In an ideal world, the free market would step in and protect consumers in place of the government having to do so.
You think so? Isn't it the free market which lead to the situation that we have today with a few major companies having the power to control the network and shut out competitors? Did all that happen in some sort of socialist vacuum?
You're welcome to take that up with the reviewers listing them in the top 10. I personally don't care, I was just answering the guy's question about how they make money.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/...
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/tes...
http://www.av-test.org/en/anti...
http://anti-virus-software-rev...
John is trying to get Intel to remove his name from the brand (which they are). He hasn't wanted to be associated with that software for quite some time.
Well, since you asked seriously, they are the world's largest dedicated security technology company, now wholly owned by Intel, and their antivirus software still ranks in the top 10 in a lot of reviews. That's what they do to earn money, anyway.
FYI - oil is currently flowing through the Keystone pipeline from Alberta all the way to the Gulf Coast, and it's been flowing that far for over a year. It's been flowing to Illinois refineries for almost 5 years. But don't let facts like that stop your hatred for Obama.
You *do* realize that the oil that would be flowing though the XL Pipe literally goes solid at room temperature?
How do you think they push it down the pipe, then? Do they heat it up to such a high level so that it maintains an easy flow throughout the entire pipeline, assuming that it might get re-heated at pumping stations? Or do they mix it with something else to allow it to flow easier regardless of temperature? Assuming they do heat it instead of just adding an agent to make it flow easier, how long would it take to cool and solidify in the open air after spilling? What's the flow rate of the pipeline, if there was a breach how much oil could we expect to escape? It looks like someone took the time to try and answer some of these questions here (if you have another source, please share). In any case, it sounds like in the event of a breach that we're looking at a minimum of tens of thousands of gallons spilling (possibly less if the breach occurred just downstream from a shutoff valve and was detected almost immediately). How far would tens of thousands of gallons of your super-heated oil travel in the time it takes that oil to cool before literally going solid? If instead the oil has an additive to allow it to flow easier, wouldn't that also mean that it can flow easier straight down into the ground?
Hint: "environmentalist" billionaire Steyer made his billions off coal, now owns a huge stake in a Canadian pipeline that would compete with the Keystone, and spent a LOT of money playing an "environmentally concerned" person trying to stop the Keystone pipeline.
What's your point? Are you suggesting that there is in fact no environmental impact by the pipeline? Are you trying to say that this guy stands to make money if the pipeline isn't built, and his money came from environmentally harmful sources, therefore the Keystone pipeline doesn't hurt the environment? I'm unclear what correlation you're trying to draw here.
We know that millions of people rely on our devices every day, and it is our responsibility to deliver quality, reliability, innovation and security to each and every customer.
If they know that, then why are they installing adware with security holes?
Why in the world do companies keep insisting that datamining and delivering ads "enhances the experience for users"?
Because it's the only way they can possibly spin advertising as being somehow pro-consumer. There's really no other way.
If a checkbox is not checked does it still not come in on the post / get ?
That's HTML, that has nothing to do with HTTP.
Is a textarea still not a text control?
That's HTML, that has nothing to do with HTTP.
It's just the result of a drunken mad libs game.
OK, let's sell [noun] kits to fund a [noun] flight over [noun]
My point would be the part about background checks that you snipped out so that you wouldn't have to answer it.
Answer it? You didn't ask a question. The point of my link was to show that background checks for regular taxis are not sufficient to have a 100% success rate of weeding out potential sex offenders. Why should that be any different for Uber? (note, that was a question for you) People like to point to stories of sexual assault surrounding Uber as a reason not to use them, when the fact is that sexual assaults happen in regular taxis also. I don't think that Uber made any claim that their service is 100% sexual assault free, but frankly I think it is safer than a taxi. I sent a friend home in an Uber car the other night after some drinking at around 3:30 am. I ordered the car, so I was able to track where it was going on my phone and I verified that it took her straight home (I also entered her address so he knew where to go without asking her). I don't have that same capability with a taxi. If I wanted a further assurance I could have called her and talked to her all the way home. I also have the driver's name, vehicle make and model, and license plate number because Uber tells me all of that information. If I call a cab and she gets in it and she doesn't let me know when she's home, what are my options? (there's another question) Call the police and tell them who I called, and then they can call the cab company and work out with the dispatcher who got the call, then try to locate them over the radio and hope they respond? How long does that take? What else is happening in that car while all of that is going on? How is that any safer than letting me know where the vehicle is, who is driving it, and having a description of his car including location?
Like, say, while driving for an illegal limousine service without commercial insurance (and driving without insurance is a criminal offense in California).
Why is it that Uber can operate in California, then? You make it sound 100% illegal, so why do they advertise California cities among the places they operate?
Last night's big news story here in LA was an alleged sexual assault - by and Uber driver.
A quarter of California drivers have no insurance.
Well there's your problem right there. Good luck with that.
That's fine. But, just so you know, you don't tip Uber drivers. When you arrive at the destination you just get out of the car and leave, you don't pay or tip, the payment happens automatically when the ride is over.
Considering that every Uber car in which I've rode (except one) has been cleaner, more prompt, and cheaper than a typical taxi, you can stick to whatever you want and I'll stick to Uber. Where my house is, the typical time from order to pickup for Uber is 2 or 3 minutes depending on how many cars are sitting in the neighborhood. It cost me $15 with Uber to head downtown last week, and a taxi was waiting right outside when I left so we just jumped in that and the ride back home in the taxi was $25 (plus a tip). In a nice old smelly car, too. You can keep that if you want to spend your time worrying about whether or not it is legal for one person to pay another person for a ride.
I think it was written in 2004
Right, back when Uber came out in 2004.
He was referring specifically to the long route incident form, that's the focus of his article - how to know when you're getting ripped off.
"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android
