The story in the book and the story in the show, while very similar, is not actually the same.

What makes a network real? Does it require a central authority dictating programming to each affiliate? Does it require terrestrial broadcast capability? Does it require orbital broadcast capability? All three?

As it stands, I will end up paying them $30 to watch their product commercial free when it is released. Do you think that Game of Thrones is worth more money? How much do you think they should charge? How many commercials would a "real" network have to inject into their broadcasts to recoup what they'd have paid HBO for the license to it?

It's perfectly possible to own a home and have a savings rate high enough to have quite a cushion to ride out any potentially destabilizing events. The troubles occur when one buys a home that is beyond their means to afford.

I stand corrected about the 70%, I didn't realize there were caps. I'll revise my statement then.

If one has a mortgage without enough of an emergency fund to pay that mortgage in the event of a job loss for enough time to downsize to a smaller home, then one is living beyond their means.

In other words, if something like the loss of one job will cause a financial crisis, one is doing it wrong.

Well, then that would alter one's *choice* to use unemployment as a *vacation*, which was what started this silly thread.

If 70% of your salary is not enough to make ends meet, you are living well beyond your means.

The major issue that Windows 7 "fixed" from Vista was it gave hardware manufacturers enough time to write drivers for their hardware. Not a whole lot actually changed, other than time passed and companies adopted the new driver model.

The way I see it, is time is the most precious asset I have. I really don't care to spend too much of it going to low-key events from someone I barely know. That's not to say I don't want to socialize with a wide-range of people, but an event every once in a while that I do get wind of is more than enough to keep a good flow of new faces to meet.

Facebook breeds a strong fear of missing out, when in reality if I get invited to 1 out of 1000 events going on in my city, its far more than enough to keep my social calendar reasonably full. I don't care that I missed event X, even if I think it's far better than event Y that I did stumble upon because I don't *know* it was better and there's no sense in lamenting over such trifles.

It's interesting to me that you see email as too formal for some invitations. Email is where we go for spam, mass mailings, and heads-up about events. Everyone I know has email. I cannot think of a single person that does not. About half the people I know don't have or never use Facebook. Email is where I send out invitations because it works best.

Perhaps millenials all use Facebook and none of them use email for such things, and generations shift in how they do things. In my generation, we all use email for organizing things (with attached calendar items when it makes sense). For context, I'm in the generation where I used to write letters to girls across the pond because phone calls were expensive and not everyone had email.

I guess what I am saying, if someone cares about me, they know how to contact me. If I get passed over, it's really not a big deal at all. Either a) they didn't want me there enough to put in that kind of (pretty low-bar) thought or b) the Fates screwed me, oh well, or c) my "friend" dislikes the fact I don't use Facebook and didn't invite me to spite me; fuck 'em.

Seems silly to have a friend who doesn't use Facebook and think "Gee, I really like this friend, but I just have no way to invite them to my birthday get-together. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to pass them up."

If I want my friends there, I'll invite them. The medium makes no difference to me.

First you claim that they use malware to send my plaintext passwords to themselves. Then you claim they have been caught red-handed doing the first claim...by compromising networking equipment which never sees my plaintext passwords.

I understand your point, but your claims are rather incongruous.

First, not all companies are doing fine using services from Oracle, IBM, SAP and Microsoft.

Second, Facebook is different in the same way that Oracle is different and IBM is different and SAP is different. It is not a very convincing argument to say other companies provide services so *this* company's services must be "fine".

Which platform is the only platform with SMS clients?

I tried the app as well and dropped because they measure most of their ingredients by volume, not weight. It's so much easier to use a scale when cooking than to measure volume of every ingredient.

I use an OXO one with 11lb capacity and pull out panel so that you can still see the readout even when larger items are placed on it.

We've never used more than a few pounds of any ingredient as we cook for no more than 8 portions or so.

Yes, of course you also have to trust the sender. We're talking about securing communications here, not trusting a sender. If you don't trust the sender, why even talk about trusting their communication? We need to first trust the sender, then we can think about "how do I know this message is from that specific trusted sender and not compromised."

Authentication using a certificate gives you no inherent trust of the other party. I thought that was obvious.