Had you read the summary, or the article, or the entire Wiki page you'd have caught that:

1. That they're referring to when a person's "blood alcohol level reaches 0.075" [In the article summary].
2. That the explanation given in the Wikipedia article explains what is meant by blood alcohol level, and notes that it is a term used along side Blood Alcohol Content.
3. The units of measure are interchangeable given the way they're measured, this is why the wiki article gives that handy This much in method A is equivalent to this much in method B chart. One gives a mass per volume, the other gives a volume per mass.
4. There is no mention of blood-alcohol percentage, only the beer's alcohol percentage.

If you're referring to the BrAC in use in some countries as the third unit in use, the wiki article clearly states this is a different unit of measure, and not one that the article mentions at all.

I misread the original comment, I thought it was saying the limit was 0.05 incorrectly as .05 is also a limit sometimes used as a lesser charge of under the influence. My bad.

BAC, it's the standard measure of how much alcohol is in your system.

Semantics about BAC vs % aside, you're off by an order of magnitude. Generally it's 0.05, not 0.005 in the US.

At this point, does it really matter if people are simply taking steps to hide their Facebook posts, or if they're starting to PGP sign their emails?

People are starting to do something; starting to feel that it's important enough to do something. That's a positive step, each subsequent story makes them think "Oh, maybe I should do this thing more often, or keep these posts private." That increases the overall digital literacy, for lack of a better term, with each subsequent generation doing better than the past. Most people now know not to emails from strangers with attachments, if not most then certainly a lot more than did 5 years ago. Same goes for password practices, people know they should do better at them regardless of if they do or not.

Eventually people will, or services will do it for them, encrypt their phones, they'll put a half decent password on things, etc. It's just not going to happen overnight. We should be encouraging any little steps people take, not deriding them for not doing enough.

We, in Canada, also count simple assault (slapping, spitting, pushing, etc, which result in no serious bodily harm) where the US does not. From the US wiki article:

"The reported US violent crime rate includes murder, rape and sexual assault, robbery, and assault,[54] whereas the Canadian violent crime rate includes all categories of assault, including Assault level 1 (i.e., assault not using a weapon and not resulting in serious bodily harm).[43][44] A Canadian government study concluded that direct comparison of the 2 countries' violent crime totals or rates was "inappropriate".[55]"

From the articles you linked to, it looks as though Ontario has the lowest rate of violent crime (900/100K residents) with Nunavut as the highest (10K/100K) with an overall rate of 1100/100K. Again, these rates include all forms of assault, not just ones that cause injury like the US does. The US has an overall rate of 386/100K, but does not include simple assault nor sexual assault in that total. Looking at the overall numbers paints Canada as a lot less safe than the US, but digging in a bit suggests that we're actually over-reporting in relation to the US. After having lived in the most violent city in Canada (Winnipeg) for 20+ years, and in some of the most violent places in the US (Baltimore, DC, Richmond) I can say, anecdotally, while I may've been more worried about getting a punch in the mouth in Winnipeg for telling someone to go fuck themselves, I was a lot more worried about getting shot so kept my mouth shut in Baltimore.

So should all Christians be tarred with the same brush due to anti-abortion shootings, the Klan, Westboro Baptists? That is, all Christians are crazy people?

I'm not saying that the majority of non-suicide gun deaths aren't related to criminal activity, I believe that's likely the case. I am saying that it's not 80%, and that discounting gang-related gun violence is not going to make America suddenly a murder-free zone, statistically speaking. Even if we assume Chicago in 2011 is a representative sampling of the country as a whole, gang-related death still makes up less than 35% of the total, removing that from the statistics makes a dent, but it doesn't drop America into the "lowest violent crime rates and murder rates in the world."

America has a gun problem, there's no doubt about that. But the problem isn't necessarily the fact that there are guns available, the problem (as I see it) is that there is a culture which celebrates violence, punishes poverty, abdicates any wide-spread social responsibility to those most vulnerable, and then gives that same populace access to highly efficient killing machines. I'll be the first to get shit from all the rest of my commie-hippy-liberal friends for defending the purpose behind the second amendment: securing the state and the population from tyrants. But I don't think that by and large, that's why Americans have guns. Americans have guns, for the most part, because they feel unsafe and wish to carve out a 9mm sliver of safety in a world they're told is out to get them.

That wish is all fine and dandy, but it doesn't do anything to address the causes of violence. The best thing that's happened to gun violence is social programs designed to remove and reduce the impacts of poverty, if the NRA et-al really wanted to stick it to the man and keep their guns in their cold dead hands, they'd be advocating poverty reduction strategies to eliminate gang-related gun violence; they'd be pouring money into substance abuse programs; mental health programs to prevent violent outbreaks from people with mental illness; legalization and decriminalization of drug USE and pushing sales into regulated schedules like they do with alcohol, tobacco and prescription drugs; they'd be doing what they can to end the over-incarceration of people which destroys community continuity and reduce the actual threats to gun ownership: the highly visible, easily scapegotable gang-related gun crimes.

If you're discounting what you claim the major cause of American gun deaths (illegally owned guns used by criminals) to be, you've got to do the same in Canada. In nearly every category Canada is better off, per capita, than the US in terms of crime.

