I'm glad I don't work with you, if you laugh at loud for every sentence you write.

Here in the US, the incompetent are called "victims". There's no shame to being ignorant, and, sometimes I think, no concept of shame at all. And the black-and-white thinking that dictates that if this guy was guilty, the buyers were therefore innocent.
Sure, the guy is guilty, and deserves 10 years in the locker. But so does every single buyer. You have to be seriously retarded to fall for a scam like this, and seriously retarded people should not be charged with buying military equipment.

No ifs and buts, there is enough guilt to go around here.

The problem here is to allow the siphon that private insurance companies invariably mean. Pay for the healthcare without the overhead of insurance companies. But no, that's against the law in the US, because that would be the government outcompeting private companies.

As for governments making money, there are plenty of examples. All in countries were governments aren't barred by law from making money.
(But then comes a wind from the right, and some populist right wing politicians tell how much better everything will be with privatization. He gets the votes, and the government sells its profitable businesses. Service goes down, prices go up, and everybody is happy. Er.)

Sure, it's possible. But why would they?
For Apple, it didn't cost much, if anything, given the high margins on their products and that a fair amount of gift card receivers could be expected to buy more than the gift card's worth while in the store anyhow, all of which would go back to Apple.
For Microsoft, the situation is somewhat different.

And why do people who bought something before a price drop feel entitled to anything? They bought at what they thought was a fair price. Whether to buy now or hold out for a possible price drop is always a gamble, and if you made the wrong choice, well, sucks to be you.

We need rules for these articles in the future.

Cyber-war/Cyber-warfare - take a drink
Cyber-weapon - take a drink
Cyber-warrior/Cyber-soldier - chug
Cyber-command - chug
Others?

Anyway, if this is such a big risk (aside from alcohol poisoning) then why aren't other countries switching to Linux and training their own programmers so that they can "harden" it?

If they have to use something that they did not write/audit themselves then that should be completely isolated.

Wouldn't the intelligent thing to do (if this is really a threat) be to develop a 5 year goal of moving off of software written by your potential cyber-emenies (take a shot).

I incorrectly thought that when people got zero results on the combined search, they'd try each of the words separately.

iwlyfmbp returns a boatload of WFMB radio station results on DDG, because Bing returns them. Whoever designed the algorithms for Bing was probably doing sabotage, cause you can't get that wrong by accident.

DDG has a way to specify a specific search engine to use, but it does not have a way to exclude one. Like Bing, which is worse than useless because of how it attempts to second-guess its users, and botches it.

Yeah, it's a search aggregator, and not a search engine.
I used it before, but stopped, because it uses Bing, which is maed forr pepple whoo cann nott speel. When I make exact and correctly spelled search queries, I get a lot of rubbish back because Bing returns results for "similar" queries.

Example query: iwlyfmbp deflate

Now run this through Google and DDG and see where you get the best results.

Getting one's head bashed into the ground is a "life threatening situation" even here in liberal leaning Canada.

Again, that was AFTER Zimmerman strapped on a gun, got out of his car and followed Martin. Each one of those 3 actions is proscribed by neighborhood watch guides.

An easier way to see it is if Martin had been a woman. Zimmerman has a gun and starts following a woman. She uses pepper spray and while he's blinded, she kicks him. So he shoots her. No one would be sympathizing with Zimmerman.

While I think Zimmerman should have stopped following Martin once the police were contacted, following someone on a public street is not actually illegal in any way in Florida.

Wait until you get a girlfriend and ask her how she feels when some guy starts following her on the street. It may not be illegal. But that is not the same as being innocent.

Then he was promptly jumped and attacked by Martin.

That is Zimmerman's story. Whether that is factual or not cannot be determined any more because the other person is dead.

Zimmerman wouldn't have had a chance to try to flee considering he was on the ground getting pounded.

That would be after Zimmerman decided to follow Martin and got out of his car and kept following Martin. Even if the events happened in that way it is a bit strange to talk of fleeing AFTER the confrontation that Zimmerman apparently wanted had happened.

That lead to Martin being shot.

No. Zimmerman could have NOT carried a gun which is what the neighborhood watches recommend. Zimmerman could have stayed in his car which is what the neighborhood watches recommend. Zimmerman could have NOT followed Martin which is what the neighborhood watches recommend. Only after breaking each of those rules was Zimmerman armed and in a fist fight.

Since he was losing the fight, he shot the other guy.

If it were up to me there would have been no conflict, or the mere sight of a gun would have scared him off and it would have ended there, but let's be clear about this: if you want to violently attack a stranger who has not initiated violence against you, you are taking a risk

Except that it was Zimmerman who initiated the conflict by following Martin. Again, when you get a girlfriend, ask her about a stranger who starts following her.

We already have states where homeowners hesitate to shoot a home invader because they might get in serious trouble, and all this does is lower the risk of burglarizing the law-abiding which in turn can only make burglers more bold.

So a burglar is more bold because the homeowner might NOT shoot him? I don't think so.