Though how someone defines "life" comes down to an issue of semantics, it has very real consequences monetarily. Not to say it is good for any kind of scientific community to attempt to dupe the laymen of the country, but if people see headlines exclaiming that scientists have found life on Mars, they will be more likely to support continued funding of the space program or other areas of biological inquiry. The exact definition can be bent around to suit the political end of receiving funding. I do not necessarily advocate for the idea but think it could be at least relatively effective in practice as taxpayers and venture capitalists become more excited about what science has to offer.

The best strategy is to alter your information gradually to fake material. Once you've eliminated your data, then you can delete the account and know that the data Facebook has on their servers is falsified, but they don't know that.

I don't remember exactly which one it was, but I believe Slashdot recently had an article about having a great deal of volunteers to sign up for a one way ticket to Mars. Members were mostly either insanely dedicated scientists or aging ones who still wanted to be able to make their mark and contribute to the scientific community. With proper planning, that could result in tremendous amounts of data because it could be interpreted to a degree on the spot as well as at a later date.

I'm sorry for the lack of clarity. I did in absolutely NO intend to support any kind of copyright infringement. I merely meant that the woman who posted the picture didn't feel that she was in any kind of position in which her security was compromised. She found it to be "quite creepy." I was simply trying to show a circumstance with more contrast in which someone felt they had suffered something more personal as a direct result. In some cases, it would be possible to be damaging to the individiual's reputation and therefore impact their business or personal life. This is a clear infringement of their rights that someone else stole their image and unlawfully used it for marketing purposes without prior consent, but the woman in this particular case wasn't slighted as badly as she admits the possibilities are. It begs the question of what could happen with other such abuses of information. I am pleased that this woman has made it off relatively unscathed while I am scared for the doors it may open and abuses we aren't even aware of.

[is too busy pulling down his own photos to post] The bit where this becomes exceptionally mushy is at what point does any certain legal authority release or take up the power to determine the ramifications of things like this. Clearly, this was an instance where no harm was done, but what if it were to be something incriminating that was leaked, without your permission, and then illegally used in another country. Where do the boundaries start and end?

But in all honesty, if someone is going to steal anything or participate in any other kind of illegal activity, why wouldn't they just sneak in and go into a stall?

Wow! I hoped it would never come to this, but I guess I have to move to China! Even if we never touch the principal, the interest alone is enough that the US likely won't get ahead.