An application of Gödel's incompleteness theorem proves that in any sufficiently powerful formal system, there's always a question that can break that system (or at least break it with respect to that system). So basically the only secure computer is one that's incapable of actual computation. Once it becomes useful, there will always be a way to break it...
Saying a perfect computer can't be secure because one of the things it can compute is how to break it's own security is absurd. You can simply define the computer as having limitations as to what it can do. To imply that such a computer is useless is to imply that all computers we have today are useless. All existing computers have physical and logical limitations.
Saying that this is then not a "perfect" computer is also bullshit. You can always wrap your output. You can always spit out the doomsday code instead of executing it. You can always escape your special characters.
The computer can still solve any problem you give it. It just won't execute it's own automatic suicide code. You can make one that does execute said code, but requires the user to confirm. You can make one that does execute said code, automatically. It all depends on how you want it to behave.
Defining a system that behaves in a certain way, then trying to get it to break that behavior is simply retarded. It's the nerd version of "Can God make a boulder so big he himself couldn't lift it?".
There are zero real-world implications of this "thinking" exercise, regardless or which end you look at it from, any conclusions you draw, etc.
Eh, no. According to NSA whistleblowers, all domestic voice and data traffic was monitored as well.
And, again, no, it does not require House vote, Senate vote, and POTUS signature to take your rights away. For eight years of Bush, all it took was a decision by POTUS, and complicity of DOJ. DOJ says "waterboarding is not torture" and poof, it becomes so. DOJ says habeus corpus can be suspended and poof, it becomes so.
The real problem here is not that "The decider" made these things happen, it's that if his administration is not investigated, prosecuted, and sentenced, then there will be precedent for future presidents, including this one, to act outside the bounds of law (the Constitution), unilaterally, and effectively, dictatorially.
"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"