About the assassination of a specific, currently in power, POTUS? I don't know of any.

I know of movies that assassinate a generic POTUS, or perhaps a previous POTUS. I have never seen a movie in which the current president (at the time of filming), has been assassinated.

I've gone back and forth on this. On one hand, you have Sony and the movie theaters ceding to the demands/threats of the hackers/terrorists. On another hand, you have Hollywood doing one of the things it does best, pushing the limits of shock value for the sake of monetary gain. On the third hand, you have a smaller group provoking a larger, despotic group, with considerable power, with little regard to the tensions it would cause.

If the movie were merely insulting, I would think the reaction of North Korea to be unwarranted. But this is basically a threat, however unlikely, backed by a US company and its Japanese parent. If I were to create a fiction involving the assassination of the president of the US, you can be pretty sure the US government would try to shut it down.

I guess it depends on how complex the individual is.

Obviously this is his method of escape. He will conceal himself inside the statue, and then it will be shipped to Russia, among other places.

Could probably pump a gas out at the lens so debris and dust don't make it onto the lens.

At the risk of sounding like a luddite:
Off and on I will think about how people want to treat the internet as a utility. We try to conserve water, we try to conserve electricity, we are metered for these. For phones, we pay for minutes, though you can opt for unlimited plans, and the infrastructure is such that unlimited plans don't burden others. For cars, we have gasoline (though technically not a utility), and when gas is cheap, people buy larger vehicles. When the price of gas goes up, people become concerned about gas efficiency.

Noone is terribly concerned about "conserving" the internet, or conserving computer resources. Every year computers get faster, and every year websites get less efficient. More bloat, bigger images, more script nonsense. They find more ways to update the browser, to make it smarter and yet more bloated. My NoScript and RequestPolicy plugins are so laden with websites that aren't obviously related to the one I'm on. If I'm lucky, there are one or two sites with a related name, or a CDN, and I can allow these and continue on. If not, I sometimes temporarily allow all, sick of going down the rabbit hole and just wanting to get to my destination.

I'm sure there is an electricity cost related to the extra computing. The time required for page loads is simply time you've wasted, unless you have managed to multitask a few pages. A site taking 15 seconds more than it did a year ago isn't a lot one time, but it adds up page after page, day after day. Even mobile versions of sites, using 4G services, load slower than they did years ago.

I just want my information, I want it simple, and I want it now. I'm sick of all this crap that is designed to make my life better somehow. I liked my life the way it was. I liked being able to do Verbatim searches on Google and actually getting verbatim results. I don't need fancy maps that take 10 times as long to load, I need simple maps that work fast when the network is congested. I don't need functionality changes to make things look slicker. I want to be able to do more with the hardware I have, and we just keep going in the opposite direction.

This Bennett Hasselton thing has gotten out of hand enough to become a meme. Now I have to read his name when he isn't writing some clickbait article. I'm done with Slashdot.

It's not competitor, it's counterfeiter. These are chips stamped with FTDI's logo that aren't made by FTDI. http://hackaday.com/2014/02/19...

The chips are counterfeits using the logo of FTDI stamped on the the chip. http://hackaday.com/2014/02/19...

I can put AIDs in my mouth all I want and not get AIDs.
If I put Ebola in my mouth, I will get infected with Ebola.
Please stop spreading this nonsense that Ebola is as difficult as AIDs to transmit. It is carried in more bodily fluids, and can be spread by contact with those fluids. It does not require a wound, as AIDs does.

Poster is entirely aware that his unreliability comes from his mobile links. That is why he is asking the question. Better, affordable, providers probably don't exist in his area, and this is the game that he has decided he wants to play.

Chances are that his situation is similar to mine: around $20 a month towards Freedompop (WiMax) for one mobile connection, and tethering through my phone (4G) for another connection.
My other options are $55/month for Verzion FIOS (they no longer offer DSL in my area and have no affordable lower bandwidth plans available to me), or Comcast, which I would rather avoid based on all of the horror stories. Unless Google shows up to offer these guys some competition, the idea of a better provider is largely a myth.

The cellular networks are usually adequate. Latency and bandwidth are generally good when demand isn't peaked. When there is a lot of demand (friday nights, for instance), you just have to hope for the best, as latency will be very unpredictable. However, even when the connection seems good during non-peak hours, mobile networks seem to be plagued by random latency spikes. You can be playing a game with less than 200ms ping and all of a sudden you're looking at 1000ms+ ping times.
If you could use both mobile networks at once, the chances of them both crapping out at the same time is going to be less than it is for one or the other.

They also skipped over hair care products. Silicon is becoming much more common in them. I see dimethicone more often than not in shampoos and conditioners.

This.

The problem is that there is a very random factor involved here, and that factor is humans.

In an age of not taking responsibility for our actions, we are relying on people to 1) recognize they may be sick, and 2) take the proper actions once they suspect that they are sick.
I can imagine all sorts of scenarios, someone in denial about having it, someone that thinks they have a more benign illness and can't afford to take off from work, someone uneducated about Ebola, someone who denies the existence of Ebola, or someone who thinks that God will protect him from Ebola and that he will recover on his own.
Think of a somewhat possible worst case scenario: This person lives in New York city, takes 2 or 3 different trains/buses to get to work, maybe uses an elevator, visits a public cafeteria, doesn't wash their hands. How many people could be exposed in two days?

It might not be likely to happen, but if it does, how would you contain it?

With current consoles, these games can be patched. So not only is Ubi just pissing and moaning, but they could still find ways to dumb down the AI, remove NPC's, and find other ways to lower CPU load. Instead of changing their game to make it better, they fingerpoint at the thing that they cannot change.

No mod points, or I would have modded GP up.

An Ebola outbreak in the US is undesirable by pretty much everybody here, except maybe for people with stock in the companies producing cures and vaccines.

Travel bans seem entirely reasonable to me. If aid workers want to go over and help, then by all means we should have some sort of quarantine procedure in place so we can get them home. But we don't need Joe Schmoe going over there, getting infected, and bringing it back with him. It's an unnecessary risk, just as it is unnecessary to take a leisure trip to Liberia in the middle of an epidemic.

I am a little surprised that noone is fear mongering about someone intentionally spreading Ebola. It seems like the perfect thing to let loose in a country you are at odds with, whether you are another country or a terrorist organization.