False equivalencies destroy credibility for either side. You're not doing your party any favors.

Your front door isn't truly secure, it can be knocked down. Does that mean you shouldn't lock it? Does that mean the President shouldn't lock his doors?

Personally, I feel like even if a problem can't be entirely avoided, it makes sense to put a reasonable amount of effort into reducing the chances of that problem occurring. Seems like most folks agree considering how often people lock their doors. I suspect you agree, too, but decided to throw logic out the window on this one for whatever reason. The fact that one of these domains was better protected tells us more could've been done to protect the others, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask an administration that has stressed the importance of email security as much as this one has to put that little bit of effort in.

Look at the further reading. Just a random collection of negative stories because that's what the editor looked for. The Apple stories here are a joke, they're only meant to stir up feuds about something nobody should give a damn about: what devices other people use.

You have been a comment hero lately, good sir. Thanks for your contributions! You'd get all my mod points if I had any.

Phones with replaceable batteries are still on sale today, but most people don't realize it because they are usually a bit bigger and therefore are very unpopular. This is a thing everyone seems to ignore every time we talk about phones with batteries that can't easily be replaced: You have a choice already, you made it, claiming you were ignorant of your options does not justify a law to take away the option most people prefer. And yes, most people do prefer phones with batteries that can't be replaced because they don't like the bulky replaceable batteries.

Slashdot is always full of people saying we should vote with our wallets. We did, replaceable batteries lost.

I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd say try to roll back to before the updates if you can. If that doesn't work I would probably re-install Windows. If it's trying to boot but just keeps restarting it shouldn't be bricked, so a re-install should get it booting again in any case. Just be careful not to automatically update again after the re-install!

You won't even notice the effects of the patch.

Not quite the reasoning. Your insurance rate starts dropping at 25 as long as you maintain a good driving record. If you just start driving at 50, your rate will start at about the same point as if you were 25. The reason the "sweet spot" appears to be 50-60 is that most folks have a steadily decreasing rate starting at 25 or so, and then it starts going up again at 65 when most folks' reaction times and eyesight start to suffer significantly. I've also read that, statistically, the lowest number of crashes per miles driven tends to occur around age 70, but I never see anyone argue that 70 year old people are the best or safest drivers. Something tells me it's not as simple as saying any group of people is better at driving than any other group.

You can't hire an electrician from London that isn't licensed to work here to wire your house and still get it approved. Just like Apple couldn't have hired some dick off the street to design their building and still get it signed off on. The whole reason these people get licensed is to demonstrate that you can trust them with this stuff. Is your entire argument based on the assumption that Apple hired unlicensed idiots to design their building? Or were you completely unaware of how any of that works? Because that's a pretty thin argument.

Is the pig fucking question supposed to be edgy? Grow up, kiddo.

Are you suggesting that when you hire experts to do something and they mess up it's your fault? So, if you hire an electrician to rewire your house and your house burns down because he did a poor job, you wouldn't go after the electrician, right? You'd say it was all your fault for hiring a bad electrician and take responsibility for burning your house down? So contractors can do whatever they want, and inspectors can approve whatever they want, and then it's all the building owners fault for not becoming an expert themselves and correcting the work of the contractor?

I mean, that's an argument, I guess.

So to be honest, the list I've narrowed it down to is largely based on personal recommendations from the IT staff at companies we deal with. We're small to the point where we don't have any dedicated IT staff so those things just fall on my shoulders because I'm reasonably good with computers. So on password managers, the biggest things I need are ease of use for the employees who are mostly not very comfortable with computers, and easy administration which should include password distribution either to groups or individual users and I'd like the ability to mass-reset passwords as folks leave the company, and if I can find something that we run on our own server instead of on that company's servers it would be preferred. We don't actually need any mobile app access, and all our PCs run Windows so that's the only thing it needs to work on. Endorsement from experts is always a plus but it's not a dealbreaker as long as nobody has outright said they are bad. Open source would be a perk in my mind because of pricing and availability, but also I'd want to make sure it's a project that has been around a while and looks like it will stay around for a while. I'm really just winging it, which is what most of my IT work is, so we'll see where I land. Keepass is actually on my list as someone recommended it to me but I haven't looked into it too deeply yet. This whole project of finding a password manager is actually sort of my own deal so I can only work on it in my free time, which barely exists. But I really need to get us past word documents with passwords in them, it's physically painful for me to see that all the time.

I'm actually in charge of finding a new password manager for the small business I work at and Keeper was one of the few I'd narrowed my choices down to. They just knocked themselves off that list. My company is small and that's no huge loss for them, but I know I'm not the only person making that choice. Now, had they responded to this stating they're temporarily disabling the browser extension while they work on a fix, they'd still be on the list. When are companies going to learn that trying to shut down bad publicity is the worst publicity of all?

Ahh I think I get it now. So yeah, still a dick move, but not a NN issue. I guess they'll always find a way to screw us in the end. Thanks for explaining it, very much appreciated.

Thanks! But I'm still a little unclear on why it isn't considered blocking since credentials can be entered manually. I mean, when I brought my PS4 to my friend's house where Verizon provided his internet service and he wasn't an HBO subscriber, I was able to use my HBO Go just fine. Logins can be entered manually when the ISP doesn't forward it themselves, after all it is HBO "Go" and isn't meant to only be used at home through your own ISP, so I understand that when Comcast just isn't forwarding the login info it wouldn't be a NN violation, but not sending the info I manually enter still seems like it would be.

What? Comcast was blocking a service their customers were paying for until that service payed Comcast more money. Can you explain why NN does not encompass that? I'm not saying it definitely does, but your response does nothing but shit on someone without explaining your position, so it's impossible to take you seriously right now.