While TFA is an interesting approach, the simpler solution to one of the main thrusts in TFA (of having equal EC representation/distribution) is to simply change the EC to where each congressional district (or in this case, electoral district) is autonomous and controls its own vote independent from the rest of the state it's in.
Even if the two extra EC vote afforded each state are kept, I see this as a far better system than a strait popular vote system. Why? Because the EC has a side effect of doing something amazingly positive that few realize. It contains vote fraud to within the state it happens in.
Consider this for example: Imagine a politically corrupt jurisdiction in your state. Imagine that they start cranking out fraudulent votes. The votes they dilute are limited to the vote in their state. But in a popular vote system, they now dilute everyone's vote. By tweaking the EC system to treat congressional districts autonomously, the fraud is contained even further.
And since congressional districts are explicitly drawn to contain apportioned sections of the population (given a few constraints of not crossing state boundaries and the like), the goal towards equal vote weighting is more naturally furthered.
You can't be bigoted against an idea.
But if you hold a particular idea, can you be called a bigot and be summarily dismissed? And those ideas that are generally accepted to be bigoted never get a fair discussion because those that would argue in favor of them are marginalized and dismissed for merely advocating the idea.
Are you sure that the flash drives are actually looking at NTFS datastructures? Due to the proprietary and complex nature of NTFS, this sounds like something drive manufacturers would avoid like the plague.
Linux now has decent NTFS support. That lead me to believe that anyone who wanted to implement these GC routines would have enough (indirect) documentation of NTFS internals to do such.
If the attacker turns out to be a tea party paranoid type, then I honestly believe people like Beck hold indirect responsibility for the attack. Incitement to rioting is a crime; so, in a (non-legal) way, is the winking threats and paranoia that's been on the airwaves for too long.
So what you're saying is... that you don't watch Beck, but you believe what his adversaries say about him. Okay. At least I know how informed you are.
The reality is that Net Neutrality has nothing to do with neutrality and everything to do with carriers wanting to enjoy common carrier protections without having to provide common carrier openess.
I don't have mod points, so I have to post. It's discouraging to see so much lefty-Flavor-Aid blather here at +5, and something like this only sitting at +4 (at the time of me seeing it).
You know what their response to that is? It's very simple: "Right, you're buying a license."
It probably is their response. It may be even more flippant... "Right, you're buying a box". Everyone need to push back and state that such is not the way to convey such in our language. That they need to explicitly state that the price is for the priveledge to enter into a license agreement with them for use of their software, and that a reasonable jury will interpret the language of "buying the product" to mean "buying the product".
Of course, I may still be under the misguided impression that our world still has a good percentage of reasonable people.
Also, I'd like for it to now be legally disallowed to use the term "buy software" in a commercial context as it no longer applies and would falsely advertise what it is that we "purchase".
An absolutely brilliant point. And following up on that point, I went to their website to see how they phrased it, and indeed they are using the language "reasons to buy" and "review and buy" on their product pages.