You don't get it. Give it a few years and Google Glass will be an option you can add at 60-Minute Eyewear or at Lenscrafters. Are you going to try beat up everyone who wears glasses?

Much more importantly, you fuck up, you may kill others. Can you imagine if he had hit a traffic light at a corner where a family was waiting to cross?

Actually those cars were absolutely "too dangerous." Back then, year in and year out about 50,000 people died every year in car accidents (about 50,000 Americans died in the Vietnam war). Since the near universal placement of airbags and anti-lock brakes and the use of sophisticated crumple zones in contemporary cars, that death toll has come down to around 33,000. That's huge.

Just because you were both careful and lucky and didn't get hurt in traffic accidents then doesn't mean that the car was less safe.

This is only true in a very unusual condition; when the snow is both heavy and deep.

In all other snowy conditions ABS is superior in breaking distance and in control. I know this from years of experience and personal experimentation. When I was young and reckless, living in Utah, my Dad had an Audi 90 Quattro that he sometimes let me drive. ABS was still only available on nicer cars then. It had a button for turning off the ABS. I experimented a lot with different breaking approaches and different conditions with and without the ABS. The only time I was able to best the ABS breaking distance was when the snow was very heavy and more than 6" deep. Now on a dry, flat surface under I was/am able to stop about the same distance without as with, because I have lots of experience including racing experience and I can modulate the breaking right at the edge of lockup. But the beauty and magic of ABS is that any numbskull idiot driver can break as well as Andretti in an ABS car 99% of the time, because all it takes is stomping on the pedal.

If my Dad known what I was doing with his car, he would have been pretty upset, but I still think it made me a better driver.

This is only true in the two very rare cases of deep gravel or deep heavy snow. In all other cases anti-lock breaking can do a better job than you can or I can, and often better than Mario Andretti can.

Government surveillance and overreach has NEVER been about protecting us from bad guys. It has always been about protecting the powerful from the rest of us.

How much surveillance can a democracy withstand? That will be very hard to answer in the absence of a democracy to test it upon. Democracy, liberty, rights, etc., all that has been gone for some time now. We live in a nation that has the appearance of democracy without the substance. Over the last 30 years public policy has continuously moved in a direction opposite from what the overwhelming majority of people want. Polls have continuously shown for 30 years that people believe the minimum wage should be high enough to keep a family above the poverty line. The inflation adjusted minimum wage is as low as ever. Polls have continuously shown for 30 years that the overwhelming majority of people believe that deficits should be handled by bigger taxes on the wealthy and large corporations. During that same time taxes on the wealthy and big corporations have gone way down to the lowest levels since before the depression. There is no democracy only democracy theater.

What the guy actually did is completely irrelevant. Of course the government doesn't try to set a precedent like this in a case against a cute and loveable defendant. If this stands then the state has the power to get your private communications by any means and since a defendant somehow doesn't have standing to challenge the practice, evidence gotten this way can be used.
The only check against unreasonable searches and seizures has always been that evidence from such searches would not be admissible in court. Without that safeguard, for terrorist supporters as well as your mom, the 4th Amendment means nothing.

I never knew this one. I tried it just a moment ago and I swear the heavens opened up and I heard the angels singing for just a moment. Bless you.

I would disagree that "management" is running much of anything. In most companies "management" only manages means and methods the goals are set by the system. Profit, shareholder value, and whatever supports these goals, that's the task of management.
Literally a publicly held company by law must maximize shareholder value. There is no choice and there is no person deciding this. I believe that even massively rich industrialists that get neck deep in politics, like the Kochs, don't have the power to make fundamental changes unless those changes serve the god of lucre. Even the New Deal of FDR was needed to prevent the growing tide of socialism, and therefore served the purpose of preserving the system. The only thing that has ever changed things for the better is large numbers of people organizing and taking power from the system and from the rulers.

You, and many others here, sound like you've never worked for a small business. I assure you that for small businesses having an employee quit is often a big difficulty. It often means that others have to step in and do the work of the person who quit until that person can be replaced and the replacement is trained. Small business isn't a football team with a backup quarterback waiting on the sidelines warmed up and ready to play. The margins are tight and there isn't money for extra employees. When someone gives 2 weeks that gives a tiny bit of breathing room for the employer to begin finding someone new, and is the minimum courtesy for a professional leaving a job. Quitting and walking out without notice is appalling rude. I can't blame people for leaving if they found something better, but the way they leave is often more revealing of character than anything else.

Luckily this is something that decent people just know, and just do. If you have to ask then I hope it is because you work for a terrible employer, if not, I hope you aren't applying for a job at my office.

mod eenaarbrak up for proper use and understanding of "begging the question."

Atari 400 had 4k. My current has 8Gb. 2,000,000 times. I miss that old atari.

What nonsense. The US Constitution and the Magna Carta were documents that limited the authority of government and existed in the context of British Common Law which is a very complex web of precedent that few could ever hope to master.
Your earlier call for a system based on about 10 simple serious laws and leaving the rest to the civil courts would effectively prevent access to the law to all who can't afford a lawyer and an investigator.

Mos Espa? That must be from episode 1. God wants to forget the prequels too!