The safest action with work email is to delete it without reading it, so that is what I do for most everything. Most work emails are designed to suck the creative life out of you anyway.

Now we can sell out vote to the highest bidder in the privacy of our own home. Unless you allow me to change my vote up the last minute -- think of the chaos that could cause. The reason paper ballots remain is because they have built up a lot of public trust with the ordinary people. You may not care about them, but trust that is explainable to the ordinary person is of utmost importance.

But from the aggressors side, if they launch and it does not hit it's target because it is shot down, they are going to be very tense waiting for a response. If the launching country is able to launch many ICBM's, it may not be a huge issue if 1 or 2 are shot down, but if they launch their only ICBM and it never makes it to the target, that would be very bad for them. This puts a single ICBM from North Korea at a significant disadvantage, as the US could make multiple attempts to take down the only one they can launch.

I've been around groundhogs all my life and those adjectives should never be used with a groundhog, they are tough, vicious predators of corn and all other sorts for gentle, vulnerable vegetation. Think of the poor spring seedlings, cut down in their prime of life by these nasty varmits.

Death to all groundhogs I say . . . .

Another example of how the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
Funny how outraged companies can get when their bad faith operations are threatened.

That was my first reaction too when I read the synopsis.
Sorry, but I never have mod points when I really need them, or I would mark this insightful (because you are thinking like I am)

Should read "Lack of Cheap, Qualified CS Talent"

Andrew Tierney should be thankful John didn't just shoot him . . . (yet) If he wants to meet someplace dark and private to pay out the bounty, I recommend Andrew not go alone. McAfee is a scary guy even in the light.

At least around here, IT jobs do pay very well indeed because companies are trying to find the best candidates. The problem, as I see it, it not that that pay too little, it's that their hiring process almost seems to actively exclude the better candidates. Then, because they get a string of duds that have to fire and replace, they switch to contract roles, with an option to hire, thinking that they can "test drive" a worker before committing to them. Of course, that further excludes even more candidates, leaving them a diminishing pool of lower and lower quality people.

Adding "None of the above" to every list of candidates would solve so many of the problems with the current system. If "None of the above" wins, all candidates are disqualified from that office and each party has to submit a new candidate to run. We would need a faster (online?) voting methodology, because I suspect that "None of the above" would win a whole lot of elections for a while until the parties realized we weren't voting for s*hole candidates as the "least worst" anymore.

If I listed off all the major reasons I don't like voting, this solves nearly all of them. Voting participation would rise tremendously if people felt like they could vote their actual conscience.

Please point out any flaws in this logic (who am I kidding, this is /.)

It seems like the best solution would be to change the laws to force drug companies sell drugs to pharmacies on consignment, so any unsold drugs get returned before or at their expiration date for the drug companies to dispose or re-certify, as their business model dictates. This is letting the business and free market determine the best way to handle the drugs. Some are so cheap to manufacture it is not worth saving the expired ones. Others are worth recovering.

The only flaw I see in this is the drug companies losing 768 billion in sales, but I think most Americans will sleep ok with that on their conscience.

Determining the correct expiration date involves lots of sciency stuff that we would not understand, but suffice it to say it is all very precise and involves a lot of math. Once they have that "expiration value" then they round it down to 1,2 or 3 years, depending on what management deems to be maximizing their shareholder's value.

True, but if not implementing your system meant a 100% failure rate, he might deign to keep you on and see if you can do better in the next test.
In the real world with current events, adding in a 50% chance that the 1 or 2 IBCM's that NK could launch would be shot down adds tremendously to the risk that they would not hurt us. If they succeed or not matters a lot to us, but it will only matter to them for a few minutes, then they will see everything they have built obliterated in a counter attack. The military commanders will likely never know if they actually landed a weapon on US soil.
Their entire premise depends on the world believing they are crazy enough to destroy their entire country to make a point. I believe at least some of the leaders there are that crazy. Lucky we have our own version of crazy leader to counter this threat.

Case, IH, and New Holland are all owned by Fiat/Chrysler, so if your numbers are correct, then the #2 spot is 26%. The bigger problem for those companies is the rather intense loyalty shown by JD owners. But if you are trying to kill off all your customer loyalty, you could hardly do better than approach outlined here.

Farmers talk amongst themselves, a lot, so a crop threatening failure to provide needed service, can quickly become a huge negative in the minds of any farmers shopping for new equipment.

Nothing like "pissing off your best customers to make more profits" as a business model, is it.

... only outlaws will have strong encryption.