Really? Somehow, I suspect that you'd have an entirely different critique if the answers weren't such an embarrassment to those who fit into the "conservative" camp.

The really glaring thing here, to me at least, is that the non-scientist sample is so far off from the scientist sample. Do some research into why the non-scientists believe the stupid shit they do. Come, on, less than half of all laymen believe evolution is a thing? That's scary.

We've managed to spend a trillion taxpayers dollars on an incredibly expensive airplane, which is being built by our friends. Our friends got their money. Right? I call that an unqualified success. Who gives a shit if it actually works?

Regards,
Your Elected Officials

Not really. Laws, criminal codes to be more precise, apply to people, not corporations. Didn't you get the memo?

Oh, yes we can, you little person you. We missed the boat completely when it came to digital media and lack totally the vision to come up with a business model that works in this new age, so we've paid good money, a buttload of it, to have the rules tilt things in our favor. So shut up and take what we so generously offer you. Regards, Your Friends at RIAA

Not quite. They're finally recognizing the plain fact that in the United States today, if a "corporate citizen" wants something badly enough, they get it, and the little people can go fuck themselves.
Is this a great country, or what? /s

I've heard talk of a marketplace for "fat credits".

And guess what? If you used even the most basic security hygiene, especially with your LastPass master password, it still is.

Just what they're doing now - serving as the medium for conscientious journalists and other concerned individuals to publish accounts of the bullshit going on in their corner of the world. Anonymity is tough, but it can be attained for such purposes. Such techniques should not be the responsibility of Facebook. And yes, anonymity tends to dampen credibility, so there's a balancing act to be performed if one wants to avoid the violent response of the corrupt little men being exposed, but let us give thanks that there there are those willing to take such risks for the sake of truth.

What is this "competitor" thing that you speak of?

You forgot the sarcasm tags, there, Skippy. Surely, you aren't seriously suggesting that all the crimes that the NSA and their colleagues in the intelligence and law enforcement communities are guilty of are not at least as dangerous as Russia and China's economic "threats". Right?

Piss off, you mere citizen. If you're not a corporate citizen, you're little people, and little people don't have the same rights as corporate citizens. We will tell you what you can do with your property, and you'll like it, because the bread and circuses will continue to flow.

TFTFY
...and, no shit. Put down the iPhone, you little dorks and recognize that the world still communicates verbally, sometimes using a feature that your magic text box has actually had from the start. It's efficacy at communicating useful information larger than something like "lol" is unparalleled when compared to the other shitty input devices on mobile devices.

TFTFY
Internally, our company uses several different mechanisms for securely transferring sensitive documents, all of which are superior to fax in speed and reliability, but we interact with hundreds of other businesses that refuse to abandon this mid-last-century technology for the same job.

You were doing fine up until the point where you equated religious faith with scientific hypothesis. The two are alike in only the most superficial way. They are unalike in the most important ways. Only a fool would fail (or refuse) to note such distinctions.

If I observe that you seem to not understand the definition of ad hominem, I am not engaging in an ad hominem attack. Likewise, if I observe that a particular observation is "daft", it is the observation I've addressed, not the observer.
You are an idiot, and your mother dresses you funny. There. Now that was an ad hominem attack.