>Before anyone starts explaining about how it is difficult not to give root access to sys admins etc, it is not exactly rocket science to have peer reviewed access control polices even for sys admins,

Would you care to share what those access control systems are?

Erm, actually it's the same storage requirements for Google, even if they rewrite the image to be contained in the email.

E.g.: 1KB email, 40 KB image. Image stored separately, 41 KB storage space required.

1KB email, 40 KB image. Image stored in email, 41 KB storage space required.

The answer is the user can't differentiate, unless we have access to the source code.

So here's an open source flashlight app you should be using:
MrWhite: https://fdroid.org/wiki/page/org.bc_bd.mrwhite

Or Torch: https://fdroid.org/wiki/page/com.colinmcdonough.android.torch

Install them by installing the F-Droid (FOSS for Android) package manager from Google Play.

Yeah, but look at it from the perspective of a company (say, your own):

You hire a guy who's a total generalist. You sit patiently while either you train him or he trains himself in specifics. The moment he's trained, he jumps ship for someplace else.

How do you avoid that? Since you paid for his education (training) shouldn't you get to reap the benefits?

Please tell us.

What's an FBI virus? A virus released by the FBI into the wild so they can snoop on people without a warrant?

He went to Princeton, and then to Harvard Law School. While an undergraduate, he was the top debater in the national college debate circuit.

Except that I've had trouble booting CD images on thumbdrives, although "in theory" there shouldn't have been any problem.

What I find is that when you encounter a series of iptable statements, it seems obvious that the kernel is building some sort of table of data or rules (LISP: data == program).

But instead of providing the table to the system, you have to build it up, piece by excruciating piece.

Whoever thought that was a good idea should have his packets limited.

OK, I'll bite.

What do you think deprecate means?

OK, I checked out your links, and they don't seem to have the text of their proposed amendment other than this vague statement:

We are calling for an amendment to the US Constitution to unequivocally state that inalienable rights belong to human beings only, and that money is not a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment and can be regulated in political campaigns.

So, then, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People cannot spend money as they choose, because as a corporation, it doesn't have any rights, correct? And for humans, speech will be limited to using your voicebox, and not distributing pamphlets?

It would be useful to review the actual Citizens United case: a group of people organized as a corporation were selling an anti-Clinton video close to an election, for which they were prosecuted. If dissing politicians is bad, what exactly is the point of the 1st Amendment?

Erm, there's no yearly budget, and the government has been operating in this mode for a while now. Ask the Senate Majority Leader why.

It's been operating on continuing resolutions, which basically means: spend as much money as you were before, but x% extra.

It seems you didn't read the article. The article said if there are sites which have been replaced by a static page, fine.

But there are other sites which are serving the full content of a page, and then also showing a "We're Closed" popup obscuring the content, thus saving no web or DB costs, power, etc., serving no purpose whatsoever other than we want to be in your face that this stuff is closed, oh, and here's a preview of what you're missing.

Even with the parliamentary system, you have two houses. The lower house is supreme in matters of funding. If the House of Commons were to reject funding for Program X (whether that be the UK's involvement in Afghanistan or whatever), that would be the end of the matter.

There'd be nothing the House of Lords could do about it.

Here, the lower house has rejected funding for a certain program, and the upper house is refusing to recognize the lower house's power of the purse.

>It's infinitely more fare

Um, you must mean more fair, less fare.