Why do you think that being for expansion in one area means you're for expansion in all areas? Clearly, government needs to do more to promote competition in the ISP business, and just as clearly, government is overreaching with the TSA and spy agencies, which need to be more limited. It's no so simple to say "fuck big government" or "let's expand government", either of which is such an extraordinary simplification of the fact that it blows me away that people take either side seriously.

BTW, people will hate the IRS regardless as to whether they grow, shrink, or just stay the same size, so they're pretty much irrelevant to whether you hate the size of government as long as it exists. Don't; forget, the early history of the US was rife with infighting over taxes.

It really is due to municipalities and states in the US. South Korea is so far ahead because there's a bunch of choices - 4 major ISPs, plus 2 of their major cell operators are both rolling out LTE-A at 300mbps, which is entirely a viable option instead of the land-based ISPs. In the US, the federal government hasn't rectified the problem that states and local governments are causing with their exclusivity deals and blocks against municipal broadband, but it's not entering into those agreements for the locals either. The federal government is allowing the problem to persist, at least to some degree - I don't know how well they'd be able to argue for striking down local laws like this, even if there was a will to do it. Net neutrality is much easier for the federal government to get involved in than how states deploy the infrastructure.

Yeah, about a 12 foot wingspan prop plane.....it'll get shot down long before it gets near a target like the WH. I think the guy from Ohio actually had the best concept for trying this type of attack - small amount of explosives on a jet-style RC that would be fast moving (I've seen them go up past 400mph) and hard to hit, and is more likely to actually make it inside of the building since you could aim for the glass.

On the WH specifically, I doubt you'd be able to have even a few pounds of C4 do significant damage to the building from the outside - it's not exactly a soft target built like a standard house, where 4 pounds of C4 might completely demolish it from the outside. The entire building is at a minimum bulletproof, and the walls are likely backed by blast panels. That was one of the most troubling things about the guy who ran inside, IMO. If the threat is outside of the WH, there's not much to worry about unless they're carrying a small nuke or flying a jetliner into it. If the threat is inside the WH, though, they can cause a massive amount of damage with just a gun, or a small quantity of relatively easy to access explosives.

I'm thinking you overestimate the payload capacity of drones, at least for quadcopters (as opposed to plane-styles, which I know nearly nothing about, but would likely be terrifying without any explosive payload if it went full speed into the capital dome). One of the most popular large models for carrying heavier payloads, the DJI Phantom 2, can carry about 320g reliably. That is, it won't be sluggish and unable to compensate for wind gusts at that kind of payload. The thing is, this drone is *big*. I doubt the drone in the story was larger than a Syma X11 or similar toy, which you'd be hard-pressed to even see coming, tops out at about 15g of payload, can't compensate for more than about 10mph wind gusts, and won't hear outdoors in a city unless it gets within 5 feet or so. A Phantom, OTOH, is large enough to see and hear at a distance, and slow enough to shoot down. There's also a huge price difference, as a Phantom is over $1000, while one of those toy drones is in the $50 ballpark. In other words, this is only really a major threat when explosives advance to the point where you can fit that C4 block's charge into a 15g, 2" x 2" package.

This is really aimed at irresponsible behavior by large companies. Large companies are undoubtedly going to leave a massive trail of emails and tons of other proof in the wake of the discovery as they try to rectify the problem, and subpoenas will get that proof into the court system. Small companies aren't going to be worth bringing to court, since there's a decent chance that there's no real proof.

I'm glad the common standards for safety make it safe to do 65 on the Turnpike both in mid summer at 90 degrees and in light snow sub-32.

You can espouse the benefits of common safety standards all you want, but the Turnpike, along with most other interstates, was designed for near 100mph speeds (if not exceeding that) when no traffic is present in good weather with a capable car, and using "common safety standards" as your excuse for the government screwing you is a farce unless they're actually changing the speed limit based on the actual conditions present on the road. It's funny too, because they do change the speed limit of the Turnpike occasionally - downwards, in bad conditions. Specifically, for the government's benefit, not ours. Masquerading as safety, when the truth is that safety would be the reason only if it moved in both directions.

