You mean we might have to find a way to fund law enforcement and road construction that doesn't inevitably lead to corruption?

That would be an interesting switch: new technology unintentionally solving problems rather than creating them.

My guess would be it was a debugging "feature" that someone forgot to turn off.

But filling up password fields with certain common characters probably IS something that should be tested, even if it wasn't standard before.

Marriage is not a "minor disagreement." Those who oppose same sex marriage do so on some variation of the theme that marriage is a cornerstone of our society that will be substantially damaged if people with the same naughty parts are allowed to participate in it. You can't argue that and then turn around and criticize the people they're trying to exclude for getting too worked up about it.

All I can think of is the old Star Wars/Cops spoof Troops:

"Suspects are guilty, period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect, would they?"

No, it's a means to reduce theft of service by uppity customers who think that just because they pay for a phone, they actually own it.

I'm less worried about the government (at least in the US) than I am about service providers deciding to brick my phone for non-payment, or simply to force me to upgrade.

Given the technical prowess generally demonstrated by the government (especially the legislators), and the level of complexity of maintaining a database of this kind, I'm really more bothered by the massive potential for FUBARs. This kind of database is probably inevitable, but I just don't trust a government-led effort to get it right. Or even in the general vicinity of right.

You're anti-science.

No, you're anti-science. And you smell.

I'll buy that for a dollar!

Wait, no I won't.

I'm confused. Isn't Texas supposed to be the state of small government, balanced budgets, and personal responsibility?

Shouldn't they just be giving the kids guns and letting them sort it out themselves?

Individual doctors (or at least the ones I know) are all about simplifying the system and making it easier for people to get basic health care.

Health "Care" corporations (the ones who buy the lobbyists and pundits that we hear about on the news) are against simplifying the system, because if it were more profitable to provide decent health care to everyone, they'd already be doing it.

This isn't a moral judgement, it's just the way large corporations work, and it's why they shouldn't be in charge of providing essential services, at least not without significant safeguards.

All depends on your definition. The economy is growing, and by that measure, we're not in a recession. Of course, anyone who is unemployed or underemployed certainly feels like we're in a recession.

The problem is the national debt has little or nothing to do with this.

My school system published a no weapons policy in the early 90s. If I'd been a bit more of a troublemaker, I would have shown up one day with no books or pencils, because any of them could be used as a weapon.

It's nice to see that the bureaucracy has finally fulfilled its own stupidity.

I don't think this is actually a change for human society. (There were always far more peasants than aristocrats.) The difference is treating these individuals as equal, causing them to have far more impact on on how things are run. And many people would argue that isn't happening anyway.

Wouldn't a compliment imply that they were giving you credit? Now, if they commented on how lucky you were to have such well-mannered children, I could understand being upset.

I predict a level of success similar to that achieved by previous attempts to replace the qwerty scheme, even ones that were arguably better. At best, it will gain a small, rabid following, that will eventually end up putting off additional converts. Of course, it's far more likely it will simply slide into obscurity.