I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Scolds? Really? What is this, kindergarten? How about a nice hefty fine to make them take security seriously? Oh, I forgot, can't be angering the real bosses. :/

RIP. Thank You.

in the stove!

HO HO! It's hidin' in the stove, eh?

Homer Simpson, eh? He's not as stupid as he looks, or sounds, or our best testing indicates...

Just when large CRT monitors became affordable albeit heavy, the companies rolled out smaller flat panels. Not only where they cheaper for them to make, they were cheaper to ship and had much lower field defect rates. So of course they charged more for them.

Similarly right when magnetic drives are near-free, the companies roll out smaller, and in some cases slower SSD's which are less expensive to make, cheaper to ship and over the long run (probably) have lower field defect rates born of their no moving parts. So of course they will charge more for them.

Everything old is new again. Wait and see companies that offer Netbooks with NO storage as an 'option' and then charge up the wazoo for a crappy sized SSD touted as 'premium'.

Number 1:

He better start his own company, because the only idiot that would hire the guy is himself.

Number 2:

Can't wait to NOT BUY A DAMN THING from ANY COMPANY THAT BEARS HIS NAME.

-Hack

Better watch out, because you're next.

You see, they have infiltrated the Federal Government. The same crazies (yes, just like in the movie) just happened to get control of places like California and Detroit first. This is not an R or a D problem. Both parties are infected. They talk freedom and civil liberties while they are in the minority, but as soon as they get into power, they start stripping them away at a faster and faster pace, until the whole damn world either cuts them loose, or the whole world collapses back into the Dark Ages.

The realistic thing to do would be to make the jury a completely random sampling: if you're selected for jury duty, you're going to be on the jury, period. None of this defense/prosecution exclusion based on knowledge, crap.

Yeah, you'd have more hung juries and you'd have more guilty people getting off, but that's not a conviction, upholding the whole "guilty until proven innocent" part.

Another thing to do would be to make the jury randomly selected within the demographic of the defender, but with a bias not only for the defense but also for the offense: in this case, you'd have a statistically higher number of tech workers and government employees, for instance. (Of course, knowing how gov't works, that would certainly bias the jury in his favor.)

Making a "jury of peers" is dicey because it can lead to nepotism and plutocratic results with ease, where no justice is found. Still, I think I would prefer this to the current setup.