Have you ever talked to a cop about speed limits? Do you know what the majority I've met have said about them? "We can't pull over everyone going this speed, so we look for people who are actually dangerous, whether they're swerving or going so far over that it's unsafe. You're not going to get pulled over going 5 above it." Gops completely understand what's safe to drive on a given road at a given time - they're trained more extensively than your average driver, both in recognizing dangerous behaviors in others and how to drive themselves. Have you ever seen a cop observing the speed limit with open road in front of them outside of a residential area? Speed limits, as a hard limit for safety regardless as to the actual conditions present, are bullshit, and cops tacitly recognize that fact and use their near-immunity to get away with what you're defending so vehemently. Case closed.

I'm glad you bolded this part, because I completely to agree, and it's one of the most important parts of understanding management overall. Management anything requires a certain skillset, particularly focused on listening and delegation (recognizing employees' skillsets and enabling employees to use them efficiently). If you're able to do that, you're able to manage any employee in any industry once you have a basic understanding of what the company and that particular group is trying to achieve.

I'm guessing you've never heard of this little show, easily one of the most successful of all time, originally aired when I was 1 year old and still airing new episodes, called Cops? Commercial use is absolutely something to be concerned about with body cam record requests, and to think that it's some sly comment with an ulterior motive is ignoring that there's a real, undeniable truth to it.

You're cherrypicking numbers here. I know it both from facts and because I was a young driver at the time, so I paid a lot of attention to gas prices. Gas happened to be on a low swing at that moment in time, and not just because it was winter (which always equates to lower prices), but because of the correction from the previous summer's unbelievably high oil prices. Look at the 2008 summer price average, and you'll see gas was over $4/gallon for a couple weeks - using that number would be cherrypicking too, though, since that was the spike that led directly to the valley you're citing. The real average gas price for the second half of Bush's presidency averages out to about $2.50-$2.75/gallon (with drastic swings between summer and winter, as you'd expect).

I don't know about some of what you're saying in enough detail to answer, and some of what you're saying is correct (like warrantless spying), but on other counts, you're incorrect. Medical costs are still rising, but at a lower rate than in previous years; it will take time to know if this is a temporary lull that would have happened anyway or a result of the ACA. Guantanamo was slated to be closed, and Obama repeatedly signed orders to do so, but congress blocked the use of funding to move the prisoners, then repeatedly moved in different ways to block the shutdown. Destabilization in north and west Africa has pretty much nothing to do with Obama. In the case of west Africa, we have absolutely every reason to be fighting ebola, while in northern Africa, we're really not getting sucked into their current destabilization in any meaningful way. You're not doing your argument any favors by tossing in things that either show signs of improving (health care costs), or are clearly not his fault for not being able to deliver (Guantanamo).

You do realize Cook County isn't a congressional district, right? It's represented by 11 separate districts, almost all of which bleed out from Cook County's boundaries.

Doesn't really matter to me, as long as they were diligent in checking their temperature/being checked. Ebola patients don't go from beginning of fever to vomiting in the span of any but the longest plane flights.

I think one of the big things the CDC should do, though, is mention that the joint pain and lethargy that a lot of the patients are experiencing are frequently a precursor to the fever. If someone in contact with an ebola patient has unusual joint pain (i.e. not a preexisting condition like a bad knee) or lethargy, that should be the signal to get them into isolation, instead of waiting for the fever. We've heard about one of the two being their first symptom from almost everyone who has had it in the US, and they're well-known symptoms of ebola in general.

You do realize that ebola causes, essentially, massive vomiting and diarrhea, and most people that die of ebola die of the dehydration it causes, right? Hazmat suits are entirely necessary given that bodily fluids aren't just located inside the body when dealing with an infected patient - they're flying out of every orifice.

My local Stop n' Shop (supermarket chain) has both available. It's absolutely wonderful having the scanner for larger trips, and being able to use self-checkout for small trips.

The richness needed to drive one also makes it so that people who own Vipers are less likely to be ticketed for a multitude of reasons (including but not limited to the overlap between race and wealth, and the areas where rich people live), so their speeding wouldn't show up in infraction statistics at the same rate as others.