You forgot to add that people who are employed by Uber need to be investigated to make sure they have the added insurance required when you are transporting people for money.

What should happen is insurance companies should use the service then cross-reference the driver with their insurance policy. If they don't have the required insurance, send them a bill.

Same goes for the state department of revenue. Since these people are operating a business they need to claim the money on their tax returns, though they can still deduct expenses just like any other business.

"They are now, and have always been the same company, they just had a trial separation for a few years."

When SBC bought the AT&T name, the poor managers at SBC became "AT&T". When I said "there is no connection", I meant that there was no continuity of management.

Yes. It was ugly.

Also, it is probably helpful to note that Southwestern Bell, a company that had a very bad reputation with customers, bought the name AT&T. There is no connection between the old AT&T and the company called AT&T today.

Yeah. BillDog has it right, the libertarians couldn't have given a toss about net neutrality.

All I've ever seen about it is Left-wingers saying we must have it. I've gathered that it's about getting government to interfere with the free market, by telling carriers that they can't charge more for premium levels of service.

Fuck me. It's not like slashdot has decades of articles and comments on this very issue which would help you not sound like such a tool.

at least 2 USB, plus power connector (could be a 3rd USB 3.1 connector I suppose...), a video out port (again, I /suppose/ it could be yet another USB 3.1 trasporting DP. Rather just have mini-DP though), and an RJ-45 port.

"You have to consider local, internal attacks..."

If you know of an attack that works against a Windows XP limited user, please mention it. It is likely it could be fixed without Microsoft's support.

"XP is dead. It's lifespan is over."

Software doesn't die. Are you saying that, after literally thousands of bug fixes, Microsoft had still not fixed all the vulnerabilities in Windows XP? That's certainly possible; Microsoft makes more money if there are vulnerabilities, since people pay full price for the next version of the operating sytstem.

"we had major difficulty getting drivers for things as simple as SATA controllers for it"

SATA add-on cards.

"If you have ANY significant number of XP machines, it's time to pay the pittance that an entirely new machine would cost"

That's not the problem. The real cost is in all the configuration and teaching people to use new computers. There are programs, lots of them, that don't run on Windows 7.

"And Windows 10 is expected to be free..."

I'm guessing that Windows 10 will be "free" because it will force a lock-in to Microsoft's methods.

"If you have a "network", especially a business one, of any description, you are negligent in sticking on XP now."

What is particularly vulnerable about XP on a network? We use a software firewall on each computer, Windows 7 or XP, and everyone operates as a limited user.

"You can't secure XP. ... there's no real thing as a limited user in XP because it's basically a cinch to demonstrate privilege escalation using any number of pieces of bog-standard software on XP..."

Look at this video of a "privilege escalation": Windows XP local privilege escalation. It's total nonsense. One of the comments: "When you try this without administrator rights you get an error: Access is denied."

So you're saying a country doesn't want its currency to be stable? That anyone and anyone should be able to create a currency out of thin air and use it?

Don't know your American history that well, do you?

So you'd be okay with the EPA releasing your personal data if you were part of health impact study? You'd be okay with letting some company dump unknown toxins into your water because the EPA can only regulate what's publicly available and said toxins are guarded by "trade secrets"? How about nuclear waste, where the contents, sources, and locations are all "secret" knowledge?

Do you see where this going?

Any bill regarding the EPA pushed forward by republicans is designed to destroy the EPA. They don't give a single fuck about pollution or destroying the environment. They want to go back to the days where you could set Lake Eerie on fire and getting black lung from living downwind of a coal plant. They want science to die a miserable death in all it's forms.

Always read the fine print. This bill is specifically crafted to remove the EPA's ability to function, with the eventual goal of disbanding it entirely.

Less government regulation is pretty much what Libertarianism is all about, so this is more him sticking true to his ideals.

Except this the government going back and undoing what it had previously done. Originally ISPs were to be treated as common carriers but the government got bigger by using its power to say they weren't common carriers.

If the government had the power to say ISPs weren't common carriers, it most certainly has the power to say they are. No contradiction or overstepping of authority.