If you really need security for some reason, use it to match the person to the badge at the clean room entrance. That will keep someone from using a stolen badge.
Then you don't need to hand people hundreds of dollars to take it off your hands.
If Microsoft, with orders of a magnitude more cash available to burn is finding it almost impossible to break the Android-iOS duopoly
Microsoft is the canonical proof that having piles of cash on hand is no guarantee of success in product development.
Paper ballots are pretty damn open-source.
Just because a voting machine is supposedly running open-source software doesn't preclude tampering - hardware or software.
Feels like I've said this 100 times now:
Electronic voting: bad.
Computer-assisted voting: good.
Sure, fine, have a touch-screen and pretty pictures and good usability in general, all of that is great. Then have the voting machine print a paper ballot, which is then cast normally. You can check the paper, or just use the paper yourself, if you don't trust the computer, or if it breaks, or has been hacked. And since almost all ballots will be printed cleanly, there will be little room for 2000-style "dimpled chad" and "interpreting the voter's intentions".
While I appreciate your greed and approve, if you're a software developer, or have some other highly skilled job as most
Replacing your roof with solar panels will always be an overhead cost!
Unwanted to take advantage of this,
Now *that's* a freudian slip typo if I ever saw one!
,,, thrown on the back of a mule and hauled over the Andes by Juan Valdez.
While I agree with you about " a GOP w/o the religion", do you have the first clue what the Citizen's United case was actually about? It was about a group of people who pooled their money to show a film critical of Hillary. The ruling was that you do not lose your freedom of political speech simply because you form a partnership or corporation to manage the funds needed for that speech. There have since been many similar ruling that a closely held corporation is no different from a partnership in not restricting the protected rights of the owners.
Political speech in America has always involved money (and always involved anonymous speech). From the time when people in the British colonies were angry at King George to today, you can't spread your political message beyond the reach of your voice without money. Anonymous pamphleteering was a big deal early on, and you needed to buy a printing press to make that work. Buying a newspaper company in order to ensure your spin was heard was all the rage in the heyday of newspapers, much like starting your own cable news network was in the late 20th century.
Assuming you want someone other than the very rich to have a political voice, you can't restrict buying ads. Most of us can't afford to buy an entire newspaper company or cable network, even if we pool our resources, but we might be able to buy a political ad. And if that's not freedom of political speech, I don't know what is.
With factors like that going on all around your number, I'm not quite sure what value you can expect out of your salary stats
Software developers who don't work on web UI frontend stuff: infrastructure and systems programmers, kernel developers, and so on, were barely affected by all that. 2007-08 was rough for everyone, but even then it wasn't that bad for us backend devs.
Now, if your expertise was DB internals, hard cluster internals, or user-mode storage software, those fields have gradually faded over the past decade, but many of us just moved on to the new hotness: the backend for the cloud, and massively parallel systems that can run in the cloud (external or internal).
Correct. And as with Leninism, fascism is government telling you what and how resources are produced and provisioned. Take for example the National Socialist German Workers' Party - Nazi Party; it's a fascist regime operated under the auspices of socialism.
Just to be clear, Communism (Marxism) in its purest ideology doesn't exist. It can't! So when the word Communism is used, what we're really talking about is Leninism which is the exact opposite of Marx's theoretical working class self-emancipation.
In fact it did, Tea Party sits between Libertarian and Republican. But it won't officially split into two seperate parties as that would "split the vote". In fact, that's how the Republicans lost a few elections because votes splintered off to Libertarian or Independent. That gave the Democrats the majority vote. So when push comes to shove, the Tea Party voters will still vote Republican. Blame the process.