That's the nice thing about lists. The government says you're on it, and that's that. No proof required. No means to defend yourself or prove your innocence. Nope, you're on the list, and now we're going to bully everyone and cut you out of all the conveniences of modern life. Those who don't co-operate, well, you wouldn't want to be "aiding a terrorist" now would you?

The "free" world has gone insane, and I despair when I see a whole new generation growing up that doesn't seem to have a problem at all with this modus operandi.

Not a troll. They are ALREADY trying to figure out how to stifle free speech. Net Neutrality the concept is great. Net Neutrality as defined by Politicians and the current laws is so screwed up as to be dangerous.

And with the President's penchant for "executive orders", just imagine how the next one will screw it up even more.

Add in Government Control of the Internet via "Net Neutrality" and yeah, same boss = old boss.

It's 2015. We are surrounded with selfish bastards. I wouldn't be surprised if after investigating the wreck the copilot was taking selfies right before the crash.

Producing the alarm sound when the autopilot is turned off, which would have been heard on the recording.

Agreed. The problem is how do you prevent someone unauthorized from getting hold of this "foolproof" entry method into the cockpit by any number of means, including the low tech solution...

No. You are trying to explain a mechanical failure of a door right at the moment when the aircraft suddenly starts descending into mountains all the while during which the copilot also does nothing to try to correct this unscheduled descent and also ignores air traffic control. Seriously if it has wings and floats on the water and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Your version requires many, many things to go wrong at once. The simple answer is, of course, only one thing went wrong - the co-pilot locked the door and set the plane to descend. Occam's razor, and all that.

Adding fuel to this theory is that the co-pilot was detatched and monosyllabic when receiving the briefing about landing in Dusseldorf - he had already made up his mind that he wasn't going to reach Dusseldorf. If the pilot wasn't going to go to the bathroom he probably was planning on killing the pilot anyway.

You're thinking of a wave not a tsunami. Think about rapids in a river, and the standing waves you get over those rocks that are much higher than the surrounding water. A tsunami has a waveLENGTH of several km at least. That is a LOT of volume of water that is going to move up and over the wall.

No. You've never seen what happens to a wave when it hits a wall? All that energy has to go somewhere and if it can't move laterally it will move vertically. How's this for 0.51 meters? That's just a normal wave, not one with a wavelength of > 1 km like a tsunami.

No and no. This is a "feel good" project so that politicians can convince people they are doing something effective while not actually addressing the problem at all. In the meantime I'm sure that the politician's cousin/uncle/brother-in-law who surprisingly "won" the bid for construction is very happy. Politics as usual.

We don't need government help to prosper.

Said the guy, on the internet.

... hm... my next home purchase might just have to have a conditional clause that if I can't get broadband, the deal is off...

You know, like how you can back out once you get an appraisal and learn that there are termites.

The public is moving inexorably toward acceptance of gay marriage.

Check the historical data:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/117...

I don't honestly see Jeb as having that much a chance, at least not if it were done today.

He's winning the money primary, which is the only one that really matters.

I also think there are a lot of folks in the US that just do not want another dynasty name in there, no more Clintons or Bushes.

Well, there's the problem, isn't it? It just doesn't matter that folks in the US think when it comes to US elections. The decisions are always made for us long before election day.

It's not quite that simple. When B purchases the data, the contract between you and A doesn't just disappear. B purchases the data subject to the contract. Since there is no provision in the contract that it's not transferable (at least not on RS's end), that's a normal and acceptable thing to do with a contract. That's not a guarantee that they won't do the most nefarious thing with it that they can get away with, but simply putting up a torrent of it probably won't fly. In fact, that's exactly what the NY AG is talking about here. RS received the data under an agreement. They can't breach that agreement just because they're going bankrupt.