How about getting mail for your ex-wife's deceased father,
- who never lived in your state
- much less your home?

How about collection notices to your workplace for a guy living in Chicago,
- a place you have never even visited,
- but his first and last name are the same,
- so you call to tell them about the mistake, and they send you another one the next year anyway?

How about getting tax forms from the town you used to live in,
- and when you call they ask that you send annoying amounts of proof of where you live just so they'll stop sending you forms,
- and you do it anyway
- and they still send forms the next year?

FedEx and UPS screw up too. I got a delivery confirmation once, where they delivered it to the wrong address and then FAKED THE SIGNATURE. I informed them of the issue, and they said they would send someone out to pick it up and take it to us. Of course, it was hours later and almost 7 PM with no delivery in sight. The guy who got it was nice enough to bring it to us himself by the point-- and we hadn't even met him before then.

People can pick their own house number where you live?

Is your car's speedometer an "accurate scientific instrument"? How about the gas pedal, and its linkage? How about your foot: the bones, tendons, and muscles?

Expecting a driver to maintain an exact speed to the MPH, much less the km/h, is stupid.

Pancreatic cancer is no joke, but can be survived. My dad did, and one of the factors his doctor attributed it to was his good overall health despite being in his 60s. Jobs was health conscious from early in his life, and should have been able to beat this.

It was a pretty lousy one. It was basically like criticizing Apple for releasing the inferior Apple I, II, IIe, and III before the Macintosh.

Perhaps if they had experienced whatever similar changes occurred in the USA to cause crime to fall every year since 1993-- despite the fact that the assault weapons ban was in effect from 93-2003 and not in effect from 2003 until now.

During WWI, you were convicted of sedition if you criticized the US's entry into the war. Apparently that is OK, because it was the law.

0.05 is unreasonable. It is de facto prohibition, and unconstitutional.

These are also the geniuses that mandated seat belt interlocks, and a year later had to repeal the regulation and allow people to disable them because they were universally impractical. People's cars were dead in the water because a sensor stuck, or it was too cold, or they had a package on the seat. More and more people were using their seatbelts even without this regulation. Meanwhile, the rest just buckled their belts behind them anyway.

These same geniuses mandated passive restraints, which (since airbags were initially too expensive for an average car) resulted in everyone being strangled by automatic seatbelts.

When auto manufacturers started putting airbags in everything, in a big to make themselves useful the NHTSA uselessly MANDATED them. Of course, they mandated that the bags work on a 180 pound male, which had the unfortunate consequence of injuring or killing people who were much smaller.

These are the geniuses who held back aerodynamic engineering because they insisted headlights had to be round, because... ???

So will total prohibition. Neither is acceptable. Drunk driving is deadly, but this is a step too far when even the government admits a limit this low this is de facto prohibition. Unless we also want to outlaw other distractions, like screens, radios, cupholders, pets, and passengers, we're just choosing what rights we're OK with giving up.

We may make ourselves into cyborgs, and not the ghoulish, creepy Borg of STNG, but more like various comic superheroes such as Wolverine.

I don't think many people set out with the idea of being evil for evil's sake. If we become the compliant automatons that the world's governments demand, we'll be much more like the Borg.

If you really think it's important, you would do what it takes to prove that your drone won't be used for nefarious purposes. You must know that it would take only one subpoena from one cop signed by one judge to have you and your drone commandeered in some "emergency" to monitor a "person of interest" and you wouldn't be allowed to talk about it. Propose a local regulation that outlaws the use of privately-held drones for law enforcement.

They did, but Kent State pretty much was the last straw. "Less than lethal" weapons are a godsend for them, because now they can abuse the public with impunity since, hey, at least you aren't dead! And if you weren't doing something wrong, the cops wouldn't have attacked you, right?

So you're expecting the media to report that a drone actually crashed into a bus, and not that the bus (with a sketchy maintenance record) didn't just burst into flame spontaneously? The cops are the guys with the guns.

The problem is that those rules have to be enforced by the same people who would be breaking them. Who can I turn to, as a private citizen, when I catch a police drone circling my property to spy on me, or follow me when I leave?

Sorry, but people like the average Slashdotter let the government take all means to defend ourselves from a simple robber, much less a despotic government. Good luck with that.