Just did it in my shining brand new mail forwarding (shipping/logistics) system that's coming out in a few weeks (almost 7 months in development :)

There is a simple solution to all of these problems, just declare anybody with a foreign sounding name to be a terrorist and be done with it. For the French, just rename them all with one name: Freedom. Monsieur Freedom Freedom at your service.

I don't actually know if I'd go that far. Your heuristic will pick out a single bully in a class of victims, but it will also pick out a single victim in a class of bullies, and I'd argue that the latter is by far the more common case.

Everytime you open your mouth I cringe. I built my products by investing my own money and time into them before I even had 1 single sale, nobody else participated but myself and 4 guys I hired at the time. Before first iPad or even iPod or even calculator or production car or airplane or a barrel of kerosene was sold, people put their time and money on the line, sacrificed a guaranteed income of working for someone else to run their own business, used their or other investors money, put their lives on hold to try and create something thatothers, including worthless assholes of your kind would be eventually enjoying, while pretending that your mere worthless existance is the reason for anything. It is not. The reason assholes like you have anything but stones and sticks is somebody who was way ahead of you in everything, including savings, work etics, risk taking, planning and much more. As to jobs, they are a function savings by somebody else, not you and of getting more done in shorter time than your poor attempt at existance. Nobody is forced by you to create jobs. Employers hire people to increase profits and none of it has anything to do with altruism, what a dumbass idea for anybody even to consider that as a possibility. You also are not the reason to hire anybody, people hire people to be more productive. A company is a machine built by the investors to make money, that is the only consideration and reason in itself. Being productive allows an investor to stake more claims to future productivity of others, that is where the making money part comes in and again, you are the last element in that chain, the most trivial element. Once the product exists, either the investor makes money or loses money in that gamble, you are part of the cycle at the very end - the shit producing part.

Which depression? The gold USD has been defaulted upon in 1971. The Great Depression only ended with the end of WWII as gov't cut taxes by over 32% and spending by over 64%. The Great Depression was caused by the Fed inflating the money supply, causing the stock market bubble, which popped and crashed the market, which prompted the gov't to pump even more liquidity and start various nonsense gov't programs that caused the depression.

Increase in property and asset values is not economic growth, only increase in production is and USA has been diminishing its productive output since it defaulted on the gold dollar in 1971. As to jobs, the jobs that are created in USA do not reduce its trade deficit, quite the opposite, all the gov't and service sector jobs increase it. USA needs manufacturing and it lost most of it, so no, those jobs didn't help, they actually hurt, they are the wrong kinds of jobs and only exist due to all this inflation, they wouldn't be around if USA still had honest money, instead USA would still be a productive country as opposed to what it is today - a bankrupt country with unpayable debts and impossible obligations.

Government cannot declare anything to be money any more than I can declare myself to be a ballerina.

People decide what things are money, people decided that gold is money for example, it was never a government decision to make. Government tries to control the currency of the state by making it a 'legal tender' (all debts to creditors can be paid legally in government issued fiat). Constitutionally government has the authority to declare weights and measures (this much gold of this purity is required to mint a gold dollar). Government has the authority to offer you mint services (they can mint a coin for you from your own gold even though it may require a small fee, this is useful to have easily recognisable money on you).

Declaring paper to be money or more correctly - defaulting on the gold dollar has marked the beginning of the end of USA economy. At this point it does not matter what government declares anything to be, currency or property, none of it matters. They are way beyond all of their legal authority anyway. Do not pay any taxes, avoid and evade as much as you can, that's pretty much the only you can do now, you no longer have a Constitutional authorised legal government, there is no rule of law.

Bitcoins were designed to be money, from my perspective they are not, because they can't store value, so I won't take Bitcoins as payment for goods and services, but I will take gold. Government has declared gold to be 'property' long ago, applying capital gains taxes to it, thus trying to steal your gold from you, because it is the value of the dollar (the perceived value) that is going down relative to the gold, gold is not increasing in size or volume over time, it's the relative perceived value of the dollar that is falling, so government is trying to tax your gold holdings with the nonsensical 'capital gains' taxes that are pure theft. Nothing was gained from gold that was in the vault except for inflation protection.

So this is a Symantec ad, I don't have a problem with advertising, but call it what it is. Windows XP used in an ATM? Well, I can see how this can be a problem, but how is this SMS based attack specific to Windows XP exactly? What, if the ATM in question was running VAX/VMS it wouldn't support SMS based attack due to its lack of SMS support? :) I mean there are no details as to how an SMS makes it possible to get cash out of the machine and I don't see at this point how it is OS related. Any OS with appropriate software could do the same, no?

