Not really.

Security is not an all-or-nothing proposition. In the real world, an adversary will NOT attempt to crack your encrypted filesystem. Instead they will do one of a hundred other attacks, like swapping your laptop with one that has a cloned disk and hardware but an embedded keylogger, or add in a shim between the disk and interface, or install an infected MBR that logs the decryption password, or perform a RAM sniffing attack to steal the keys, or simply extort the keys out of you.

Security is a process of analyzing the most common risks, and determining the best way to deal with them. Sometimes this means determining that a particular security action will lower your security by attracting the attention of entities with far more sophistication than you are prepared to deal with; if you are worried about criminals stealing your laptop, and your mitigation ends up attracting the attention of the NSA, you have lost the security battle.

IDS / antivirus have no ability whatsoever to detect a hardware keylogger, by the way. If you attract the attention of someone who can gain physical access to your hardware, you lose-- period.

AFAIK it gets revisions with every major release. Like the EXT family its backwards compatible, transparently.

What big features is it missing aside from the checksumming / self-healing stuff thats already in ReFS? Feature wise its a pretty decent FS; its biggest flaw AFAICT is its bad performance in directories with huge numbers of files.

Republican speech is often characterized in exactly this way. But I cant play the victim card here, because it could very easily shift in the opposite direction.

Stifling free speech truly doesnt benefit the average citizen of any party.

You say that extreme speech needs to be controlled: Wonderful! Theres only one problem left to solve-- figuring out who makes the call of what constitutes "extreme". In the 40s and 50s it was far-left political ideology. Today, might it be the far right? Tea partiers?

Noone denies that "free speech" brings out some nasty characters like the Westboro Baptist Church. But you really cant tread down the middle on this issue; when you start saying "we're only going to allow the reasonable folks" you have to have someone deciding who that is, which in fact ends up controlling the entire political dialogue. Inevitably you will end up with a scenario where "reasonable" is synonymous with whatever ideology is in power.

Comparing the two is disingenuous. True, we have nastygrams for infringement, NSLs,etc-- but their use tends to be fairly limited. We do NOT have grossly expansive libel laws that allow entities to demand that true-but-damaging information be suppressed for no other reason than that it is damaging.

It never ceases to amaze me how much people on the internet love to hate on the US, all the while European countries (and Australia) seem to be running with open arms towards heavy state-controlled censorship. Maybe Europe isnt the utopia people love to paint it as. Maybe you truly cant trust the government to have your best interest in mind all the time.

While I agree that it would be nice if they just used beta carotene, has there been ANY evidence that yellow 5 and the other colors they use have EVER caused a single incidence of cancer? The "poisoning our children" angle is fun and all but these colorings are everywhere in our foods, its pretty silly to single kraft out over this.

Maybe the study went further than the article, but Im not clear where you got "harm" from. The article mentions gene changes-- that doesnt mean they were harmful.

You know what they say about assumptions.

If you think you can expect institutional altruism out of anyone, I have a bridge to sell you.

2. Its actually easier, as before you had to press-and-hold and then hit the screen... now you tap a volume button once and change it from "none" to normal.
4. Turn off battery saver.
5. ART opens faster; this is fact, because it pre-compiles. The installation will take longer-- thats the tradeoff vs JIT.

improved battery, pinnable apps, multi-user (ie, guest or kids mode), trusted smart unlock, better notifications... those are the big ones off the top of my head.

Why should breaking a particular law with a gun (say, robbery) be treated differently than with a knife? I have never seen the logic here.

Is it at all possible that it has to do with what you're familiar with?

Because believe me I have tried a lot of foreign candy and it really doesnt suit my palate. I dont know that I could categorically call them "awful", though, without betraying ignorance into how palate differences work.

Which is misleading, because white chocolate in the US contains more cocoa than milk chocolate in the US.

The fact that both statements are true is not surprising because Europe actually has the same white chocolate standards:

Regulations govern what may be marketed as "white chocolate": In the United States, since 2004, white chocolate must be (by weight) at least 20% cocoa butter, 14% total milk solids, and 3.5% milk fat, and no more than 55% sugar or other sweeteners....The European Union has adopted the same standards, except that there is no limit on sugar or sweeteners

Its interesting that you phrased it in a way to suggest that the US lacks good chocolate regulation when in fact the US has tighter regulation on white chocolate than the EU-- though to be fair the EU does require more cocoa in its milk chocolate than the US.

Incidentally, this page suggests that its actually 25% thats required in the EU, both for fat and non-fat cocoa solids. Thats not quite the picture you paint.

Flavor is a subjective thing, so what you're essentially saying is "I dont like the taste of American foods and Im not American, therefore your food sucks". Surprisingly, there are many Americans who prefer the taste of food they grew up with, such as American chocolate, and do not always like the different tastes that other countries have.

Clearly though your taste buds are the standard by which the entire world should judge. The fact that I actually like American Snickers bars, despite having tasted Belgian chocolate (which, i hope you would agree, constitutes "real" chocolate), surely must mean that my taste buds are broken. At least, this seems to be what you're saying.

No, what hes getting at is that there is a tired cliche that because something is European it must be inherently better, and also that any chance not taken to slam America is wasted. I assure you (without even having to research this) that there are world class wineries, chocolatiers, chefs, etc in the US-- even ones that would meet your particular requirements for "good' chocolate.

I have a scary newsflash for you: you live in a free society and there is nothing that prevents someone from kicking in a door and murdering your family as you sleep at night. We can punish them after they do it, sure, but you'll still be dead.

Maybe we should put cops and cameras at every street corner! Or we could recognize that we have things incredibly good in this country and there is zero sense throwing it all away over some hysterical fears that are incredibly low on the risk matrix.

What is the problem you are seeing that requires a law update? Our country remains strong, murder rates are down, violent crime is down, our economy is up...

why is it so many people seem to think "changing what works" is a good idea?