Please show me in the Constitution where the Federal government has the power to impose laws about education.

Oh yeah, there is this:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

>"In the past decade, the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency has wasted $10 billion on defense projects that were either impractical and impossible."

And to put that in perspective, this "tiny" example of federal waste in a never ending huge bucket of waste is probably over $800 for every active taxpayer (depending on how many or few Americans are actually paying meaningful taxes)... not counting the compounded interest on the debt it, no-doubt, incurred.

RE 2) Apple uses a proprietary cable/disc with magnetic device to inductively charge. Meanwhile, the 360 uses standard, multi-vendor QI wireless inductive charging. So, yes my original posting point 2 was flawed. Sorry. It is still nothing new or innovative- just proprietary and likely more expensive.

>Exactly what do Android devices do with you Liver to Notify you?

LOL! *haptic* feedback, I think I cut and pasted his spelling by accident :)

Many good points.

RE 2) Apple uses a proprietary cable/disc with magnetic device to inductively charge. Meanwhile, the 360 uses standard, multi-vendor QI wireless inductive charging. So, yes my original posting point 2 was flawed. Sorry. It is still nothing new or innovative- just proprietary and likely more expensive.

3) The 360 is a premium device- the lowest cost one still comes with a high-quality leather strap, not rubber. And if you don't think 60% less is a lot less, then I have some stuff to sell ya :)

4) The 360 is not "enormous"... have you seen one in person, for real? I get compliments all the time and not a single person has said they thought it was too large. You do realize the 360 case is 45mm diameter, right? That is only 3mm larger than the full sized Apple watch and yet the 360 has s smaller bezel.

>"Don't forget the "Taptic Engine" a haptic feedback mechanism

I didn't miss it, Android wear devices have hepatic feedback also (vibration). I don't see much difference between vibe and "tap". I have been silently notified of alerts since the day I put the 360 on my wrist.

1) ?
2) It uses a proprietary cable with magnetic device to charge. Meanwhile, the 360 uses standard QI wireless inductive charging. So, whether it is actually "wireless" nor not, it is still more like wired and certainly not standard.
3) You are full of it. I am on a national forum of people that talk about the 360 every day, very, very few people are unhappy with it
4) Yep... and isn't that what Apple products are supposed to be all about?
5) One vendor with 3 models is a far cry from a dozen vendors with dozens of models. One represents no choice, the other lots of choice.

Yawn- so looking through the info, it doesn't really do much more than my Moto 360 can do, yet the Moto 360:

1) Has been available already for 7 months.
2) Has inductive charging and the Apple watch doesn't.
3) Is far less expensive.
4) Is arguably much better looking (for those who want round).
5) Works with many different phones, not just a few iPhone models.

So what is so innovative and impressive? A button on the side? The 360 has a button. It is not a scroll wheel, but despite what Apple's video claims, I have absolutely no problems using the touchscreen to pinch zoom, swipe, or scroll and it doesn't hurt my experience and is far more intuitive.

The ONLY two things I saw of interest were variable touch sensitivity... which is certainly not a new technology, but it novel on a watch. And having a speaker, which I certainly have not missed.

I mean, it looks like a great device, but I fail to understand why people think it is some brilliant new idea or super fantastic breakthrough.

>"officials said they had determined they could address concerns raised by civil liberties advocates"

Sorry, that is impossible, unless by "address" they mean "dismiss". If the government (and also private industry) in any way collects the information, it will be abused. Period. Regardless of what they say they will do, they will store the info for extended times, share it with all the black-ops agencies, index and associate it with all kinds of other databases, and search it at will, without a warrant, with impunity and without even audits.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is just totally naive and living in some fantasy world. The only safe data is the data not collected in the first place. Wake up people- the only real way to ensure data privacy is to prevent its collection in the first place.

Exactly. I was about to post the same thing. I am responsible for no less than 160 Linux desktops, laptops, and servers at work, home, family, etc.. Not a SINGLE one of them is using Gnome desktop. And based on a rough estimate at our Linux/Unix user's group, I would say perhaps less than 10% use Gnome on any of their machine.

Now, if they said "popular" desktop or something, fine. But "primary"??? Give me a break.

>" And the Apple watch is not the only device mentioned in this video (or transcript, if you prefer reading to listening)."

Then why is the title of the summary just "Apple Watch" instead of "Smart Watch"? Especially when there are already lots of non-Apple smart watches with motion sensing, heart rate monitoring, step counters, etc, already on peoples' wrists and have been for coming up on a year....

smart phone, not iphone
smart watch, not apple watch
tablet, not ipad
mp3 player, not ipod

>" Plus BIOS passwords can be worked around, jumpers, batteries, etc."

If designed properly, they would be no easier to work around than secureboot, itself. And still give control to the owner, not the OEM and not Microsoft.

>"The owner may not want to spend the time setting the password"

Freedom has a cost. It is not free, and it is not necessarily convenient.

>"One counterexample: The user of a computer is not necessarily the owner of a computer. For example a business may not want to allow an employee to disable secureboot."

Then the owner places a password protection on the BIOS and that prevents disabling secureboot, if that is their desire. I have no problem with password protection of the BIOS being strong. As long as the fate of the computer and its settings are in the hands of the owner.

>"And consider that the owner is not necessarily the user. In a business environment the company may not want users to disable secureboot."

That is easy to consider. The business can then lock the BIOS with a password to prevent the user from changing the secureboot status. And I have absolutely no problem with the BIOS password failure by the user doing nasty things like semi-bricking it until the OWNER unlocks it, or some other suitably difficult-to-circumvent design (like slicking the drives, or calling for help, or whatever).

The difference is that the OWNER is in control of the options set and used, not the OEM, not Microsoft.