If /. was put in charge or anybody who thinks the way an average /. user does, then all sorts of things will qualify as trolling. All of a sudden difference of opinion qualifies as 'trolling' on a government level and is punishable by jail time. Vast majority may find it wonderful, that opinions of a minority are qualified that way, however everybody is in minority opinion on some things.

Sounds great for upper class people who worry about taxes.

Here is my take on it, I have a number of people from well known schools, same number of people from schools that nobody heard from and in some cases people from unknown schools who dropped out and started working for me when I offered them a job. I have a number of people that had no formal higher education at all and a couple of guys that didn't know much about computers before they started here.

AFAIC I care about the attitude, I care that the person can work within a team, that I can work with the person, whether they are eager to learn. This is a starting job for all of the people I hire, very few of them worked in the field before, I do not pay much but that is also part of the equation. The people that do not have student debts do not have the same problem as those with debt, they don't need to try and get a highly paid position right away and so they can afford to work with me, where they are gaining more than enough experience so that eventually they are propelled to better paying jobs.

I will say this: I have about equal number of good coders, whether they had any formal computer science training or not, but I go through many people to find good ones but it does not take much time at all to know who is who. Just in the last 2 months I interviewed about 15 people, 3 of them ended up with me, 2 are going to be excellent developers. Out of the 15, 4 decided it was too hard in the first 3 days. 2 decided that they made a mistake and shouldn't be in this field right during our meeting.

In the interview all I do is I show them what we do, how we work, ask them what they like to do and explain the structure here: you are studying here before I put you on an actual paying project. I teach you what you need to know and while I am teaching you, I am not paying you anything. Normally takes 2-3 weeks for a developer to go through training and start being productive. This is my way of doing stuff, I do not care where you studied, what you think you know, I only care to figure out if you are OK for the team and if you can learn and have the right attitude for this company.

They do do that already. Their prices are what they are and not 2 times what they are now for a reason as well. Of-course actually building Apple hardware products is a costly endeavour, nobody else can really afford to do what they do to achieve the save level of user friendliness and beauty. I don't buy Apple products (not because of price, I just do not like their software), but plenty of people do. Their products are priced to satisfy demand of a specific set of population, however if their revenues did not cover their costs and did not make them good profits, they would have lowered prices by lowering the cost of production and very likely by sacrificing build quality to gain market share, however their customers are used to certain degree of quality and shine, and so Apple spends more than anybody else delivering just that.

If Apple could actually cut their production costs in half, while delivering the same quality of product, their prices would go down to increase market share, but they are in business of providing top quality systems (even with some problems, like the new phones that probably bend much easier than some others).

If you in fact believe that you could provide similar quality of the product as Apple for half the price, you yourself could do what you are talking about, but apparently it is not as easy as you say, since other companies do not provide the same, shall we say 'shine' in their hardware so far, while being able to charge much less than Apple.

An additional advantage to those signs is that in a dystopian future, the terrorists are usually the good guys. The info will help direct those good guys to where they can find materials helpful in the fight against evil governments.

Let's see if Finland is so liberal on crime when we up their black and hispanic populations to 30% (like in the U.S.)
Rasicst much...?

I would propose we gut the funding for Finlands schools, shunt any higher income kids with some of the exceptionally smart to excellent schools and let the rest fall into disrepair. We should also lock up a significant number of fathers and some mothers so kids can be raised by single parents or foster care. Finally, we should saddle youth with significant debts that make it difficult for them to progress their lives up the financial ladder. Maybe charging them for education and healthcare would do the trick.

We could also consider adding a back door system of bribery to their political system to allow wealthy people to make their own laws and regulations, or at least polarize people and win over most of the stupids to some sort of self defeating political movement.

I think it would increase government scrutiny. They have to track all sales consumption rather then only labor (currently).

- encryption does not place users beyond the law, Comey likes to have FBI that is beyond the law.

HBO just felt a disturbance, it's like .000001% of their market cried out and was suddenly silenced.

Woah, professional sports might go back to being about the game and the local community? What a disaster.

I could also see someone like Netflix stepping in, shows have changed distributors in the past. I think this is long overdue, even if it only provides HBO original programming it would be a great move.

Preach it brother.

For every one of these spouse monitorings that is used for divorce, there's probably 10 that are used to justify assault or murder.

If my wife has a misbehaving child in public, she gets a totally different attitude then I do. Dad's get a lot of slack.

Ha, the New Deal was part of the socialist infection that lead to the financial crisis that hit USA in the 1970s.

The Federal reserve bank of America, the IRS, New Deal, minimum wage and other price controls, business regulations, inflation created by the Fed and the Treasury is what destroyed actual productive economy in the USA and to look at all of that and conclude that in the 1970s what you observed (default on the dollar, stagflation) was not a result of the diseased socialist economic and monetary policy but to decide that whatever happened in the seventies was the reason for the further failures is to come to a completely wrong conclusion and to misdiagnose the problem.

When you misdiagnose the problem you then tend to misunderstand the necessary solutions, which is what has been happening for the last 50 years as well (and actually earlier, from about 1930, from the moment that the USA government misdiagnosed the problem that it created and by trying to fix it in the completely wrong way caused the Great Depression).

The complete misunderstanding of the underlying economic principles by those, who are supposedly our economic guides, the so called 'mainstream economists', their failure to be impartial on these matters and actually care about the principles of the economic systems, but instead injecting feelings and political and their misguided version of the social agenda into all of it is what allows the politicians to justify completely wrong moves that they sell as 'solutions' to the general population, most of which doesn't know or understand anything about economics, in no small part because of these so called 'experts' who exist solely to muddy the waters and steer people away from understanding for the benefit of those in power.