makes it a lot harder for people to lie about their interaction with a police officer.

I remember a case where a woman claimed she was beaten in the back of a patrol car by the two responding officers. Too bad for her there was an in-car camera pointed to the back seat which clearly showed her yelling and screaming, telling the cops to stop beating her, and she was the only one in the scene the whole time.

The constructive contribution I have is to make everyone who uses medical services pay for them. Stop this nonsense of people going to the emergency room with the sniffles and saying, "I'm sick."

"No shit you're sick, so are 5% of the people in the city. It's flu season. That' will be $50."

The second part is to force the smokers, the obese, the alcoholics and drug users to change their ways. All of the above are lifestyle choices they have made. They want to smoke? No problem. It's their choice. But I shouldn't have my money confiscated to pay for their bad choices.

But neither will be done, will it? Because that would involve personal responsibility and we can't have that, can we? It's easier to make people pay, and pay, and pay some more rather than taking a hard look at the driving issues of rising health costs.

The uACA has nothing to do with health insurance and everything to do with giving free money to insurers.

A failed web site launch, failure to meet their initial sign-up goal, failure to meet their predicted sign-up goal, continual fudging of implementation dates for random portions of the ACA.

It's just like having Bush all over again.

Hopefully people have finally gotten the message and aren't handing over their money to private companies just because the government says you have to.

I hear complaints from every field these days about not enough jobs for graduates, even in the medical fields.

Not according to companies. If you listen to them, there isn't anyone who's qualified for their positions which is why they have a worker shortage.

Witness this article which claims employers are whining they can't find enough people to fill these ten positions which include the medical field.

if it harms the overall society in the end.

By that logic, stop using your computer. Between the mining of elements used in its construction, the huge amount of water needed to produce the parts, and everything else that goes into making a computer, it's harming society.

Oh wait, it makes you happy using a computer? Well then, carry on, society be damned.

And thank you for missing the sarcasm in my post.

Because when you "share" music you've purchased, the person to whom you've "shared" returns the music to you, and doesn't keep a copy for themselves, right?

but people who are intent to steal their images are going to do it anyway.

Except it's not stealing, is it? Nothing is being taken. The people are just using the image for their own purpose with the idea being the image is still attributed to Getty, the distributor, and the photographer, who doesn't get paid for the use of their work.

Obviously at some point the person would return the image since they're just borrowing it, not stealing it. That's what happens when someone "shares" their music with someone else, right? They let the other person borrow the music and when done, the person returns the music back to the person who bought the cd/album/mp3/whatever, not keeping a copy for themselves.

he company appears to have no insight into why its customers continue to use the OS.

When something works, why change? And don't give me the crap about security and this and that. Cars from the 60s don't have anywhere near the safety features modern cars do yet have no problem operating safely.

For the average person who does some web surfing and checks their email, there is no legitimate reason to upgrade ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration the costs involved.

This will be one of the few times you'll hear this, but Microsoft did too good a job creating XP.

she'd spent something on the order of $400 playing Candy Crush. That amount floored me... I couldn't believe anyone would do that!

But it's okay if someone spends the same amount of money on a video card, camera lens, monitor or anything else they want to spend the money on, right?

Just because you wouldn't spend that much money on a game doesn't mean others won't. How much money did you spend (if you're old enough to have done so) on video games growing up? I would be willing to bet you easily spent that much enjoying yourself playing games.

flaunting that they had an extra $1,500 just lying around.

Point of order. I just spent significantly more than that on a camera yesterday. I agonized over the purchase for the last several months in the process.

Did I have the money lying around? Technically, yes. I had no problem with the monetary aspect. Does that mean I'll be flaunting to everyone else who doesn't have said camera that I am a have rather than a have not?

While Glass is an annoyance, just because someone buys something somewhat expensive does not mean they are flaunting their wealth. Maybe, like me, they want to have it because it will allow them to expand their horizons.

P.S. If you're going to reply I'm just as annoying as they people are because of my purchase, I'll be sure to remind you the next time you purchase your $200 headphones, $500 video card or something similar which other people would categorize as flaunting your wealth.

Still running IE8 so no problems.

Keep pushing the envelope to be cool and edgy and this is what you get.

Same thing with thinking everything needs to be touch screen and/or digital. Witness the fiasco of trying to use touch screens for radio controls. Knobs and buttons for the win!

People will pay a reasonable price for content make it more easy than pirating.

Such as .99 cents on the Apple Store and elsewhere?

The fact of the matter is people believe they are entitled to take whatever they want without having to pay the artist. Period. You can try to use whatever semantics you want but in the end the result is the same. People have taken something which they do not have a right to and have not compensated the person/group who has created the work.

Considering Bitcoin is trading around $300 on at least one exchange, I'll take my $500 now, Alex.

but has chosen instead to respond with a giant "fuck you" to its user base.

So you're saying Dice/Slashdot is just like Microsoft when they did the same thing to end user in Windows 8.1?

I said the same thing. I have no idea what drug the people were on when they considered redesigning nbcnews.com, but if ever there was a drug that needed to be outlawed, that is the one.

Who in their right mind could possibly think that making a web site look like Windows 8 was a good idea?