Its largely a coya situation. Whether you are a complete imbecile or the grand daddy of all neck beards who shared part of creating computers, the cert is the only way a mid level manager is going to be able to pass the blame on you not doing it corectly rather than himself for hiring you if something goes wrong. It likely allows them to escape punitive damages if sued over it too- of course qe hired a qualified person, ignore the fact he's the owners neighbor's kid, he has all these certs.

I suggest the sales department phone number. Those seem to be able to accomplish things with screeching to management and IT.

Yup. The market will adjust.

The problem is, the adjustments will be wild and put companies out of business.

Cocoa comes off a tree, so switching land from bananas to coca is not a "next year we'll grow that" type of transition. While that expansion happens, the price goes where ever. Also, with that start up time, a local farmer might get burned by being a little too late where large numbers of other fields are converted too. Leaving him out of business or at least less willing to do cocoa again.

If my industry relied on the good stuff, I'd be looking hard at geographically spreading my supplies out and getting production in places it hasn't been done before, AND stockpiling it if it keeps well. Just set a price, buy all of it you can.

It might be wise to release a press statement warning of the scam in your points 1 and 2 and state that they are "cooperating" with regulators and authorities to catch the scammers.

I put cooperate in quotes because trechnically it is true as long as it is reported to them whether they act or not.

But it seems that one of the ways this works is the legitimate number being used to trick people. Well, if the news runs a story about it, that element goes away.

You mean birther types. There are plenty or Tea Party types who do not challenge his birth- which is a premise originating from democrats.

This difference is significant unless your goal is to make shit up that you know little about and hope it sticks. Perhaps you are just the ignorant target of someone like that.

They did, at WWDC 2013. More to the point, I wonder why the Trim Enabler dev isn't signing his kext? Are there legitimate reasons, like he needs a special kind of thing that can't be signed using the provided tools, or is it because he doesn't want to pay for a dev license to sign the software he's selling? In a vacuum of information, there's not much point in speculating.

Why? Is TRIM empirically faster on your drive, or is this something you think you need?

I'm wondering about that myself. Early benchmarks showed that the 840 EVO benefits from TRIM, but that drive also had wonky firmware that was causing read degradation. Could the old firmware have accounted for some of the benchmark problems?

Side note: I applied the firmware upgrade myself last week and it went through without a hitch. YMMV, but I had an easy time of it.

I don't work for Apple, but... Older MacBook Pros came with instructions for replacing the RAM and hard drive. This was considered a normal thing to do and didn't void warranties. For example, my 2011 MBP has normal Phillips screws on the bottom, and it takes me about two minutes to have the back panel off and the RAM and HDD snap right out.

SSDs have a history of notoriously horrible firmware. SandForce, anyone? Someone goes to Best Buy and comes home with a new SSD, pops it into their MBP, uses it for a month, and the thing asplodes and eats their data. They call Apple support to scream at them for writing a terrible OS that loses their data, and Apple loses money and reputation.

I can imagine perfectly non-nefarious reasons why Apple would disable TRIM by default and only enable it for drives that have been explicitly tested for compatibility. Even today, you can still turn TRIM on for yourself as you described, at the price of reverting to pre-Yosemite security. I haven't done so on the 840 EVO I swapped into my MBP because I've judged that it's not worth the tradeoff for me, but it's an option. Trim Enabler even has a GUI to do it for you.

I'd be hard pressed to come up with more of a manufactured controversy.

Apple has never enabled TRIM on non-OEM SSDs, which is probably the conservative and correct thing to do. If you're clever enough to install a new SSD, you're clever enough to enable it on your own (and presumably to know whether you should enable it, and whether it's even a benefit for your particular drive).

The current workaround involved a single software vendor who didn't sign their kexts. Apple's new security policy won't let you load random unsigned kernel modules unless you explicitly turn off the signature checking. While this is inconvenient for me personally - because I have a 3rd-party SSD and I used that software myself - on whole, I'd rather have a more secure OS than the dubious benefit of a possibly slightly faster SSD.

From what i saw, it doesn't appear that it would tip over easily unless you placed something tall on it to chang its center of gravity substantially.

The point seems to be to pass the design on and make parts availible to those without the machining tools or skills neccesary to get a scalable, proven design operational. There ate itherkits similar availible but i think their niche here is the ability to keep teaction in rough enviroments and not be thrawted by a stick on the ground or curb or whatever.

You are correct. That is what i was attempting to say but after looking my post over, i realized i failed in doing so. Nonetheless, i think you explained it better than i could.

You can stop reading whenever you want. All it does is makes you an uninformed fool. I suspect you do that a lot in life.

Your own link says he is " strongly critical of conservatism and the Republican Party" that he is a regular mouth piece on democrat talk shows and news programs " MSNBC and Current TV news program, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and The Randi Rhodes Show". Well, currently only the ones who didn't go out of business because nobody watched or listened to them. IF this is not a democrat, I don't know what is. This no true scottsman fallacy of yours will only convince the people who do not ad 2+2 together and come up with 4.

lol.. I love that series.

Nixon, Bush, and Reagan are all serving, or did ,serve prison terms for their illegal speech right?

No.. Do you think they were or are you being rhetorical?

Each of these guys are also in authoritative positions which can require people to follow their whims, unlike the person TFA discusses who is not in an authoritative position.

There is little to no clear evidence that they told anyone to do anything but the circumstantial indications are that they did. For Reagan, there was no criminal punishment for the Iran Contra affair- for bush, no laws were seen to be violated, and for Nixon, obstructing congress by deleting 18 or so minutes of a recording is the only thing linked to him outside the testimony of a known democrat (Dean) who was getting favorable treatment for that testimony. And since Nixon, it would seem that the white house regularly tells congress to STFU by claiming executive privilege which is about the same because they still do not get what they asked for. This all impacts the ability to prosecute if any laws are known to have been broken.

I don't think you can compare the two (or four) situations. Maybe a more accurate comparison would be all the accountants who devise schemes to dodge and defeat tax obligations. Whether right or wrong, a law exists that allows prosecution of someone who conspires to commit fraud on the government and they his teaching for the specific purpose of defeating FBI employment polygraphs seems to fit that description. Typically conspiracy charges crosses from free speech to criminal when someone takes steps further than talking about it. For instance, if you and a friend were sitting around smoking a joint talking about how easy it would be to rob a bank, it would be free speech. If you or your friend started staking banks out and purchasing supplies you discussed, it can become a criminal conspiracy whether you actually robbed the bank or not. Of course either of you would have to be aware the other was taking steps to make it stick.

So perhaps this is a good thing that this guy is being prosecuted. Perhaps it is going to end up changing the law or how it is applied in the future which seems to be misguided or misapplied in this case. Perhaps it is going to end the reliance of lie detectors for government. I think either of those would be a good thing. I'm just sorry that one guy will have to shoulder the brunt of the work.

And once again, the truth is a flame. Its interesting how many people can't handle the truth.