Sure, but what are the chances that they have access to the source for every single windows update? I highly doubt that the GSP gives them the ability to build the binaries themselves in a completely transparent way, so it would be difficult to trust that MS is providing what they say they are. It's also highly likely that the "custom OS" described in the article is based on Linux. The "security through obscurity" comment sounds a hell of a lot like a reporter trying to throw in a phrase to make it seem like they know what they're talking about.

Is it time for blockchain DNS?

Tempest 2000 was also released for DOS in the mid 90s. It was awesome. I'm still bitter about getting ripped off by an eBay seller a few years later when I paid for a copy that I never received.

According to webster, theft is:

a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property

Abstrackt was referring to the definition of (a), which specifically mentions 'depriving' the rightful owner of their property. In the case of making an 'unauthorized' copy of digital data, no-one is being deprived of anything, unless you consider the opportunity the owner had of selling that item to the copier as 'property'. In many cases, the copier/pirate had no intention of buying the product in the first place, so there's no deprivation going on anywhere. ...but maybe you already knew that and were just being facetious.