Security Essentials is worthless. It used to be decent years ago but is one of the poorer performing Antivirus products now. For Free Panda is supposed to perform well. Really anything but MSSE is a good idea, regardless of how safe you surf. Just because you only visit "safe" sites doesn't mean malware isn't being handed out via some drive by advert.

Regardless of the licensing, a lot of the content on the site is useful because its just unavailable otherwise.

I wonder this about Youtube. What if it was just shutdown? At this point you can laugh but it has historical value. Beyond the cat videos there are documentaries, content from laserdisc, obscure commercials, very useful user howtos and reviews etc. This list goes on and on. If all you search for on youtube is funny videos then you are missing out on a treasure trove of content that spans many decades.

At some point I think the site will have to become a public archive. Which it kind of already is, it just needs the legal status so that some greedy corporation can't just turn off the switch. Now if only we could cut down on the crap that is a result of everyone trying to monetize youtube. But I guess that's wishful thinking because without that Google might just shut down Youtube outright.

I'm completely shocked that when given additional opportunity, you still won't back up your claims.

The bizarre thing is that you're accusing me of "singling out one particular issue based purely on the person implementing it," when you have literally no example of me ever doing that, ever, least of all in this discussion, where if anything I was taking Gruber's side.

Not in any way, no, I did not.

You're a liar.

I agree. I am nearly completely transparent and obvious and clear. I lack pretense or disguise.

No. It's true that the framers and most people who understand politics want the people to be ignorant about most issues in government, because otherwise, the people would be spending too much time watching government and not enough time enjoying life and being productive. Everyone should want to be ignorant about most things, especially most things government does. Otherwise you'll be miserable.

But it's not true that they want people to be ignorant, but with a delusion of lack of ignorance. You're just making things up.

There's no objective reason why it's a bad thing.

I'm a dope because you ... agreed with me? You think that little of yourself?

You're a liar.

Well, yes, people who believe what they are told -- and then profess to know those things -- without investigating it, are stupid.

Gruber was mostly right, although the word "stupid" is probably not what he meant. But the fact is that whoever believed it wasn't a tax, it wouldn't raise rates, it wouldn't force you to change plans and possibly doctors, etc., was ignorant. Not stupid, necessarily, but ignorant. That said, someone who is ignorant and thinks that he actually knows these things is kinda stupid. So all the news folks, for example, who said that what Republicans said about the ACA were lies ... they were stupid.

The fact is that almost everything the GOP said about the ACA was true. Federal funding of abortions, subsidies for illegals, massive government control defined at a later date by an administrator and not Congress, death panels, increased taxes and premiums, decreased choice ... all of it was and is true.

I'd expect an article talking about criminally prosecuting Gruber would at least make reference to some violation of the criminal code. I see no crime. Neither the author nor his interviewee mention any crime. He makes vague references to "Deceit. Fraud. Premeditated felonious theft.," but he simply gave his opinions; he didn't implement anything. The theft was by the government, not him. The fraud was perhaps aided by him, but no court has ever found that government fraud of this type is prosecutable, so prosecuting a private citizen for aiding the government in something that can't be prosecuted makes no sense.