You're correct, the problem isn't guns per se, but the type of guns that are *legally* available. I'm tired of the assertion that anyone should be able to legally purchase a military grade assault rifle.

Also, you may want to come up with a better analogy than illegal drugs here. Recent stats (no, I'm not providing links) show that 47% of Americans *self identify* as gun owners (as of 2011), whereas 8-10% of Americans are identified as illegal drug users. If being illegal had not impact, one would expect these numbers to be closer. And, drugs are typically used by the individual purchasing them, on themselves. Not so much with guns.

I don't advocate general gun bans, but the slippery-slope argument regarding regulation of certain types of weapons is getting old and tired. Just like me.

What in the world was the point of all that, and what did it have to do with online ads?!

If you are annoyed at online ads, you are obviously fortunate enough to have internet access. I don't like all the ads in my face either, but there is no free lunch my friend.

If I only had a penny for every time that someone whined about why they can't get everything for free...

Not sure if this will apply to the new AT&T plans as well, but with Verizon, you may not be able to stick with the "old" plans. Unless you want to hang on to your existing devices from here on out, or buy all new devices at full price, you will be forced to use the share plan when re-upping your contract.

I don't know who the new plans are targeted to, but they are definitely not geared toward saving money. (I know, duh)

But, as many folks have already pointed out, the carriers are artificially driving up the costs, while limited the options. Yes, some folks will actually pay less under the new plan, but we all don't require gazigabytes of data, or unlimited minutes per month. Having to pay per device to "share" a tiered data plan is not "sharing" - it's paying for data per device. And it's even worse because that tiered data amount *is* shared - just not the cost.

I had high hopes that Verizon's shared data would be the right thing for my family plan. None of need 2GB of data a month - we could easily share that. But, the new plan actually costs significantly more.

And, the unlimited voice has no value to me - we never reach our limit on the shared smallest family plan now.

Angry (er).

I waste 2,000-3,000 hours *a year* working for my employer. I can't stop myself. I feel that, if I stop, my ability to function in society will end. I must be addicted to work.

Anyone have the number for a good lawyer? (hmm, is that an oxymoron?)

Hmmm. I call bullshit. As a consultant at a small technical consultancy, I can't tell you how many times some so-called-risk-taking-good-businessman type has asked us to completely bare the full burden of risk by building applications to run their not-so-great business plans - for free.

That might be genius on their part in a business sense, but don't give me that crap that they are risk-takers. The only risk was getting rejected. Waaaaah to that.

While these are interesting anecdotal references, I personally have had almost exactly the same experiences with my children and myself here in the US. It's not really fair to dismiss the UK system based solely on your limited exposure.

I pay obscene amounts for my so-called "cadillac" plan (that still requires me to pay %10-20 per incident, BTW), and the run-around that my wife and I got from the insurance company after our daughter was hospitalized was inexcusable. Now, it's also not fair for me to judge the US system based on my limited exposure, but it seems to me that I should be getting noticeably better care than one would get in the UK based on how much I pay for it. It would appear as though I am not (based on our individual experiences). At the very least, as a consumer, I am clearly not the one being served.

Prior to "Y2K", I saw far too many mediocre "consultants" make more money than God by spreading FUD about the possibility that your software would 'esplode on midnight 1/1/2000. Were there systems that would be affected? Sure. Back when storage and memory cost money, the amount of space used by data was an issue that could not be ignored, and that led to decisions in system design that caused the issue. Heck, who thought that any single piece of software would still be relevant 20 years after it was written? But, so-called experts came out of the woodwork to "help" businesses through the non-crisis by charging them huge rates.

But, to have this really happen on "modern" systems seems unacceptable to me. I half expect to see another new breed of "expert" consultant who specializes in reviewing all of your code to make sure you are next-year compliant.

Of course, maybe I'm just envious that I didn't capitalize on that feeding frenzy in the first place....

--

If "external" is the opposite of "internal", what is the opposite of "increment"?

Are we talking the European, or African Swallow?