Exactly. If no one bids on anything (because the consequences are too grave), then the government will be forced to change its procurement procedures. Doing things the way they're working now obviously isn't working, and the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result, yet that's exactly what most people seem to want to do.
Is the iTunes Store not to your satisfaction? It's always worked fine for me. I never notice the DRM.
Well there's still ads. He didn't say anything about blocking ads, just tracking and content. Of course, I'm not sure why you'd want to do that.
"I'm appreciated here!"
Unfortunately there's no simple, black-and-white answer to this question.
Ideally, in a good democratic society, people would decide democratically what the minimum "bar" is, and anything below that is considered neglect. We already do this to an extent in the US, with "CPS" in many states taking kids away if they're found to be abused or neglected. Usually, though, CPS is criticized for allowing too much abuse before they intervene (or just being plain incompetent, or overworked/understaffed, etc.), rather than being too heavy-handed (though this happens too occasionally). Societies do have a right to decide on minimum levels of acceptable conduct, and punish people who don't conform ("disturbing the peace" laws are an example of this). The main problem we have is our democracy isn't very good (too much corruption, bad voting systems), so the actions of the government can't really be assumed to accurately reflect the will of the people.
How about denying medical insurance coverage to those that fail to get vaccinated, unless they can demonstrate that they are a member of a recognized religious congregation that specifically is against vaccination as a part of church dogma?
No. I'm sorry, I don't see this as a valid excuse. Freedom of religion has gone too far; if you can't properly take care of your kids, they should be taken away from you.
No, I think you didn't parse the story carefully enough. If you look, it's saying that MITM attacks are the kind of thing that COULD be used to break SSL, if you had bogus certificates. It does not say that there's any evidence of this actually happening on a large scale, and indeed one of the surprising things about the Snowden leaks so far is that there isn't much (any?) evidence of SSL sabotage, even though it obviously must be one of their highest priority targets. The MITM attacks that NSA/GCHQ have been doing have all been reported as being against sites that, at the time the attacks took place, were not doing SSL.
Regardless, if all you want to do is inject an exploit into a browser you don't need to beat SSL. It's not widespread enough so eventually someone will browse to a non-SSLd website (like slashdot) and get pwnd. At that point you can read all traffic before it gets encrypted.
Syria is a country far from the UK that has no connection to Britain at all, and despite that we (I'm also a Brit) are so amazed at ourselves for the fact that politicians finally voted no. Why the hell did the decision even come up in the first place? Right, because both Blair and Cameron are warmongers who squeal with delight the moment a far off country destabilises because it gives them a chance to prance around on the "world stage", as they put it. Not so different from what they accuse Putin of, is it?
Ukraine is right on the border of Russia and has a lot of Russian people in it. The first thing the new Ukrainian government did (if you want to call the outcome of a revolution/coup a government) is start to try and suppress the Russian language. If you're looking for a better analogy, perhaps look at Ireland, the long-festering Troubles and the occupation-like conditions that parts of Ireland were put under by the British Army at times.
George Bush and Obama were also very popular at times. Is the majority of the USA suffering from mass psychosis?
Putin is popular because the economy of Russia has recovered a lot since he took power. There isn't really anything magical about this. It's the same with China. Leaders that make poor populations a lot wealthier get a lot of slack in the authoritarianism department.
Actually the latest polling on Scotland gives more like 38-40% in the "yes" block.
I would like to see evidence for your claim that Ukraine is not really a divided country and that's all Putin's propaganda. Everything else I've seen suggests that Ukraine really is a highly divided country with a large population of people who would prefer to be a part of Russia than the EU. I'm not convinced this is something Putin is just making up.
The problem here is that the west has already decided it doesn't matter what the outcome of the Crimean referendum is - if Russia wins, that must be because of foul play, intimidation or excessive "propaganda" (as if western elections are not also filled with propaganda). In fact, I don't see any way the people living there could ever actually decide they prefer to be aligned with Russia without western powers decrying it as the work of the dastardly Putin.
Here's an idea. Why don't you go compare American propaganda (Obama's comments) vs Russian propaganda (Putin's comments). In particular note that Obama doesn't even bother taking press questions any more, whereas Putin takes lots of very aggressive and straightforward ones.
I think it's something specific to MacBooks. I used to find I could hardly see the background, but if I tilted the screen a bit suddenly there it was back in the old yellow colour. The new yellow "Ad" icon is much easier to see though.
Google went public a decade ago. I think you have to do a better job of showing cause/effect than that.
Friends who are not my friends apparently want me to stop finding meaningful results.
Again, this should all be covered by the company that wins the bid. If they don't like it, they shouldn't bid on the contract.
>because most of the requirements are out of date,
Contractor's fault. If the requirements are impossible, tell the customer and don't bid.
>were written by somone who had no idea what they were asking for
Same as above.
>or are missing critical pieces of functionality or details.
Same as above.
>Then you find out you need to integrate with a 35 year old Wang mainframe that runs some weird esoteric algorithm that no one alive understands.
If that's in the contract you signed, you need to do it. If it isn't in the contract, don't do it, or re-bid for that portion.
This would all be much simpler if both parties simply adhered to the terms of the contract. If the terms are unrealistic or impossible, don't bid.
The problem with privatization is that it ends up being worse than having the government do it directly, because there's no consequences for failure. Several companies bid on the project, but they low-ball the bid to win the project because the lowest bidder almost always wins. But then the project costs much more, and somehow the government is on the hook for these cost overruns, instead of the contractor being responsible (since they did, after all, bid a certain amount). The problem here is the government agrees to contracts which allow enormous overruns at the government's expense. If the contractor fails, what's the penalty? At worst, they get dismissed (and keep all the cash) and someone new takes over.
It's simple: make the bids binding, and if the contractor fails to meet the terms, they pay to get it right, and if they can't, they forfeit their company and the officers are all personally responsible.