Meh. Smart people in the US donâ(TM)t profit much from inventing things any more, either. Capitalism turns out to reward exploitation more than innovation.

There was a Planet Money episode on exactly this recently. Turns out it's not a legal thing, but simply a conventions thing.

The summary is worth reading:

Notably, they didnâ(TM)t force the turnover of a password. They used facial recognition to unlock the laptop. Passwords have better protection under the law than biometrics.

>Do you believe rehabilitation is impossible or do you want revenge?

I don't believe that someone who commits mass murder can be rehabilitated, no. It isn't about revenge; it's about public safety.

Someone once pointed out that hoping a rapist gets raped in prison isn't a victory for his victim(s), because it somehow gives him what he had coming to him, but it's actually a victory for rape and violence. I wish I could remember who said that, because they are right. The score doesn't go Rapist: 1 World: 1. It goes Rape: 2.

What this man did is unspeakable, and he absolutely deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he needs to be kept away from other prisoners as a safety issue, there are ways to do that without keeping him in solitary confinement, which has been shown conclusively to be profoundly cruel and harmful.

Putting him in solitary confinement, as a punitive measure, is not a victory for the good people in the world. It's a victory for inhumane treatment of human beings. This ruling is, in my opinion, very good and very strong for human rights, *precisely* because it was brought by such a despicable and horrible person. It affirms that all of us have basic human rights, even the absolute worst of us on this planet.

This is precisely why I lost all interest in Oculus the instant I heard that it had been acquired by Facebook.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

The OP wrote, "I'd think with all the Oompa Loompas at the Chocolate Factory that they could do a better job rejecting the obvious spam emails. If they did it would make checking for the occasional false positives in my spam folder a teeny bit easier." In other words, he's saying that he wants Google to reject the mail before it gets to his spam folder. He's not complaining about the efficacy of their spam filters, but is instead suggesting that Google should find a way to reject it before it even hits his spam folder.

This is the kind of contest that no participant who's qualified should ever compete in. It's the same kind of crap as the 'design our new logo' contests or 'shoot your own commercial (for us)' contests.

I suppose, the touch interfaces weren't ready... and XP kinda sucks in retrospect anyway... But determining the right pricepoint is a marketing decision. I suspect it never occurd to them to price it as an expensive toy you don't need, rather than what they did, as an investment in productivity.

Marketing department at Apple, they didn't work there.

Easy, show them the capital expendature will increase reveneu enough that the margin between the operating costs and the reveneu by enough to make back the capital expendature or thereabouts (smallish sunk costs are ok) within a year or two.

I know this is a (racist) troll, but the lack of a decent social safety net and government mandated contraband is what drives up crime... Most people would prefer a decent job type job.

Those really big ones that produce the heavy metals don't last nearly that long. Just a ouple billion iirc.

It's a quibble, but I'm pretty sure it's symmetric. You use DH to establish a shared secret (the same on both sides). The only assymetric part of ssl is the certificates that are used to prevent man in the middle... I'd hardly call X509 ssl, just a necessary evil (or is it, convergence.io seems dead).