Tariffs are literally a tax on doing business in america. What's a company going to do, pay a 30% tax on supplies needed to produce their product for sale all over the world, or move manufacturing to mexico or canada where they don't have to pay the tax. The tariff makes it uneconomical to do manufacturing in the US for things made for export, as in, things that bring money into the country. US based companies just don't have the economy of scale that companies that sell worldwide have and spinning up factories to only cater to the US market is rarely cost effective. So all that happens is we end up paying a tax to the government and things still get imported. This happened with the steel tariffs bush imposed. It was the push needed to move many factories offshore. Tariffs are a bad, bad tax.

Your personal information is being shared by your creditors/bank with equifax. That is the only way they collect information.

Write your creditors and say you no longer consent to your information being sent to equifax due to their ongoing security issues. There are two other reporting agencies they can use, tell them you only want information shared with experian and transunion until further notice. Even if they say no, say you will hold them legally responsible for information shared with equifax after equifax has been shown to be an immediate and clear security risk.

It is pretty much the only way to hurt equifax. Gets companies to stop using them. Convince companies that no matter how strong their own privacy policies are, they don't work if they are not transitive to everyone they share your information with.

Heck, make this idea popular enough that credit card companies start listing "wont share your information with equifax." as a selling point and it will hurt them bad and make everyone take security more seriously.

Of all the physical posessions I have the three top things I spend the majority of my time interacting with are:

1. my bed
2. my laptop
3. my smartphone

It's the third most important thing I can buy from a quality of life standpoint when it comes to raw hours. I don't want to spend hours a day annoyed by my phone. A couple hundred bucks as a one time fee. (less if deprecation and re-sell is taken into account) is completely worth it for even a slightly better experience.

It doesn't take funding to send a copyright infringement letter and his case is pretty clear cut. He just doesn't want his character being appropriated by those groups. He has already said as much several times. No need for a conspiracy.

Again, that is trademark. Copyright has no such requirement.

No, you are definitely supposed to enter the intersection when making a left then turn on yellow or red. You will get dinged on your driving test if you do not do so. At least in California, maybe it varies by state. But that is how you are supposed to do it here.

To quote a CHP officer

"If a person is driving straight through an intersection (NOT TURNING) law requires a motorist to enter the intersection, only when there is enough room to completely traverse the intersection. For drivers making a left turn, this rule does not apply! If a driver faces a green light, they are authorized to enter the intersection and wait for clearance to complete their turn. HOWEVER, the driver is not allowed to enter the intersection for a left turn if they are facing a yellow light."

This has nothing to do with trading or algorithms.

This was a mistake made by their system that handled shareholder votes about corporate buyouts interacting with a lawsuit.

Except organic does _not_ mean no pesticides, it means they are using decades old formulations of pesticides that were pretty arbitrarily certified organic with little research, rhyme or reason. They require a lot more chemicals to be effective than modern, better researched and more effective pesticides. If you are eating organic to avoid pesticides, you are doing it wrong. They often have more pesticides than normal food since they are restricted to less effective pesticides and are going to be worse for you than modern equivalents that were designed to be safe.

some good info with hard examples of how much more pesticide is needed for organic farming.
http://blogs.scientificamerica...

Completely, utterly not true. The DA has fully discretion on what to prosecute. And political reasons are a huge part of deciding whether to do so or not. [1]

Not only does the DA have the freedom to not prosecute, a jury can declare someone not guilty they know is guilty if they believe the law itself or the punishment that will happen if declared guilty is unjust. [2]

[1] http://definitions.uslegal.com...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Except the advertiser does not pay when people skip.

So it is in the advertisers best interest to have you skip if you are actually not interested in the ad, if they made a nice quiet ad, people might let it run without realizing it even if they are not interested and the advertiser is out money.

Absolutely,

If an insurance company can perform a relatively inexpensive gene therapy and even slightly reduce the chance of a hugely expensive heart bypass, hip replacement, or long term care later they would jump on it in a minute. They may even waive the copay if it is that effective. Many insurance companies do this for drugs that help later in life like statins now as is to encourage people to take them before they have to pay out a huge bill later.

As to relatively inexpensive, She underwent a fairly normal gene therapy that just has not been done on humans before, to quote the article it is something a student could whip up in a few days in a lab and nothing that out of the ordinary.

Just stick one of these in a box with an LED. if the LED is on, it's doomsday.

http://www.maxwell.com/product...

"Maxwell’s radiation-hardened, hybrid, Nuclear Event Detectors (NED) sense ionizing radiation pulses generated by a nuclear event, such as the detonation of a nuclear weapon, and rapidly switches its output from the normal high state to a low state with a propagation delay time of less than 20ns."

I know it makes articles sound more dramatic and controversial, but sometimes the answer is obvious:

"So, does DoCoMo need to invest more in its infrastructure, or is Android a data hog that needs reigning in?"

The answer is clearly "both". Apps and android should optimize their data usage, doing so increases battery life and gives a better user experience all around. If DoCoMo is identifying particularly troublesome apps, then that is helpful to decide where to start hacking. _Also_, DoCoMo should be upgrading its infrastructure. It is clear that data use will only rise, and they certainly would like to have more customers, apps reducing their usage is a good thing, and will create a better experience, but not a solution to the problem that people actually have uses for all that data, and said usage will grow.

However they can tell by the serial number whether that iPad is fresh from the factory or restocked after a return.

It would be odd if 10 iPads shipped in different shipments, some used and returned without the customer before claiming it was made of clay all happend to be returned for being made of clay at once.

The human brain is absurdly faster/more powerful than even the largest computers today. Admittedly, we are getting closer to the point where the two will meet, but it is still decades away by most estimates.