Bureaucrats need jobs too! They are a help to the organization in the same way that leeches are a help to their host organism.
I think this also works if you replace the word economic to get one of the following:
* Faith-based social policy
* Faith-based foreign policy
* Faith-based domestic policy
* Faith-based public policy
* Faith-based science policy
* Faith-based government policy
Or simply remove the word economic and get:
* Faith-based policy
Now once you get through the ice, the ocean dwellers below might not be happy about it.
What is the problem with reducing your energy cost while at the same time helping the planet?
While I usually like pricks, in your case I will make an exception.
Microsoft fixed it, didn't they?
Microsoft takes security seriously.
(Hey, stop it. Stop laughing. Hey, I said STOP LAUGHING!)
> I'll burn more gas and contribute to global warming...with fucking glee!!!
Don't think of it as increasing global warming, which some Texans would tell you doesn't even exist. Rather, think of it as helping the business of all those poor, underprivileged oil producers. Texas is a PRO-business state. One of the legislators said so.
> timer your car tells you something like "maintain 30kph to avoid having to stop".
It would be much more welcome news to hear my car tell me: "increase speed to 85 mph to avoid having to stop".
OT, I know, but shouldn't that be: Premier Election Rigging Systems?
"Symantec has demonstrated it with an ATM in its labs, though it is not revealing the brand of the vulnerable machines . . . because Diebold already has a bad enough reputation with it's e-voting machines.
Furthermore, dedicated ammatuers who focus on a particular subject often have quicker and better coverage of news on that topic. Professional mass media news often over simplifies news, sometimes to the point of almost losing the story.
Then we've all seen the bias of professional news organizations. Freedom of the press is for whoever owns one. Look at how all mainstream mass media was completely silent about SOPA until the Internet forced the issue into the public eye. Then, the professional journalists all told whatever story their owners wanted us to hear.
I'm not saying that professional journalism is all bad. It's just not all good either. And the same for ammatuers. It is up to you to decide what news sources you trust. Some professionals have, and should rightfully so, not be given any trust.
We now have news channels that are more about info-tainment and the most fantastical splashy graphics than they are about real news. Closing down bureaus and getting rid of real investigative reporters because it is cheaper to just do talking heads? Then we also have professional news sources whose entire purpose is to promote a particular ideology. So maybe, increasingly, the only difference between the ammatuers and professionals is how big a budget they have? Now TV news anchors have to be fashion models. But in the past they had to be journalists who eventually earned the position of anchor. They weren't models, they just had to look okay.
So I find arguments about the goodness of professional news over news on the internet to be less than completely convincing.
Wrong. Google was only furious because the NSA was accessing the data without seeing ads.