Honestly I think even the measure being considered doesn't go far enough. Sure, it'll protect future students, but what about those of us who are currently feeling the penetration of the long thick phallus of Sallie Mae after having gotten a degree from one of these colleges.

In your haste to make a "communism" reference, you missed: In order to receive federal student aid, the law requires that most for-profit programs, regardless of credential level, and most non-degree programs at non-profit and public institutions, including community colleges, prepare students for "gainful employment in a recognized occupation"

What you're describing is known as the "Gray fallacy" or "Argument to moderation" and is often incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

Ahh After Dark... memories lol. Yes, you're correct. Early 90s.

That, and the whole concept of a grammar "nazi" on this thread is somewhat apropos as well.

Hahahahaha, you really think that's what corporate personhood is about? The ability to sue them? That's unbelievably cute. I could just put you in my pocket. Let me give you a hint, it was about the ability to make political donations in the name of a corporation.

Out of all of that, apes vs. monkeys was what you chose to take issue with? lmfao!

So you either subsidize it with your taxes (a fixed amount) or you subsidize it by getting raped by the ISP (an amount that can change when the CEO farts). Also, how many of your "5+ choices" are top tier providers? If the answer is 1, then you're dealing with a monopoly. If there's only one car company that makes highway capable vehicles, and everyone else is manufacturing golf carts, then they're hardly the same thing. Even if the answer is 2, then it's a duopoly because there still won't be competition, as history shows that those circumstances lead to collusion, not competition.

And the ones about Tesla tend to even be fellatious...

Not seeing the downside here...

As opposed to using them on us... which happens way more often.

Might even be self deprecating too...

Not referring to the iphone users specifically, but rather the rest of us armchair engineers criticizing the design.

I think for most people, this is a difference without distinction. There may be differences in the engineering definition of stress vs strain, but for the average layman looking at this problem it's essentially the same thing. Either way, Apple failed to account for the stress/strain that an average user would put on the phone.

Yes, I looked at the URL. The key difference here is that the phones of other models that were reported bending were largely "I sat on it" type scenarios (including one asshole who sat on his while it was in a cupholder), while many of the reports I've seen of the iphone 6 have often been in the front pocket. Sure, there were others that said "it spontaneously bent itself" but I'm betting those are "I sat on it, but I really don't want to say that". Yes, all phones bend, and as I qualified if large amounts of stress (or strain as Captain Pedantic in another response would have it) is applied, then they will break and stay that way. My point is that plastic tends to be a more forgiving medium for that kind of abuse than aluminum (or aluminium as another pedant stated).