Also, citation needed for the not counting gangland violence showing low murder rate. The closest thing I can find is a mis-cited report about Chicago that a US conservative site trotted out, sourcing a CDC report that shows nothing of the sort, via Reddit. Here's a well cited refutation of the idea that 80% of gun deaths are caused by gangs, not even after ruling out suicide is it close to true..

Download some binaries from a Usenet provider, that'll max out your connection.

I generally get ~13.5MBps down on my 120Mbps connection from Rogers. Uploading to my VPS gets me a solid 2MBps out of 20Mbps.

I've got a Dell T410 I bought second hand. I've got 6x1TB WD Black SATA drives attached to a PERC5 in RAID 6. It's got 48GB of RAM and dual Xeon E5504s. It's running Hyper-V 2012R2, and hosts my MS home lab for testing, licensed through the now defunct Technet program. The MS lab is all 2012R2 and consists of an Exchange 2013 server, 2 DCs, and a CA. I use this mostly for testing stuff I'm going to do at work, as well as learning Windows garbage I wouldn't normally get to.

I've also got 8 Linux VMs running on it. 6 are running Ubuntu 14.04, one is running Debian Wheezy and one is running Debian Sid. The 6 Ubuntu boxes run my internet based PVR so that I don't have to deal with building a proper PVR to record my totally current active cable service; internet based Blu-Ray ripper so that I don't have to actually rip the discs I buy all the time; Plex Media Server to connect the aforementioned backups to my Chromecast/mobile devices/whatever; SABNzb to actually perform the backups; a custom WordPress installation running SupportPress so that my wife and roommate can submit tickets to remind me to fix the Roomba; a BitTorrent Sync box so that I don't need to deal with Dropbox. The Wheezy box is a Sendmail server for sending mail and the Sid box is one that I use to mess around with and test Linux compatibility with some Python stuff I have.

I've got a file server which has been running OpenIndiana, but I had to move that back to Ubuntu because OI doesn't currently support my motherboard. It's got an 80GB Intel 520 SSD as the OS drive, and a janky ZFS setup which works well enough for home use. The zpools are setup across 3 RAIDZ pools, each cnsists of a 4x1TB, 4x2TB or 4x3TB RAIDZ array. Each array also has a 20GB slice of a 120GB Vertex 3 as cache drives, with the last slice going to the smallest zpool as a slog. The smallest zpool gets the slog since it's running dedup as it houses backups for the Hyper-V box, my desktop and laptop and my wife and roommate's computers. It's got an i3 and 32GB of ECC RAM.

I'm currently in the process of waiting for a server to configure off-site replication of all my important/irreplaceable data to a hosted server through So You Start, formerly OVH. $42 a month for 2TB of off-site storage seems like a pretty great deal to me. It'll be running FreeBSD I suppose, since they don't offer Solaris.

A VPN? To connect to where, from where? Are you doing this for something to do, or because you want to implement the best solution? Do you just want better router software?

Install Tomato or DD or OpenWRT or any one of their variants on your existing router.

Building your own in the name of security isn't going to work unless you really know what you're doing, which you said you don't in your summary. That sounds like a dick thing to say, but it's not. Security is difficult for people that know what they're doing, when people who don't try to DIY it, it's almost universally bad.

I've got a dedicated file server running Ubuntu 14.04 at home with a small group of ZFS pools (4x1TB, 4x2TB, 4x4TB each in RAIDZ). The FS used for backups has dedup turned on, everything else uses compression, but not dedup. It serves out 15 SMB shares, 10 netatalk shares and ~20 NFS shares to 3 Windows clients, 6 OSX clients all using TimeMachine and normal file access, 10 Linux VMs doing rsync backups and other normal file server stuff. Data is primarily HD video being streamed, as well as backups for everything.

The server is built on a low end i3 with 32GB ECC RAM, all disks are consumer grade (WD blacks for the 1TB and greens for everything else) attached to an LSI 9211-8i doing JBOD only. Sustained writes of 2x1Gbps over the network and internal writes are sustained over 3Gbps. I have 30GB of RAM dedicated to the pool, but really could get away with using about 6, dedup tables are currently ~3GB. I did a bunch of stress testing when I first set things up (scripted boatloads of fake read/write requests from each client) and CPU usage topped out at ~80%.

Home usage on an older desktop is not out of the question, assuming you can host the drives and maybe put in a total of 8GB RAM.

Not in my understanding.

The recent supreme court decision related to this announcement and several others recently indicate that according to our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we're guaranteed the right to privacy, and our actions online have a reasonable expectation of privacy and annonymity. Constitutionally speaking, we're safe online from unreasonable (unwarranted) search, it's not an issue of *a* law, it's an issue of the supreme law of the land. The government could try to amend our Charter to remove, or reduce this right, but that's a complicated process.

Any laws passed here have to be constitutionally sound, and lately the supreme court here has been coming down on what many are seeing as government overreach.

The comment isn't blaming the guns for the suicide. It's stating the fact that if you buy a gun, you are likely to use it to kill yourself.