Right, that worked very well in Eastern Europe.
How would you know, considering that they have actually never ruled there yet?
I'm not enough of a frood to sass SAS, apparently.
(Also, why the hell would I have to know about a company selling some bizarre software merely because the company is large? No matter how large it is, the world is even larger.)
Do you think the lawyers reading the ACA legislation and the children reading Harry Potter are equal?
I'm pretty sure lawyers' reading skills outpace those of Harry Potter-age children.
Plus, the lawmakers are being very well-compensated to read legislation. It's like their one fucking job, you know?
If Trump and the GOP couldn't unravel the 3500 page health care law, how are they going to pull off reforming the tax code, which ran like twenty-three volumes (without addendums) back in the 1990s? That's not counting the judicial precedents which are now law. Hell, there's like several hundred pages of law that just governs the taxation issues related to owning racehorses.
I've seen IT directors who drive Teslas but who still pocket RAM sticks from the lab.
The problem is, there is zero probability that this new corporate surveillance will be aimed at IT directors.
Because if there's one thing we've learned, it's that if you are rich and you steal, it's considered, "smart". If you're making $35k/yr and you make an unauthorized copy of your tax return on a company xerox machine, you're going to get frog-marched out of the place.
Late-stage capitalism is a cancer.
It wasn't a law. It was a regulation the FCC made up without the authority to do so. Congress slapped it down, now they will write a real law.
This Congress has definitely proven how good they are at writing "real laws".
Waste of govt time to discard this little bit of regulation, congress should be working on drafting a real privacy law that actually helps people.
Congress has important tax cuts for rich people and corporations to worry about. They have no time for your measly privacy.
This never got to the floor, and even it had and had passed, the Senate would likely have rejected it.
Because some people treat ideology like their religion. It's really that simple. They don't care what the rest of the world does. They'll grab the skeletal remains of Jefferson and Adams and make the jaws move as they declare. "government shouldn't be in health care."
Meanwhile, back in the real world the US has some of the worst health care outcomes of any developed nations, despite having one of the most expensive health care systems.
Well, there's good reason to hope on the carbon emissions front.
The global trend toward replacing coal with natural gas will have a massive impact on human CO2 footprint. And this isn't the result of the strangling hand of regulation either: gas plants are simply more economically efficient and easy to run. It also coincidentally generates less than half the CO2 per kwH that coal does.
This trend alone makes hitting world CO2 goals a lot more feasible. A better electricity grid will allow more diverse energy sources as well. It's really quite feasible to increase electricity production while reducing CO2 emissions.
Not as little as it takes to get denialists to upvote empty rhetoric posing as criticism.
The disks are getting full; purge a file today.