Reminds me of how I miss the original Tab. Give me my saccharine!
The death penalty is not vengeance in the least. It is a possible penalty for very serious crimes. Generally it's only reserved for the worst of the worst. It's not something taken lightly, but it is one alternative. This is very different from ISIS kidnapping innocent people, touring them and finally publically murdering them. Don't think ISIS is "honest" or have any other redeeming qualities. They are the Nazis of this century and are deserving of being wiped from this planet as quickly as possible.
I too believed this for many years. However as I've gotten older I realize that some people are simply too dangerous to others to leave to their own. If these individuals cannot live within the society the rest of us do why is it our responsibility to support them for the remainder of their natural lives? Death penalty is not a secret, people know if you do this, chances are you are going to die for it. They have made their choice, so why do some people feel this odd need to "save" them like they are a stray dog but then insist that the rest of us help pay for it?
Agreed, and while I doubt the prosecution team would be dumb enough to try and peruse this as a hacking case, based on what I've read if they do the "perp" deserves to get off scot-free. I'm tired of these catch all laws being used Constnatly where they don't apply because prosecutors are either too lazy or too ignorant to determine the actual crime.
However it depends on how recent it is and how complete a solution it provides. I've used it in the Enterprise IT arena in the past (I've been in enterprise IT for a couple of decades now) and it worked well, both on servers and desktops. Last year though when I purchased a new laptop (my first Windows laptop in years) I looked around for a while and settled on Norton 360. I thought it provided the most complete solution, had decent reviews and I got it at a steal of a price - something like $20 on Amazon as a "deal of the day". I had looked at McAfee (which I still do not care for), was close to purchasing Kaspersky before the sale on Norton 360, and I had dismissed the free tools as simply "better than northing". Now, probably six months later, I don't regret the purchase at all but I do hope I can find a deal on Norton 360 again come renewal time.
Well said sir.
I believe the term you are looking for is "limousine liberal". Yeah, we all hate them. But don't for a minute think DINO equates to conservative.
Quite possibly. I wasn't sure of the intent of the parent post.
Not sure about the Conservatives mention. It's always been the Libs that go around slapping labels on stuff as being bad for everyone, making broad generalizations based on nothing of substance, complaining to the likes of the FCC about anything they don't like and pretending they were "offended". First example I can think of is Tipper Gore and her war on music. Jello Biafra, hardly a Conservative, called her out on that 20 years ago on Oprah. History is full of examples of Liberals forcing their agenda on the American people.
Blocking travel from specific countries is useless unless all,countries agree to this or we choose to block travel from any country that does not participate in the ban. Nothing would prevent someone from first flying from an infected country to a third country before flying to the US. Really the flu killed more than 50000 times the number of people this year as Ebola has. Is it really that big of an issue here? This is simply people panicking needlessly.
I agree the difference in performance would be imperceptible to the average and many "above-average" users especially if they move from a 32bit OS to a 64bit OS at the same time they move from a processor that is a couple generations old to a newer - for example - i3 or i5 machine. I believe the same would be true in the mobile device world where there are still leaps in performance being made in each processor iteration. Factor in increased memory speed and the performance drop that does exist becomes more imperceptible.
Very nice sir.
-- de kc2kth
Well, I already stockpile two of the three. I just need more toilet paper and I am ready!
As an IT Professional since the mid-90s I have seen bandwidth increases driven by need in business. However in the home market the increases are simply driven by marketing messages that "more is better". We shouldn't lose sight of what we require broadband services to do. I regularly hear people brag about how many simultaneous stream of video or movie downloads they can run simultaneously. This really isn't a good argument for why we need more bandwidth. AT&T isn't trying to limit access to content, but trying to maintain some perspective.
That is apparantly because most people would simply call them "goats".