Do what the military does... Just convert all this to acronyms, mostly with 3 letters... Trust me, you will feel better in no time, just nobody will know for sure what you are talking about.

I here the SHUH (Sport Hybrid Utility Hospital) can do 12 now using regenerative technology...

I think you are right... Time to start raising leaches again and bleeding for a fever.

Maybe we can apply some leaches to the current owner until they get better?

Follow the money.. Who pays the bills? Do what they say...

Seriously, keeping your factory's networks separate is a pretty simple firewall issue for someone competent to install and configure it. I'm not sure how this cell phone connection is going to work, but there ARE ways to make cell phones connect to you via VPN's that can be made to require usernames/passwords (not to mention specific devices) before you are allowed to connect. There are solutions out there to do what they ask, they just cost a little bit to acquire, install, and manage.

So my "follow the money" joke, really should be this. IF the people in charge are asking for it, find and suggest a solution that can do it safely. If they are not willing to pay for your solution, find another, albeit less safe solution and present it with a list of assumed risks. Rinse and repeat until you have a solution they are willing to pay for with risks they are accepting, then do that.

Like I said, I'm not arguing with you about the fairness of the law.. All I'm saying is the laws (as written) will be fairly applied by the court using the age old practices and standards of evidence and proof. I get that you don't like the law, but the courts will fairly apply it, especially in Snowden's high profile case.

BTW... What you NEED to be doing is to stop yammering about how unfair all this is and start working to change the law you think is so unfair. You do that by supporting the election of law makers who, in this case, serve in congress and will get the laws changed to something you like better... All I can say to you on that front is, good luck, you are going to need it because I get the feeling the majority of people who vote in this country don't support a change in law big enough to get Snowden off the hook. Plus, it's not the pressing issue of the media's day, so nobody really cares anymore politically. I know I don't...

With that, I don't look forward to your likely reply. I'll read it but if you keep arguing about the law being unfair I don't suspect I'll find the time to respond as I refuse to be drawn into a debate over the fairness of the espionage laws...

Close...

Actually the issue is the amount of power the device dissipates. Lowering the resistance of the device the current is flowing though, lowers the voltage for the same current flow. Power = Voltage X Current So if you lower the voltage for the same current, the device heats up less, it wastes less as heat.

Disputation is how much heat the device must get rid of to stay within it's working temperature range. If it gets too hot, it will stop working, so you have to get rid of all the power it wastes as heat. If you cannot get rid of the heat, you must slow the device down, or make it bigger so there is more surface area to get rid of the heat.

So this power issue really is a heat issue and if you can lower the power being turned into heat, you can make devices that run fast and are smaller.

Shesh.. Look, the trial would be "fair" as in done by the rules. Let it go...

Again, if you want to claim the LAW is not fair, fine, but don't confuse the LAW with the trial. I'm not arguing that the law he will be accused of violating is fair or not, all I'm saying is that he will get "A FAIR TRIAL" as defined by the centuries of legal practice in this country. He is innocent until proven guilty, will be afforded an attorney, will be given a trial before his peers, face his accusers and present evidence at his trial. This is NOT a kangaroo court.

You see, I really get frustrated with people claiming that the courts are unfair, that a "fair trial" isn't possible, or didn't happen just because the outcome is not what they wanted. With VERY few exceptions the criminal courts in this country ARE fair, too fair some times if you ask me. Snowden does face certain conviction (IMHO) because he clearly broke the law, but this outcome is NOT about the fairness of the courts, it's about the law.

Go a head, argue the LAW here, call it unfair if you want, just stop with this "the trial won't be fair" garbage, and absolutely stop comparing our legal system to the likes of North Korea. Our legal system is the best system in the world at protecting individuals rights and any claim otherwise is false.

What's really going on here is you don't like the law.... You think the LAW is unfair.... Stop maligning the courts and argue your real issue...

LOL... Love you too...

It's got to be true, I found it on the internet!

Wish I knew what "facts" you disagreed with so we could continue this discussion, but I'm afraid you left that part out...

Have a nice day and keep that tin foil hat squarely in place... Hey, isn't that your mom calling you from upstairs? I think she want's you to come upstairs and read the Help wanted adds with your breakfast...

I say again, the trial would be fair, your argument is with the law, which is a different debate. I'm encouraging folks to be careful with this distinction because the issue you are having is not with the courts or the legal system but the writers of the law...

Well... Not exactly....I think there is more to what they want.

They want a TRIAL and then the death penalty if they can get it from the jury.

Otherwise, why is he alive now? If they just want him dead, that's easy to arrange in Russia for what amounts to chump change.

No they want him alive and I presume so they can take him to trial and make a huge example out of him, either that or they simply don't care what happens to him...

Totally different circumstances, but you already know that, you are just grasping at straws. OBL's death was a military action on foreign soil that resulted in the death of a non US citizen who was a known combatant. He died in a war.

I've said before that if this administration wanted Snowden dead, he'd already be dead. I'm arguing that they don't want or need him to die for what ever reason and my evidence of that is simply that he's alive. So I seriously doubt that if he turned himself in they would skip the trial and just kill him. Too many people would be looking, it wouldn't be legal, and I contend there would be nothing to gain.

Seriously, he was just a two bit system administrator who took data off the systems he managed, he wasn't some high level operative but some dude in the basement changing out backup tapes and resetting lost passwords. He didn't do that for very long either. He doesn't really know anything beyond the documents he took....

What you can and cannot argue as a defense to a crime is spelled out in the law. Defense is usually given wide latitude in what kinds of arguments they try so I see no reason why the argument wouldn't be tried, but I do see where it wouldn't be successful. However, that's for a judge to allow and a jury to decide based on the law.

Also, comparing our legal system to that of North Korea is very unfair. You may not believe it, but our legal system is generally unbiased in it's application of law, In North Korea if dear leader says guilty, NOBODY can argue the point, regardless of the law or they suffer the same fate. There is a huge difference.

OK, OK... so pick nits...

It's be "banished" or "Go to jail"...

It's not like the king said "Go away and never return or I'll put you in jail for the rest of your life.. " and called it banishment..

LOL

The talk show circuit in Russia? Or better yet, via satellite?

Grab the vodka, Snowden's on the TV honey! (Said no one ever.. ) His 15 min of fame is over and now he's relegated to making money the Russian way.... How do they do that exactly?