Yellow cabs in NYC absolutely do this. Yes, they have to take you to your destination, but that's it. There's nothing requiring them to drive around looking for passengers- hence why the green outer borough cabs came to be. Even in parts of Manhattan, you'd have to wait 10-15 minutes, or more during off-peak, before seeing an available taxi. If you walk a few blocks, they're all over the place again. I used to frequently visit a friend in the Lower East Side public housing; for her cabs were so rare she would always call black car services, which cater to the area with cheaper prices than a regular taxi.

So ribbons are better for people with no prior experience, and all the other things that correlate with being an inmate.
So professional users are once again sacrificed to the almighty goal of dumbing down to the lowest common denominator.

And then we can promptly reinterpret it to actually include corporations, and/or simply ignore it like we do with most other amendments.

Great, now Jehovah's Witness led companies don't have to provide coverage for any procedure that requires a blood transfusion. And what about even smaller minority views? You get to choose between all manner of ridiculous coverage gaps and telling people that since it's not a major religion it's not entitled to equal protection. And what about my tax money going towards things I have deep moral convictions against? Or since I'm not important, how's about a corporations taxes?

Religious beliefs shouldn't be allowed as an excuse to not pay for individual aspects of health care. What about religions that have sincere objections to receiving blood transfusions? Should they be allowed to not pay for coverage of any procedure that involves one? No doubt tax money goes to pay for religiously objectionable things; maybe we should allow companies to stipulate their taxes can't go towards Medicaid's contraceptive coverage? This is a very slippery slope, and this case would have been laughed out of court if it weren't a major religion and abortion, as opposed to a minority religion with a minority view.

The problem is you're hung up on the idea of what's legal and/or right. Think of it more along the lines of the mafia. The family running the corner bodega has nothing to do with the mafia, but they're forced to pay for the mafia's "protection services" not because of the mafia's legal right to enforce their policies, but because they have people willing to use coercion to enforce it. The only option is to get someone with more power/force behind them who is willing to stand up; for the bodega owner, that's the police. But there's no one with the power to stand up and force the United States to back down. So the US enforces global jurisdiction because IT CAN. It even prosecutes its own citizens who break US laws in countries where the activity that occurred is legal.
Now I know your first thought might be, well we're not going to use our military against Canada/France, but we have many other forms of coercion. We can and will forbid a particular financial institution to do business with US-based businesses and individuals, so that is the force that keeps them in line.

Who's "we'?

Snowden's revelations just gave me a chance to go around saying, "See I told you so! Who's the conspiracy nutjob now!"

400GB a month is already unreasonable for some, and it's rapidly becoming unreasonable for higher percentages. Not only is online video here, but people want it in HD. 400GB is only 10-20 full Blurays. It's only 10 TV seasons at 1080p for 1hr shows with full length seasons. At least 1 of every 3 months I'll exceed 400, sometimes hitting 600GB+. And I'm just one person... imagine a family with a few teenage kids, or college students living together?

People who exclusively stream don't get full bitrate, but they will soon. In the meantime, people who like to download full quality video, because 4-6Mbps is simply not good enough (or because connection quality can't handle it smoothly despite available throughput), are already over the line of just about every capped provider. I'm not downloading things I never watch just to collect them either.
Even streaming alone... 5Mbps is 2.3GB/hr, or 400GB in 174hours: 3 people streaming Netflix HD for 2 hours a day average, and bam. That's not even considering all other internet activity. Hardly unreasonable, and becoming far more common as more and more people forego cable tv.

And even beyond that, capping total bandwidth has no justification other than to eventually move to metered usage (don't be fooled into thinking that means light users paying less-- the bottom 10% will pay what they're paying now, everyone else will pay more). Throttling connections temporarily if the network is congested is reasonable; but capping overall usage is not, since ISP-level connections are priced by link speed- it doesn't cost the ISP anything else extra. Fortunately my two ISP options are Cablevision (Optimum), and FiOS, and neither of them have usage caps.

Maybe they need to stop putting marketshare above all else? It's bad enough how every version is progressively dumbing down the UI in an attempt to attract mainstream users. They did just fine long before they had the marketshare they do today. And they sure as hell didn't get off the ground by marketing to the non-technophile masses.
Are there benefits to increased marketshare? Absolutely. But when did that become the most important factor in designing a web browser?

Since there is no thermostat on the wall, things can only be adjusted by the HVAC guy or a the one maintenance guy who knows how, getting on a ladder and doing something in the ceiling...

Whoever is friends with the HVAC guy. Management doesn't care, because their offices are on a different system.

Better yet, tell them the perp had a small amount of drugs. They'll be busting down the door with the SWAT team and shooting dogs in no time.

For speeding the 'status quo' is too far in the enforcement direction. Almost no one is advocating stopping any and all speed enforcement, but the way it's set up now has nothing to do with safety. It's all about generating revenue. Cops hide around blind corners to catch people going 5mph over on an nearly empty interstate. This 'equilibrium' is not acceptable.

You mean only drug offenses right? Because enforcing that is what brings money back into the department through asset forfeiture and Byrne grants (and undeclared cash into officers pockets). Other stuff costs money, and is hard. In the world of arrest quotas, low-level drug offenses are easy stat boosters. Murder/attempted isn't typically investigated unless it involves a rich (and usually white) victim.

The Win8 interface is only an improvement if you use a touch screen. It's intellectually dishonest and blatant corporate shilling to make a factual assertion that it's an improvement without qualifying for which use case, because for non-touch mouse and keyboard, whether it's an improvement is anything but objectively true. What's particularly sad is how many people would mod that up. In the old days that would have been modded into oblivion.

Assuming you can view every page and do what you need to do without ever turning on Javascript. Which is quite the tall order. For example, there is no e-mail service on this planet that allows signup and use without JS turned on for at least one step or payment (this sounds ridiculous, but go and try it. There used to be. They've all been changed or shut down.). And it's been clearly established all it takes is one malicious script to unmask your IP while on tor.

Actually they would have a picture of your face and could go from there. A component serial number is discovered, which leads to the manufacturer, which leads to what store sold it; then their inventory systems can tell you what time it was sold, then you can match that up to security camera footage. This has been documented with burner phones, no reason it couldn't be done with computers.

It's like you missed the last year and still think this stuff is the fantasy of conspiracy nuts. Or work for the NSA and want to lull everyone into thinking they're safe.

Yes because that's the weak part. *sigh*