Yea, just don't forget a backpack to carry this modularity with you. Modern phones have surface-mounted chips for a reason. That "new screen" of yours will need new screen controller; where do you put it? On breadboard? Yes, that will totally work. Such "modular" project are nice for classroom demonstration, nothing more.
Sorry, but I just can't see a problem here. My photo and name is not a secret. You don't even need "secured database" for this. Credit card info _is_ a secret, and breaking into _this_ database is a crime very similar to bank robbery. Now, let's say someone does break into and steal those "biometrics". You can't wear someone else face in "mission impossible" style, and "technology" for stealing money more directly already exists: it's called gun/knife.
>> Because it was an act of creativity, and not money, it was removed. No. It was removed because it was made of something authors doesn't own. Want to shoot a movie - go ahead, cameras and computers are really cheap these days. Oh, you can think only about stuff coming Hollywood? No, that's won't fly. On related note: is _that_ what's called "creativity" today?
Studious acting in very predictable manner. They think that movie gonna be success, and therefor want to monetize this success. And no, they don't want "free publicity" from torrents, they want people to pay for viewing. There's nothing unreasonable in this idea. And yes, prohibit cameras in movie theater is also sensible thing to do. Since when caprip became OK?
You sound American. Only there I find people that don't see that "just push legislation" mean "write laws". That's same people that want democracy, but think that "Who voted for the politicians is irrelevant". If this is irrelevant, than why to have democracy anyway? Monarchy already been tried, thank you very match.
>> I can't think of anything more relevant to the current discussion. OK, I see: "corporation leaders my bribe politicians, therefore let's not have corporations". Or is it "let's not have politicians"? Correct answer is "fight reasons for corruption by removing government interventions where unnecessary".
>> No, politicians can get thrown out. And they are replaced by other politicians who will behave the same way. Maybe in US, where people think that "who voted is irrelevant". In other countries, politicians are replaced by other politicians that behave somewhat differently.
>> Our votes are puny. Voting is essential, ... That doesn't compute in my head. Whatever is "puny" is anything but "essential".
Your hilarious ignorance shows. This point of view amazes me every time.
>> Corporations write your laws, No, they don't. Politicians that _you_ vote for write them.
>> subvert your government Yes, corruption is the real problem, although irrelevant to current discussion.
>> and affect your life in powerful ways Or in other words "sell (or not) me some stuff". I agree, it may be important stuff (fuel, medication), but I'm free not to buy it, and - I can start my own corporation. It's still allowed in US, right?
>> Their power exceeds that of your puny vote My _single_ vote may be puny, but you must know how this "democracy" thing works. Get many annoyed people, and government is thrown out.
>> Ah the good old 'You're not allowed to offer criticism unless you're one of those involved'. You're "allowed" to offer you criticism all day long, but if you're not one of involved - it sounds too arrogant.
>> You don't have to be a to be able to say that ... That is very match depends on X and Y. Go to fashion store nearby and try to tell people that paying that match for whatever brand is wrong. Come back and share your experience. In this case government gives some rights to foreign corporation in exchange to whatever that treaty promises. Is it good/right thing to do? Since those rights exists in EU, and agriculture is good there, maybe it's OK then? Do you have counterexamples?
>> ... they have immense influence over you Local court have "immense influence" over me, since I will go to jail upon its decision. Corporation may refuse to sell me stuff, but it's me who vote. All these "corporate sovereignty" will evaporate overnight should local government decide so - that how international treaties works.
>> Great, so what's Thailand getting out of the deal that's worth what they're giving up? The answer is very simple, and a name "trade agreement" is a hint. Thailand getting (some) trade terms with EU.
Does it worth "giving up"? I don't know, maybe you should ask Thailand's government.
>> Thailand should tell them ... Do you by any chance live in Thailand or represent Thailand somehow? Or you happen to have US/EU kind of attitude where you know what's the best for every one on a planet?
Well, if country X want to make a deal with country Y, it may mean that country X need to fix its laws. This is especially true if if country Y holds upper hand in negotiations. There's nothing shocking that EU politicians want to take care about EU companies, that what those politicians _FOR_. That's what (those) negotiations exists for - to establish rules of business.
Last time I checked, EU didn't invade Thailand and forced those "horrible amendments". In short - want to trade with EU - play by EU rules.
>> Religion is just the way that hate is channeled, not the cause Oh, look - isn't ignorance cute? Religion is not the "cause", it's justification. You have no idea what the "cause" really is, unless you claim to have gift of prophecy and\or telepathy.
>> Now, let's see, another country, either directly or by proxy, is killing your civilians. International courts do nothing Courts? Who do you think should put to trial US government? UN that itself exists on US money? Europe that benefit from NATO protection? Almighty God? If you happens to be in country that US bombing, maybe you should join army there?
>> ... articles in the Geneva Convention Did any jihadist gang signed it?
>> Remember, they fucking hate us. And the worst part is that I can't say it's unjustified... So? This matters because ... ?
>>> here is no profile of the type of person who becomes a terrorist Yea, keep telling this. You seems to be confusing "terrorism" and "burglary". Not every criminal-with-a-gun is a terrorist. Not every gang is terrorist organization.
And yes, modern day Islam drive terrorism. All those calls for jihad doesn't happen in vacuum. And all those "Death to America" marches and speeches are not harmless. Maybe "well-developed Muslim identity" indeed counteract, but this "identity" is rare as snow dragon.
Are we talking about same "Amnesty International" that find "human rights violations" literally everywhere it looks? And of cause it looks where it is convenient.
Are you fighting muslim fanatics? - that's violation! Are you spying on their leaders? - that's violation?
Because you know, every jihadist idiot should be (somehow) caught, have lengthy trial and than we should feed him for the rest of his pathetic life instead of just shoot him on sight. Yea, that's reasonable.
So, that's an answer for "why GCHQ spy on them": because they are _ALSO_ fanatics. And as all kind of fanatics - dangerous when not kept in check.
So he need money for license some copyrighted stuff. What's so ridiculous here? Those photos belong CBS/Paramount and such due to high-profile nature, license cost is significant. Want make a movie - pay for it.
>> People create content for many reasons, and getting paid is usually way down on the list of reasons. There are all kind of "content". Yes, people will play music just because it's fun. And write books just to express some thoughts. But - people simply can't create Call-Of-Duty/WoW/etc level game just-because. It's simply financially impossible, at least now. Same is true for movies - those of high production values are usually produced to make a profit.