I know that. That's WHY it its brilliant.

Perhaps it's time for companies to realise that they cannot keep data secure. That they will never be able to build, much less be willing to pay for, the security required to keep this information under any kind of seal.

Perhaps it's time for companies to ask themselves: "Do we really need to store this?".

Have you taken a look at Facebook posts lately?

You seem to be confusing real identification with having actual moderation in an online forum.

"I got assigned an IP ending in .666. I refuse to support any company with such obvious anti-christian leanings."

Brilliant.

In this case no matter who in the company orders to give him the credentials, the administrator in Swizerland cannot give them or he would be breaking the Swiss law.

Right. And the guy running a local web forum devoted to lolcats can't go on vacation either, since it contains some user information and credentials to access it can't leave the country...

"Sorry kids, you know that lolcats forum? Yeah, I can't come to the family gathering in france. Government says I can't go, I know too much."

When the word "globally" is used in context with a subject that directly affects the globe, it's not a metaphor for (local) completeness, it means "everywhere on the globe." This is basic English.

It's been a consistently cool and wet spring and summer in the northern plains of the USA. This data is relative to the region of the northern plains, and is comprehensive within that region, but not globally. This data cannot, by itself, be interpreted as a global indicator, regardless of if it agrees or disagrees with the global data. One would not say "It has been globally cool and wet" based upon data for the northern plains.

Global climate data (you know, for the globe) will include data from all regions of the globe in order to determine a global average weather datum of any kind -- temperature, rainfall, etc. Anything less is regional. "It has been regionally cool and wet in the US northern plains this spring and summer."

Would someone like to translate the summary into english?

"Buy My Book! Buy My Book! Buy My Book! ....."

Is it actually marketing's fault that nobody wanted to buy the always-on, always-watching Eye of Sauron edition of the Xbox "One?"

At least it's a known quantity, whereas with desktop Linux you're still expected to know copious text commands even to get userland tasks done because every installation's GUI is a special little snowflake.

Granted, Metro is ruining that advantage by all but requiring people to memorize keyboard shortcuts for desktop use, but at least it's still mostly the same keyboard shortcuts across all versions of Windows for the past 20+ years or so.

Well, have you actually looked at bank security lately?

Sorry, I forgot the sarcasm tags in my comments.

Actually, I believe we need to scale back on consumerism and get back to some old ideas about life like not using more than you need. Living in excess, showing off, "bling" and "Hummers" (that aren't even real Humvees) and useless crap like that has to go. It's possible to be comfortable and efficient. To me, that's "real performance."

But "new things." How can we improve without "new things"?

That's a fair observation. I don't care about the climate -- it's a lie anyway. What I care about is saving money. Just about all of my bulbs produce less heat now. I do a lot of things like that now and have been for a long time. I don't do it for anyone but myself though. I bought an efficient car so I don't have to spend as much on gasoline. I did it for the money. If some pollster asked me if I care about the environment and what I am doing to help it, I would be disqualified immediately because I would say "No, I don't care about the environment, I care about my money." No one wants to hear that though. What they want is more people to join the armies of brainless "we care" socialists to support more initiatives that harm their own interests. I just love how many black people are still supporting Obama despite the fact that they are worse off under his policies and executive orders and especially now with the flood of UACs he has orchestrated. Morons.

It amazes me what actually works on people. The media says "good people do this. are you a good person?" And they fall for it each and every time. "good people don't own guns. do you own guns?" And no one is a peace-loving, person of the cloth any more... now they are characterized as "bible-thumping haters." How are people not dizzy from all of that spin? No, only Islam is a religion of peace any longer... that one founded by a warlord?

And people don't even have to understand the little details. All they have to see is what's not working and that's pretty plain for all to see.

People who advocate giving money to "the poor" and "disadvantaged" do not give their own to the poor and disadvantged -- they just get other people to do it. Just like the people who are pushing the UACs all over the US. Are they inviting these children into THEIR gated communities? No. "It's the right thing [for other people] to do."

When will people just open their eyes? Radical socialist nations got that way under the leadership of and influence of famously rich and exploitative people who united people under the promise of equality and utopia and are somehow suprised when their government takes away their freedom and points guns at them all the time. How many nations ended up like this? And we want that here too? Really?

You know what makes people save energy? High energy bills. We don't have "high" energy bills in areas where the government supplements [corporate welfare] energy companies. All these "capitalists" are amazingly non-capitalist.

Look on either side. Nobody does or means what they say.

And I still can't believe that people still don't know what was really behind the Hobby Lobby issue. Maybe you heard it from me first, but it has been out there for quite some time. But it turns out that such exemptions already existed but previously just for non-profits. And in those cases, under Obamacare, those birth control benefits (keeping in mind that birth control means abortive measures, not prevention measures) are STILL covered but are required to be paid for by INSURANCE COMPANIES. This battle was never about whether or not for-profit conpanies can have moral objections to anything. It is about insurance companies not wanting to keep their end of the bargain they wrote for themselves. They are making windfall profits on this and they don't want to give any of it back.

Okay going a bit off-topic but I don't care. Things are getting increasingly stupid and the media is pushing out increasingly obvious and blatant lies. I just wonder at what point the common drones out there will begin to notice.

For me, price is also a factor. Watching it just while cooking alone or something, I don't want to pay $5 for something that is just not that good. Crappy stream quality also doesn't matter in that case.

There seems to be a trend of the studios to allow digital "purchase" of movies but disallow rental, even for older releases. I'm only going to watch most movies once. $5 is my sweet spot for watching a movie. I'll gladly pay $5 for the ability to stream it for 24 hours, on the same model as the video rental store. I won't pay $15 to "own" it, especially when "ownership" is simply an indefinite-term rental until such time as the streaming service goes out of business. I'd rather just go without than play that asinine game.