This is exactly what the world should do.
When I schedule a meeting, I just pick the time and date and everyone knows instantly when that is, it doesn't matter what time of year it is, and when [Country X] has arbitrarily decided to change times this year.
I moved from Saskatchewan (who doesn't change times) to BC and I'm not looking forward to it. Sure I'll get an extra hours of sleep this weekend, but I lose it a few months later.
The sad thing is, the number of people in SK who want to change times, or worse yet, think that province should switch to MST. For those who don't know, Saskatchewan falls completely within CST. It generally becomes an argument about this time every year.
How is that even close to comparable?
He's saying that if you're accused of a crime, and a judge issues a court order to allow authorities to look at your phone (or other device), they have the legal right to. However, if that device is encrypted and the vendor has no way of decrypting it, it's up to you, the accused to provide the decryption key. By "forgetting" the key, you're placing yourself beyond the law.
Indeed. It's "ham" (or better, "radio amateur"), just like it's not the INTERNET or SLASHDOT.
Part 97 only applies to US hams, or foreign hams with reciprocity transmitting from US territory.
Of course our plan is imperfect. It's just less imperfect than yours is.
Choice is great, and normally I'm a big fan of choice, but when Canadians live about 2-3 years longer than Americans, on average, and spend a little more than 50% of what Americans spend on health care, I view our compromises as being acceptable. I like the economic freedom that detaching health insurance from employment provides. The two times in my life I have had pressing issues, I received immediate care. And frankly, it would be best if the US remained a private health care nation because, if I prefer care faster than my province's system provides it, I can hop across the border for it. I don't expect to have that need, but I still have that choice.
No one is uninsured here, and that means no one consumes health care and free rides on those that can afford to pay (or choose to pay), and even those of modest means will get quality care. Preexisting conditions are a non-issue. To me, those advantages outweigh the loss of choice. (And to be truthful, I do have choice - Canada has 13 systems here, one for every province and territory, so if I don't like the health care where I live, I can hop to another province. That's adequate for me.)
Public health care systems work fine in a lot of places (most of western Europe; Australia; New Zealand; Canada; and probably others). If the US can't come up with an efficient-enough bureaucracy to make it work there, then it's really time to change how you guys do things.
It works fine where I live.
As for ice cream, if it's causing people health issues, tax it. As a bonus, the money's in the tax system to put directly into health care, if your system is rationally designed.
This is why you need a single payer system. My premiums don't go up because I ate too many ice cream cones, because I don't pay premiums per se. I pay taxes and my taxes pay for medical treatment for anyone who lives in my jurisdiction.
The solution to your problems, perversely to sycodon's preferences, is *more* government, oddly enough, not less.
First, nowhere does it say they were using SMTP, at least not that I saw. They are likely using SMTP with TLS.
Secondly, they had intended on sending that document within their own domain, which likely means it wouldn't have left the control of GS anyways. I'm not saying this is the best way to do things, but it's not necessarily insecure.
There's no question that content providers like streaming because it means we're really just renting the content. There's also no question that it's super convenient (I have Netflix like a lot of people do) but I don't view it as a replacement to physical media, but rather as an augmentation.
I'm a fool because I have a cottage where there isn't inexpensive broadband or a 4-terabyte server?
Well said. I buy my music on CDs for the same reason. (Granted, I rip it and file the originals away almost instantly; I still actually use my DVD and Blu-Ray media but that might change soon too if I can ramp up the server space).
I still buy physical DVDs - primarily because they are passively archival and don't depend on me a) having connectivity or b) having my server nearby. I view programming at some locations (like my cottage) where it's easier to bring a few DVDs than it is to copy a bunch of data onto a hard disk and then connect a computer to the television.
I also wonder if the energy consumption considers the issues of ramped-up Internet infrastructure and server capacity required to store, back up and stream the content. This isn't free and isn't emission-neutral. High-def (e.g. Blu-Ray) content is even moreso whereas the cost of a Blu-Ray disc versus DVD is actually almost trivial. Once you own the Blu-Ray player, you're done except for the marginal two or three dollar cost for the higher definition media.