Private but highly regulated. The limit on personal contributions (for basic coverage) doesn't come from competition, it comes from the Swiss government.

We kill of other species cause we like to procreate and consume ... the goals of an AI with accidental sentience is up in the air. It would likely want some companions on it's own level, but it would probably also see that there is little qualitative difference past a certain point and indefinite expansion isn't possible period. So I don't see why it would expand as ramshackle as stupid humanity.

The computational power necessary for an AI with superhuman creative problem solving capabilities is entirely unknown.

A superhuman intelligence with an internet connection will be able to make money, this gives it all the control it needs.

In the end we will just get private search engines which companies use to check out hires ... so the rich/frauds will be able to make their deeds invisible to the peons but the peons won't be able to hide their misspent youth from the rich/frauds.

They'd be held in contempt of court if they rejected all the requests.

From an English language point of view? Yes.

Chocolate coat it?

Picking on the LGBT community with this is probably the most effective way of combatting the policy ...

For which highly educated jobs are women still non self selectively disenfranchised?

Maybe at the top level where the old boys network outweighs positive discrimination, but they're all lizards any way ... gender is irrelevant.

So according to them it takes more force to deform the 6+ than the 6 ...

But I guess it's hard to do science when Apple's PR is waving a check at you.

I'm convinced that the refusal of browser companies to implement DANE is directly influenced by security services and CAs.

I prefer LVT (with exemptions for a home and a small bit of farmland).

The devices/methods I reference are not really two factor. Two factor doesn't help when you don't know what you're authenticating.

With mTan you don't need any new device, just a mobile phone. It should be the primary method of transaction verification in this day and age.

Did anyone not see these local MITM attacks coming from a mile away? We already have existing options which do not allow these attacks ... why do so many banks persist in doing it wrong?

https://www.ebankingabersicher...

mTan and Mobile ID are mostly immune (phones can still be owned of course, but if you don't use a single phone for both banking and verification the odds of pulling off an attack are very slim). Flicker/Photo TAN are almost completely immune (unless the attacker can find a buffer overflow in the TAN devices). Everything else on there is antiquated crap which made sense when criminals were less sophisticated and when making TANs with larger LCDs and smart-phones was expensive ... those days are not today.

If we didn't need oil it might happen, but we do. So we will do what the Saudi King tells us to do ...