If it's not a problem, then why is it classified? If it's an identity thing, then blur everyone's face in the footage - preferably without rendering the video useless for commenting on the "medical feeding".
but if I was reading a paper book, or a magazine or a newspaper (as I did back when I wasn't allowed to listen to an audio book) instead of a Kindle your supposed safety problem still exists, but the ban on electronics does nothing. But airlines do not ban these things during take-off/landing.
I've actually been on a flight where I was told not to read during takeoff. Can't remember where it was now, but I was simultaneously annoyed, and impressed that at least they were being consistent.
By this you mean every piece of software running on your OS as well as the OS itself? Unless you're running an OS which truly implements process sandboxing, in which case you only need to audit the OS, the encryption software and the OS installation/configuration.
Not to mention maintaining physical security to avoid anyone beating you into decrypting the document for them. https://xkcd.com/538/
Just like physical locks, it's usually easier to go around the lock than to open it directly.
I read one explanation which claimed that leap seconds were a problem because all computer time is calculated by counting the seconds from something like 1972. What kind of a nutcase would calculate time based on decades worth of seconds? That would be like calculating all monetary transactions in pennies.
Note that the problem is well underway to being solved in general purpose computers, and mostly remains for specific classes of embedded systems... so is mostly an issue for things that have already been created that will last for another 20 years or more (and care about the date).
What's wrong with copying the answers on a test from someone who invested the time and effort to master the subject?
Well, there's nothing specifically wrong with it, other than the fact that doing so means you won't understand the subject, and the (job) market will reject you in favour of those who do understand the subject.
Maybe there's a market for a cheaper product that's not as good, but that's not really competition for the more expensive product that actually works. If it turns out that the cheaper product does everything that its customers want it to, then that is a form of innovation (simplification) and the more expensive product isn't actually better than the cheaper one.
If you want to be that picky, it should then be either the Goldilocks's Zone or the Goldilocks' Zone - both with the same pronounciation. The former is arguably more correct, the latter is arguably more acceptable; if only they were the same thing.
Maybe I lack imagination, but there isn't really any way to prevent something from being copied from your phone and used on their phone to open your car. At best, the phone's IMEI would be part of the key, which would require an attacker to need to spoof your phone's IMEI as well as stealing the key file.
Even the car sharing seems like an easier problem to solve than the key copying.
Interesting juxtaposition with unexpected parallels.
My instant response to this was: "North Koreans don't have an option to leave; Singaporeans do". Then I remembered that the Singaporean government actually makes it quite difficult for Singaporeans to work in other countries - all Singaporeans within a certain age range are required to spend a few weeks a year (I think 2? I forget) on national service... regardless of their current domicile.
There are local laws that require workplaces to support national service for local staff, but it's difficult for Singaporeans to find long-term work in other countries that doesn't require them to spend significant chunks of their annual leave to go and work for the Singaporean government.
So other than those not eligible for NS (elderly) or with permission to waive their obligations (sick, students), you really don't see many Singaporeans working abroad.