I say leave it this way. There are people who by their nature will always trend towards lazy and stupid solutions. Give them those solutions so that we can pick them out easier when we're hiring people.

Remember, these industries are monopolies and their opponents are individuals. We will have a period of adjustment where the dying titans make themselves look even worse and fail to justify their own purpose by lashing out against things which are a benefit to mankind.

The basic problem here is the basic problem of our government anymore. We really do not have individual representation against corporate interests.

after reading their denial?

The denial reeks of clintonesque cynicism, where one is tacitly splitting hairs in some clever semantic way which not only to me demonstrates guilt, but a culture of guilt and a preparedness for smirking dishonesty.

These are the people we entrust with our encryption? We are good and truly fucked.

is that it betrays a dangerous naivete about human nature.

Remember that if something can be exploited for gain, in any way, without some kind of solid governance it will be exploited for gain. This is human nature.

This situation should have appeared inevitable.

What an idea! Tax technologies that replace old, wasteful ones to prop up the old wasteful ones. Oh my god the horse and buggy people should have thought of this, or the gas lamp makers who were so rudely displaced by light bulbs.

This is such a fantastically brilliant idea that it could really only come from a California politician. They are truly unique in that regard.

There are so many things wrong with this proposal on so many levels, that it is upsetting that it has gotten as far as it has. The idea that we should further burden citizens with a tax rather than simply charge a sustaining amount for services is absurd, when a significant use of those services is used for bulk-rate distribution of shit mail that wastes resources and commercial mail.

This is public support of corporate welfare, again.

Considering that it is currently a felony to violate the TOS of a website, of which you may or may not be aware - and the terms of service can change, or be reasonable, or not.

I wonder how many people here would thrive if vigorously prosecuted?

I wonder how many people here understand the complete disruption and destruction of your life that would occur if you were prosecuted?

Even with a pending felony prosecution you would be unable to find employment, at all. What defense could you provide on your own savings? A defense lawyer for a federal legal case will run you in the tens of thousands a month. How long can you afford that? A public defender will amount to taking the entire case on the prosecution's terms.

How much life and happiness would you have left after months in jail? Do you have enough savings to provide for your family if you had no income?

Criminalization is a disease of government, and must be cured. Punishments not fitting the crime are unconstitutional. This man killed himself because of how our government treated him. That's not a unique situation, it's just one you happen to know about.

The second amendment is what guarantees that all of the other amendments are regarded as rights, rather than privileges by those who fancy themselves as being 'in power.'

It's very, very easy for those who govern to fancy themselves rulers. Begging to be disarmed as a populace for the sole purpose of a false sense of security based on deliberately unclear and misleading statistics and hyperexploitation of emotional circumstances is a result of naive and lazy surrender.

The most important factor to bear in mind here is that disarming people has never resulted in an improved life for the people who were disarmed. Certainly not in extreme cases such as Germany and Austria in the 30's, but even without those examples of rule we have the examples that are ignorantly put forward as our own progression in this country. Britain, who enjoys a 400% higher violent crime rate than the US, and who has had steady increases in gun crime since guns were banned. Australia which has had a whopping 40%+ increase in violent and sexual assaults since banning civilian ownership of firearms for personal defense.

There has never been a single case where the disarming of a population has led to anything but the victimization of that population, either from government or from criminals who become hawks amongst doves.

Secondly and equally important is the gross overstatement of the weight and impact of crime in the US, and the violent crime rate. The US has significantly lower crime than any country in the world with tougher gun control laws, and that is even taking the high crime areas into account. The murder rate and violent crime rate have both dropped by 50% (fbi.gov) in the past 20 years in the US, but that figure is never mentioned because it doesn't induce panic.

The only place in the US that crime remains high is in poor uirban areas. New Orleans and Detroit leading the numbers.

The LOWEST places for violent crime, in fact any crime at all in the US are the places with the highest per capita gun ownership. 60% or more per family gun ownership in the rural and midwest, and those places taken independently have some of the lowest crime rates in the world.

After all the emotional arguments, the numbers just do not support any rational basis to say that disarming people will result in anything positive for the people being disarmed. The criminals won't turn their guns in, and aren't obeying those laws now. The guns being demonized aren't the ones being used in crimes.

The only new threat after disarming the populace is that the government is now free to provoke further unrest without danger of any reprisal or resistance, which is not a positive. Remove the temptation and you remove the crime. So long as the possibility of tyranny is nil, the opportunity for it is also nil. We owe it to ourselves to really accept that the numbers don't justify letting government solidify power and disempower people, which is what this is really all about.

People need to stop being guided by fear, and retake control of their own lives.

"Are you still having problems with people reverting your commits at your new job?"

Had a pointy haired boss who insisted on coming in when he was sick, which wasn't often because he lived alone and had no kids.

This is the kind of guy who doesn't understand that people who have kids that go out of doors and play with other kids tend to get minor illnesses far more often and even pulled the dick move of comparing himself to other people in the office.

In such a circumstance it's very awkward to point out that the guy doesn't have the same social contact other people do, or kids and family so the comments get left unresponded to.

Needless to say, the party broke up.

I thought we were pro-property rights?

Considering the sad shape of education in this country...

9 months of poor classroom ratios, excessive homework and eliminating PT and focusing on rote learning standardized tests? No, we do not need more of the same, and yes - children do need time to be children.

These comments don't surprise me though. Competence isn't what seems to attract individuals to a career in decisionmaking in public educational systems.

I make a good living being the command line guy in a world of gui-constrained idiots. I don't mind keeping it that way.

is for the security and safety of other national interests to avoid using MS Windows at all, since it is most obviously being seeded with vulnerabilities.