This is a classic case of people valuing convenience over everything else:

* Responsibility
* Anonymity
* Security
* Reliability
* Accountability
* Accuracy

Electronic voting machines and on-line voting severely erode or completely disregard one or more of the above concepts. Voting is part of the democratic process, which equates to freedom. Freedom is neither free nor easy.... neither is security.

Please everyone just leave T-Mobile alone. They are doing great the last few years. I don't want them ruined by Sprint or Iliad or Dish or anyone else!

Competition is good and T-Mobile is proof of it. Even if you don't use T-Mobile and never will, you have STILL BENEFITED from many of the things they have done lately which have been forcing other carriers to make changes.

Just today:
"T-Mobile posted its second quarter earnings today, and the carrier is continuing momentum as far as customer acquisition is concerned. The Uncarrier managed to add an additional 1.5 million customers in the second quarter, which makes it the fifth consecutive quarter in which the carrier added more than 1 million subscribers. The influx of new customers meant that T-Mobile's revenue rose by 15.4 percent to $7.2 billion. 50 million total subscribers now."

Perhaps I missed something, but the linked article (and also the Fotokite product/site) has absolutely nothing to do with safety. It talks about privacy/transparency.

A tether to a person on the ground only makes the devices even more unsafe, as they now get tangled with each other and other environmental hazards. Perhaps it would limit its range (which is not mentioned in the article), but a heavy device falling is a heavy device falling.

One thing that would increase drone safety would be an automatic parachute so when they do collide or lose power or go ape crazy, it can more softly return to earth.

This is a reply not just to you, but to several similar posts at once:

1) I don't have trouble maintaining employees, and it is precisely because I am careful to hire someone that won't quickly leave.

2) We don't have the best pay nor all that much room for positional growth, but it is a great environment and very stable. I am careful to disclose as much as possible about the goods and bads of the position so there are no unreasonable expectations.

3) I don't count contract work as job hopping. It is not the same thing, and it is usually apparent based on the resume.

4) The type of positions I am hiring for are not project oriented as many posts have assumed. It is departmental management, training, systems administration, and support.

5) I agree that people should be moving on if they are stagnating, but I can't have that be every 1 to 2 years, we simply don't have the resources to deal with that type of turnover in a small company.

I can tell you now than when I am hiring and looking at resumes and see 1 year, 2 years, 1.5 years, 9 months, I label it is a "job hopper" and throw it in the "least likely to consider" pile. And a CRAPLOAD of the resumes are that way, regardless of the position. Many things come to mind when I see that "hopping"- maybe they are just using each job as a stepping stone to get more money or experience, maybe there is something wrong with them and they can't keep a job, or perhaps they are too easily bored.

As an employer, hiring a new employee is a HUGE amount of time and financial drain on my department. Regardless of what somebody does know or thinks they know, I rarely get full productivity from someone until perhaps a year (sometimes less, sometimes more). If they are looking for such temporary employment, I need them to just look elsewhere.... I need some reasonable return on my investment.

I don't expect people to stay at a job for decades anymore (although there is nothing wrong with that... I have 25 years now with the same company) and I know sometimes a job is just not a good fit. But turnover in a small department can be devastating. If I were to see the same resume with 5 years, 3 years, 6 years, that looks FAR more attractive.

Nonsense. "White" is not a dirty word, nor is "Black", they are just terms. But if people are going to describe people's "race" based on a continent/huge region of origin, then "European American" is no different than "Asian American", "African American", "Latin American", etc.

If you are Black, I am White.
If you are Negro, I am Caucasian.
If you are African American, I am European American.

I believe strongly in *EQUALITY*.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

So, since we are into discrimination and punishing...

In my city, European Americans *are* the minority (to African Americans; there are very few of any other race). So would THEY be eligible for free preferential treatment from Google?

Or does "minority" just mean anyone who is not European American?

Microsoft must be really desperate.

No thanks.... oh, and no thanks on that Air thing either... love my Nexus 10 tablet. :)

>" That's a Japanese sport touring bike with a big crotch rocket engine. It's reasonable quiet until you get onto the freeway and wind it up."

I *have* a 1.4 liter Japanese sport touring bike with huge performance. And like all other factory Japanese bikes, it is not loud at all, regardless of how much I "wind it up". Why? Because I didn't replace the stock, legal, quality, perfectly appropriate muffler with some loud, annoying aftermarket thing that serves no purpose except to scream "look at me" (or "listen to me, whether you want to or not") and pretend that it does something for performance (which they do not).

Loud is not performance. Loud is not safer. Loud is just annoying.
http://www.noiseoff.org/pipes/

But it doesn't need to be *LOUD* to accomplish that. It certainly needs to be no louder than a modern, quiet car.

I wish people with loud vehicles would be ticketed to death... and that especially holds for boom-box cars.

http://www.southparkstudios.co...

>"with the electric Harley able to go from 0 to 60 mph in four seconds."

Wow, so that makes it only twice as slow as my old gas Kawasaki. Extreme noise (because people think loud = performance, which it does not) and vibration (along with poor handling and old tech) are Harley trademarks... I can't imagine why they would be interested in producing such a model.

>"The party system itself is the issue"

BINGO.

*NOTHING* is really going to change until the voting public actually has some real choices- and that means more candidates and more parties and with a sane voting framework. The current system will simply not allow another other party to win, because people can't vote how they REALLY want to vote....

The solution is that we need to be able to use some type of instant runoff voting system that lets us rank candidates so we can vote our conscience without fear of wasting votes. Once that happens, other parties have a chance and new parties will start forming.

This is the result of the militarization of the police:
http://www.cato.org/raidmap

1) I guarantee if you say "Virginia State shooting" to any of the many millions of people around here, every single one will immediately assume you mean "a shooting at Virginia State University" and not "a shooting in the Commonwealth of Virginia" or "a shooting in the State of Virginia". And it would hold true for countless millions of people NOT around here, too.

2) I never suggested using "bare Virginia". I said to use "Virginia DMV" which is quite precise, domestic or international.

3) And "Commonwealth of Virginia" is certainly not "little known", it is on all kinds of documents and signs and materials. But I suppose everything is relative. Even so, my statements were and still are correct. http://www.virginia.gov/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

>"Virginia State Cracks Down On Uber, Lyft"

Virginia State is a university and Virginia is a Commonwealth. Sometimes these abbreviated topic lines really are bad.

Couldn't it just say Virginia DMV? It is actually *FEWER* characters.