A few years ago I went through TSA with my laptop. Naturally they wanted to search it. No problem. I thought.
I travel about once a year for personal reasons in the USA by plane, sometimes a little more. I've traveled overseas a bit too. I've had TSA people subject me to special screening. I once had US Customs decide I just had to be a smuggler after returning from a tourist trip to China because the agent at the airport decided that there was just zero chance I would go there as a tourist. I didn't care about getting "special treatment" so I went over to the special area so a different agent could go through my luggage and all he found was a teapot and a few Chinese souvenirs. He was really pissed off at the agent who flagged me because I was just a waste of his time. I was greatly amused by that. I've had some interesting encounters with customs in Ukraine too, but I can speak Russian which helps and nothing was really too wild there with customs. But one thing that has never, ever happened to me is having anybody interested in looking at my laptop. If you're brown skinned then there's not much you can do about profiling, but if you aren't, maybe you need to think about how you present yourself or dress when traveling because you are definitely doing something that is screaming that you need to be examined.
Apparently the guy survived a 12 story drop... what makes you think that suicide nets aren't already implemented?
No mention of suicide nets. Plus, can you imagine the negative publicity Amazon would get from putting up suicide nets in the USA? It's a completely different story to do that in China as Apple did, but their factory had really weird rules for the employees and was not in any way a typical Chinese workplace. I don't know what the odds are for surviving a 12 story drop, but it's not impossible. The odds aren't good, but one unofficial source I found put a 15 story fall at a 1 in 100 chance of survival. There was a documented case where a flight attendant survived a fall of about 20,000 without a parachute from an airplane, although I don't know the details of that.
TFS and TFA both utterly fail to identify or even mention one of the largest issues with mobile devices today.
Forget flying to the red planet to bridge the gap for survival. I could print the number of times we've read the words "root access" regarding mobile device hacking in 2016 and have enough material to build an actual bridge to Mars.
Totally agree with you. I've read so much stuff over the years about phone hacks that I am super paranoid about doing anything over my phone that involves me accessing a site I actually do care about having a secure connection to, such as my bank, credit card providers, etc. I control my main PC at home and keep the anti-virus updated and don't go to websites that I shouldn't be visiting if I care about security. I have a lot of confidence that I can connect safely and securely from that PC to wherever I need to go. I don't have that kind of confidence on my phone. Plus I'm not 12 years old so I actually do prefer the bigger screen on a PC and the easier ability to open multiple windows there for comparison if needed.
Power gone for half the time and armed guards? Power is not an issue in the cities, and armed guards? even the cops here don't carry arms. only the ones in our movies do.
I can only say that my Fortune 500 company has a large number of Indian workers in some major Indian IT city I'm too lazy to look up and they do lose power quite often or their network goes down for some random reason or the people managing their network screw it up. I've read on the BBC that people from India do complain about power outages all the time. Maybe you're just fortunate wherever you are. But yeah, I think the armed guards thing is pure exaggeration. I've never heard of that one at all.
It's the various academicians that still can't believe Trump won because, "nobody I know voted for Trump".
Put me in that corner. I accept the election result, but I'm baffled where all the Trump supporters came from. Most of my friends are die-hard Republicans, but I don't know a single person who (admitted) voting for Trump. I suspect that's because this election wasn't really fought along typical Republican vs Democrat, leftie vs rightie lines.
I can only tell you that I live in what is called a "red state" and I know plenty of people, including college educated, who voted for Trump. In fact every person I know who supports the Republican Party not only voted for Trump without even the slightest worry, a small number of them begged me to vote for him too.
So why did democrats want it, and republicans not want it?
Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that. I'd say that most Democrats in Congress were against the TPP and most Republicans were quietly for it. Democrats opposed it because unions hate it and the Democratic Party relies on unions for votes. Most Republicans actually favored it because in theory the Republican Party supports all free trade deals. But then you got into the Republicans being the party of "No" which meant that they had to oppose Obama on one hand yet actually approving of what he did on the other. Had a Republican been president and submitted the deal as written to Congress, it would probably already be passed. Being the party of "No" caused them to stall for time and in the end they realized that a significant number of voters are upset about job losses and voting for a deal likely to lead to more job losses simply wasn't going to work.
This vote and the calls for protectionism in the USA and UK strike me as odd. Back in my day... it was the Conservatives and Republicans and similar parties defending trickle-down, supply-side, trade leads to growth, which leads to prosperity for everyone.
You remember correctly. But that was in the 1980s and things have changed. The Republicans began strongly embracing what I call "stupid people" in the past decade. I blame Karl Rove for this. I think it started roughly around 2004. You know how people too stupid to vote correctly in Florida all voted for Al Gore in 2000? They got flipped to the Republican side. This culminated in the queen of anti-intellectualism, Sarah Palin, running for vice-president in 2008.
Now there's support for reducing freedom of movement in the UK (and other places in Europe), and for the USA to erect trade barriers. All this time, the official explanation was that international trade was not a zero-sum game, that if there's more trade, everyone eventually gains and that protectionism was BAD. I can't remember if state investment on infrastructure was even worse than protectionism, but in any case it was something that Chicago school/Republican politicians just would not have.
I don't live in the UK so I'll let others comment on that, but as people without college degrees (not necessarily stupid though) and stupid people began to embrace the Republican Party, Sarah Palin pushed an anti-intellectual agenda that resonated big time with small town, non-college educated America. Palin has said multiple times that the only "real" America is the small town one, which just happens to be where a lot of people didn't go to college. If you can see a map of how the vote was broken out by county in the recent presidential election, you'll see that at least 90% of the US is red with the only blue areas being in bigger cities. As small town people have embraced the Republican Party, they've continued to lose jobs in manufacturing and the small towns where they live don't offer adequate replacement jobs. So this has led to a somewhat large group of people in small town America who see themselves and their small town life under siege. They're very receptive to being told that they are victims of forces beyond their control and only the Republicans can bring back those small town jobs that went away. They also tend to be very religious which brings them into conflict with societal changes like gay marriage where they see these changes as coming out of big cities and being pushed by Democratic Party elites who actively wish to bring harm to them.
But it's only "evil" when Trump is involved in something.
Yes. You definitely do understand!
Other than it being announced after the Election, there doesn't seem to be anything political in the announcement.
Sales are down on vehicles made at those two plant and they are cutting the Third Shift at both plants. Nothing about moving production elsewhere or even discontinuing the two other shifts at both plants.
Yeah. I can't speak to Cadillac but I can to the Chevy Cruze. A few years ago I got a Nissan Leaf on lease to use as a daily commute to work car and I had an older car I used for longer trips. I didn't really want to keep the older car but I also wasn't at the time really enthused about outright buying something, so getting a leased car was a way to take miles off the old car and think about what I wanted to get in a new car. I wanted to keep an open mind for a new car and one time I had to get a rental car and one of the options was the Cruze. It gets good mileage, so I thought I'd ask for the Cruze as my rental car and try it out. It sucked. It's really small. The interior is really crappy and cheap and unnecessarily so. And the mileage wasn't as great as I'd hoped. I crossed that off my list of potential vehicles to buy. So I totally get that sales of the Cruze are down because it's not a very good car. Chevy does make good cars but the Cruze isn't one of them.
1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight -- it's not just a good idea, it's the law!