggeration put a little more realistic value on the number of suicides?
Nye: "We need people that can — we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems."
Well throughout history I don't believe that Nye can provide any actual correlation of a scientific advance that required a belief in evolution other than the study of evolution itself. While evolution is interesting and I like to read about it myself, but it exists primarily to employ college professors and scientific pundits who make their living pushing it. A belief in evolution is not a prerequisite for any field of scientific endeavor, not even in biology or human physiology.
So according to Nye we can't have electrical engineers, mathematicians, etc. unless they have a belief in evolution. To me this is abandoning empiricism and elevating evolution to some sort of religion that if you are not a member of the faithful then you obviously wouldn't have the mental ability to become a member of the holy order of the scientist.
I imagine people will be able to discover new drugs, new consumer electronics, new fuel technologies, etc. whether they believe in evolution or not.
Computers can be used to model and compute chemical reactions. If a chemical can produce "thought" than nothing stops a computer from doing it other than computation power.
This seems to be a very confused analogy and I'm rather shocked it has been modded up to a 5. You do realize that no chemical reaction actually occurs when a computer models a chemical reaction, right? Modeling mixing a large amount of Sodium with Water does not actually produce real Sodium Hydroxide and no explosion occurs. But then you come to this rather retarded conclusion where you try to tie your chemical reaction modeling with chemicals producing thought. Since no real chemical reaction occurred through computation and modeling; how can you come to a conclusion that real thought could occur just by computation and modeling?
How about because the article mentions no religion?
I believe you are acting deliberately dense in order to be politically correct. The Taliban and those with similar Islamist leanings have done scores of events like this in the past (bombing girls schools, poisonings, throwing acid in girls faces) and there is no reason not to have a high certainty that this was done by an Islamist. They feel that women should be in the home, married and not allowed out without a male relative. They are doing this because this is their interpretation of Islam. Saying that this is done by an Islamist does not mean that all Muslims feel this way. Probably most of the girls at the school were Muslim and the staff was probably Muslim. But there is a LARGE number of Muslims in Afghanistan who do feel this way - although is would only be a small but very powerful minority who would go to this violent extreme. But just trying to dodge this and say that this has no relationship to Islam or those who are just saying this is some aspect of Afghan culture are just ignoring reality. The perpetrators of these actions say they are doing this BECAUSE of their Islamic beliefs. So if someone says they are doing this because of Islam I see no reason not to take their reasons at face value.
Actually the subsidies provided by the U.S. government actually are to make prices higher and reduce agricultural output. This is the famous "paying farmers not to grow crops." This was done to insure that farmers get a price on their crops to make a profit.
There may be other subsidies that encourage agricultural output but I'm pretty sure that the crop set aside program is still a large part of the "subsidies" that the U.S. government provides.
"If anything can go wrong, it will." -- Edsel Murphy