Science project? Really this sounds like something dreamed up by a kid, one who hasn't heard of 200mph winds that that elevation.

There is most likely a corporate play in action here but I can see if the test in some way makes someone who can't afford medical testing/treatment off themselves because they know how terrible X disease can be then it's probably worth review. Or the inverse, someone not treating a very serious issue because the test came back ok (which is probably more likely).

Just look how many people show up at the doctor because they have convinced themselves their (low blood sugar) symptoms are 100% a brain tumor according to WebMD.

Yea, as sad as it is they are just trying to get ahead of the ball here because the writing is on the wall that once again a 3rd party service provider is required to act as an agency of law enforcement.

Law enforcement should be saying "sure please leave those up so we can track down the actual criminals instead of sending them to another 1000 little 'dark webs'. But alas, the easiest and most public thing is to tell google how serious they are about the problem and require them to do something about it.

Google should not have to filter any website, ever. Regardless of the content if it meets the same selection and searching algorithms every other site does. That they are or do is playing censor at the governments behest and when they are doing that they have no longer any reason to be trusted no matter what you are searching for.

It's who's selling the solution. The sales people cater to the execs/management and know the buzzwords that make the all tingly.

If the suggested solution comes from IT/Bottom up it's usually a lot of details they can't grasp and don't really care about.

I think that is probably more of a business decision. If they allow it the site would have been crushed immediately with porn and low value users.

We prefer the eggshell method of security: We can withstand brute force and brazen attempts but a tiny tap crumbles the whole operation.

It will be a fun day (if it already hasn't passed) when passengers are under more scrutiny than the employees, thus the TSA actually being the biggest threat.

This is exactly the type of thing that needs to be done so people can be informed voters. Unless you're heavily engaged in local politics pretty much the only information you are going to get is the fluff they want to feed you and any controversial stuff that made it into the news.

"If your security solution requires that you pass a law making it illegal to break your security, then it's not a solution."

I love that quote. Pretty much sums up the entire argument when it comes to DRM.

I don't know how it works there but most people who get suspended or revoked here continue to drive because it's a virtual necessity for most.

Increased penalties are rarely a deterrent for speeding. Maybe it works in Virginia where they are on their way to introducing summary execution for certain offenses. (2500$ fine for 81mph)

a) Doesn't work (for reducing offenses, it's great for revenue)
b) The casual speeder (the ones going over because of a hill or following the speed of traffic) doesn't want the limits raised, people just make mistakes. The 2fast types will speed regardless of the limits.
c) Doesn't work (for reducing offenses, it's great for revenue)

I don't have the ability to "speak with my wallet" when I am dissatisfied that the money being taken from me is being misused. These departments have plenty of money they just have VERY different priorities for various reasons. For large metro areas they waste tons of money on vice and swat and other special units. Actually in these forces the patrolling people actually want is considered grunt work no one wants to do.

Miles above yours, where you clearly don't even understand what you said in context. Just to recap since you may be drunk or confused: You responded to the post:

"So let me get this straight -- are you putting forth the argument that Apple chose to use pentalobe screws for their customers' convenience? That they wanted to ensure that the heads wouldn't be stripped by the frequent screwing/unscrewing that they could expect?"

With:

"And it IS a better screw design, less easily damaged, whoever opens up the device."

(keep in mind no mention of Philips in the post or your response)

Then you go on to post a response that really make no sense:

"Getting the business" (if you mean getting bent over the barrel by a corporation I guess you have a point)
"Straw man. I said it's better than Phillips, not ever other screw. And it is better than Phillips."

Good day.

I almost spent more than a second trying to understand wtf you are trying to say and then I remembered to just look up post history: Yup. Exactly what I figured.

It most certainly does present a barrier to techs. You have to go waste money on a special tool for the perfect reason of _______.

There are literally dozens of designs that are basically the same but just like everything else apple made it "proprietary" by a little rounding here and smoothing there. Viola', where's our patent?

Of course, you may have something to back up what makes this design "better" and "less easily damaged" compared to the dozens of other like designs.

That's comically absurd. You know things are bad when he's probably wishing he was tried in the Chinese courts.

We're going to pay 600,000$ to keep this guy locked in a cell for 12 years to say: "Don't Copy That Floppy". Go take a look at the average sentence for egregious violent crimes.

Shameful.