in how much they're going to compensate businesses that go offline every time there's a major update. Older versions of Windows Updates used BITS, which was, by default, limited to four concurrent connections. Win 10 uses some bastardized "embrace and extend" crap that opens, literally - I have counted - four hundred or more concurrent connections, eating up 100% of all available bandwidth, and knocking everything else on your network offline. And since this has been going on for months, with people complaining the entire time, it's clearly by intent.

I suspect that the Win 10 computers would be just fine if they weren't going through our VPN, which is also knocked down while this is going on, meaning only non-spyware versions stop working.

Windows 10 is malware, in and of itself. It is literally impossible to use for anything that matters.

The idea behind the internet was to make a massive, decentralized system that wasn't under control of anyone.

That may have been the idea behind it, but centralized control has been in place since the DNS system was put in. Yeah, in theory, you can do stuff by IP address, but in practice, that hasn't actually worked since Apache added virtual servers. No, the web isn't the internet, but it's the only internet most people actually use any more.

Snowden: I'd like sanctuary in Russia. The Americans want to kill me. Think how embarrassing it'd be if you gave me refuge.

Russian Immigration Official: We want copies of everything you stole form them.

S: I don't have it with me.

RIO: Well, get back to us when you do. In the meantime, there's the door.

S: Well, here's what I got. That's all there is.

RIO: I don't believe you, and even if I did, that's not worth the trouble of taking you in, since you'll be a parasite living off the dole for the rest of your life. Go away.

S: Well, maybe there's more.

RIO: Lie to us again, and we'll stuff you onto a plane back to the US at gunpoint, and crow about how gullible you were to give us everything you stole, and thought we'd let you stay here.

Without offering any opinion on whether what Snowden did was good, bad, or potato, my first though here is:

The odds that Snowden was given refuge in Russia without turning over 100% of what he took are about the same as the odds of him getting his pardon: zero.

Which is better than him putting it all up on the internet, I suppose. While I'm sure there's national security intelligence in that data dump of great interest to Russia, they will do their best (which is very good) to coerce him into not revealing any of that to anyone else.

As often as I leave my credit cards at home, whether I'm going to buy something or not. I bought a mobile phone so that I could take it with me. I can't drive without my license, so leaving the wallet at home would be a bad idea, too.

Do people really leave home without either?

I have a flip phone. It's still bigger than my wallet.

In none of those cases am I responsible for anything past the first $50. I don't know, and can't find out, who is responsible if a phone with some kind of digital wallet installed is stolen and hacked. Apparently, you don't know either, or you'd be crowing about it, or you do know, and hope I don't find out. What do these company have to hide?

All the crap in my wallet is still smaller and lighter than a smart phone. or even than my flip phone, for that matter.

I am curious a to who is responsible if someone steals your phone and hacks their way into it, and uses it to buy stuff. Once the new standards go into effect in October, I suspect that will be the consumer using the phone, because that's the lowest level of security (not using the chip). With a credit card, it might be the merchant (if they're not using EMV), if might be the merchant service, is might be my bank, but it won't be me.

I'll bet I can hack your phone app easier than you can hack my credit card.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I could walk away today and live for about a year on savings, etc. Without touching my 401k.

But then, I made a choice, long ago, to not live hand-to-mouth. My choice, an no employer was invited to participate in making it.

Go do a search for Terry Childs, who did not work for UCSF, but did work for the city of San Francisco. Don't think for one second that all of the employees being laid off are unaware of who he is, what he did, and how long a prison sentence he served.

I'll bet you they've been specifically reminded of him, in fact.

There is a specific legal process for forming a union. It takes longer than these guys have left. Unions picketing for jobs that they haven't had for months generally just look stupid. (This does not always stop them, of course.)

You're assuming the outsourced labor is actually cheaper. It often, perhaps even usually, is not.

When management is told that it will be, and fall for it again, and again, and again, this is not a place a competent employee wants to work in the first place.

I got say, if I were one of the two candidates who knew their ass from a hole in the ground, and I found that out, I'd consider that I'd dodges a bullet, and be very, very glad of it.

Best to avoid jobs that bad in the first place, even if you're begging for change on a street corner.

If you're living that way, that is a choice you make. No one else. If you don't save money for bad times, you will suffer when bad times arrive - and they most certainly will. If you don't make enough to save, give up smoking pot and weekend raves, and learn job skills that pay better. Rather than doing what everyone else is doing, or what stupid television shows tell you is normal, take control of your own life, and accept responsibility for your own decisions.

When you make bad decisions, you accept the bad results. The most bad decisions you make, the more bad results you have to live with.

(And young people are, generally speaking, in a far better position to be suddenly unemployed, as they generally have far less in the way of responsibilities, and generally have more support from family and friends available.)