They are not "nothing", but the psychological mechanism is what does the work. The trigger is in fact "nothing", in that it plays no part in the medical effect.

The tree-bark studies you use are more along the lines of herbalism than holistic medicine or homeopathy. The yew extracts commonly used in chemotherapy should also be considered here.

This is not just a matter of the fact that they use herbs. They fail homeopathy by not relying on the "memory of water" effect that homeopathy claims to rely on: indeed, homeopaths would be horrified at the doses used. Likewise, holistic medicine is generally quite keen on not introducing foreign substances into the body, which these clearly do.

These aren't the only herbs to be shown effective, either. And when they are shown effective, medicine incorporates them. But a great many herbs have been shown to have no effect at all, or even to cause harm, and science has rejected these, as it should. The resulting dosage tables from these tests bear little resemblance to herbalism as the herbalists tend to think of it.

Essentially, herbalists stumbled onto a couple of patterns, and thought this meant they knew everything. When we put it to the test, we found a few accidental discoveries: it's not unlike the way that alchemists accidentally discovered gunpowder. But the methods the herbalists used were bunk, and a lot of the resulting knowledge was bunk, and even when it wasn't, they turned out to know far less than they thought they did.

But if the medicine relies on the placebo effect to work, then it's a sham. You could do just as well (and a lot more cheaply) with a sugar pill.

What an average type of a dumbass, you are, still completely oblivious that individuals are not the ones that violate rights. A right is protection from government abuse and has nothing to do with an individual breaking property. Anything an individual does can only violate laws or standards, but never rights, only governments can violate rights, you brainless amoeba.

Capitalism is private ownership and operation of property, so you are saying it "only works" because value of money can be diluted? You are delirious.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, so you want to make it ILLEGAL (as in illegal based on government laws) for individual companies to agree not to hire people from each other? :)))))))

Why don't you also make it illegal for people to come to agreements to avoid sleeping with each other's wives while you are at it?

I don't care about the 'myths' that talk about Glass being distraction, whatever. People are distracted by many things, shiny objects, their phones, car crashes, etc. I don't care.

Here is what I do care about: Glass does not have to record all the time, but I don't want to be recorded by people at all. When I step into a store I can be recorded, but those recordings are there for a reason: security, theft investigations, etc. I can live with those! I can avoid going into stores that break that promise!

I can't avoid being looked at and recorded by all the idiots around me, apparently whose only reason to live is to post everything to FB and every other social hysteria clone sites. I don't want to be scanned, catalogued and recorded by entities that I don't personally deal with. I am against all government surveillance too, by the way, and the morons with cameras all around us provide copious amounts of data on everything and everybody around them specifically to the systems and entities I completely distrust and personally loath, thus from my POV this is not a myth - Glass is dangerous to my personal privacy.

You can say that I cannot expect privacy in public, however I choose to put myself into public but I do not choose to put myself into surveillance programs that are trans-public.

FB is trans-public, I don't have an account and I don't want to be there. I don't provide my pictures to online systems and don't want others to do it either. I don't have a problem with people taking matters into their own hands on this and yanking those devices of faces of the wearers and simply stomping on them.

They want this and that. I hire my people and pay them money, some people work for cash, some are on cheques. These guys are apparently not getting paid, they work for a promise of a huge payout down the road, that's the risk that they take. They reduce the risk of the founders by allowing the founders to have cheaper (or maybe free) work force.

So now they are complaining that they are not getting similar treatment in different companies, companies that have no profit model, companies that only exist as long as there is inflation created by the government, which drives a ton of funny money towards their 'investors', who are anxious to prop up anybody with yet another bright idea of creating a free (as in free beer) service that people will flock to. The model is: only eyeballs matter, only number of users matter, the profits do not matter.

Guess what, these companies shouldn't even exist. You are taking part in an exercise that is doomed to failure in normal markets. You are pretty much gambling your time in order to try and get a big payout at the expense of the larger economy (the inflation). Sure, it is not your fault that the Fed is creating this situation, which is part of the larger problem of huge centralised government destroying the said economy.

Ok, I can see how in that situation everybody feels cheated, because it's all gambling, it's all a lottery, it's all doomed to failure and the only winners are those, who have managed to be first, first in line for money in that game.

So why are you even complaining at all? Just start your own goddamn 'free services' company and you will have the greater fools lining up to work for you for free and a bunch of 'investors' with funny money to drop on you from helicopters.

But no, they don't want the risk of starting the company, they want to work for one what is started that way, but they want to be sure that they will get paid. You are taking a gamble, you are not producing anything in the society of any value, you are sucking the resources out of the society. Ok, you are just following the cues of the Fed and the government, but don't pretend that you have any moral ground here.