FINRA tries to pass itself off as an independent regulator of the financial industry.

.
Just take a look at the firms that make up FINRA and you will see what a farce it is to use FINRA and financial industry regulation in the same sentence.

I've restarted Firefox with the "Restart with Add-ons Disabled" option. And I still see the paralysis.

I cannot disagree.

You've noticed that also.

.
Though I would call it more of a paralysis than a halt. Firefox goes completely unresponsive. Unnerving at best. And hardly what I would expect of a top-rated "performance-crown-winning" browser.

... Firefox by a relatively small margin. Indeed, in some areas, Firefox is slow, other areas, such as Javascript, Firefox is, at best, middling.

.
At this point, if you are deciding upon which browser to use, perhaps the browser with the marginally highest performance benchmark numbers may not be the browser for you. Here is a difference that matters more to me: when I change the http proxy settings in Firefox, only Firefox is affected. However, when i change the http proxy settings in Chrome, the proxy settings for Windows are changed, meaning that other applications are affected. For this reason I use Firefox instead of Chrome, even though Firefox is a lot slower on a web page I frequent a lot.

When you make something idiot-proof, only idiots will want to use it.

Given Firefox's history of breaking plug-ins, why would you expect NoScript to continue to work?

If apps start requiring Directx 11.n and, as a result, I cannot run those apps on Windows 7; then that will be one more reason why Windows is no longer a solution for me.

.
First Microsoft releases an awful version of Windows (8.0), then Microsoft backtracks (temporarily?) and restores some useful functionality that was removed (emphasis on some).

The question remains, how long before Microsoft has another dose of stupid, and re-removes the Start button and boot to desktop. Strategically, it is what they want to do, so you know they will keep trying to do it.

Ummm... no.

.
An Altair 8080 is a different computer entirely.

Why did you waste her time with an interview if the cards were already on the table?

.
From what you describe, I suspect if she did get the job, it would have been a hostile work environment for her, with too many busybodies poking around into her private life.

As a hiring manager, my focus is whether or not the applicant is able to do well in the position. I've never really concerned myself with the online presence of the applicant. I look at rummaging around in google to check out an applicant as more or less equivalent to hiring an investigator to do a background check. The fact that googling is easier and cheaper than hiring an investigator does not change the motive for doing so.

.
An exception would be if the applicant links to his professional online presence in the CV. Then I would use that as I would any other information on the CV. However the presence on the web does not make the information different than having the same information on the CV.

If I were hiring for a sensitive position where a background check is warranted, then I would do a real background check.

But if no background check is required, why go poking around in someone's private life.

Target has already made that decision for me --- they do not allow me to use their website.

Target's website refuses entry for those customers who do not have tracking cookies enabled. It is Target's choice, not the customers'.

Yeah, preventing customers from walking through the main entrance and buy things is always a good thing for a store to do.

Some sites block you if you do not allow their cookies unfettered access. One example is target.com (the department store). You cannot get past the home page unless you open up your browser to all the cookies they want to place on your disk. It doesn't make sense for a store to prevent customers from using their website to shop.

.
Target needs to re-evaluate their purpose for having a website - do they want to use the website to place cookies on peoples' disks? Or does target want to use the website to sell merchandise?

:)