Slashdot Mirror

Okay, let's forgive the Bosnian sniper for the sake of discussion.

I'm sure this was intended as just a cute family fairy tale...
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10...
As was this...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
And this was just a bit of hyperbole
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
And we know she was just kidding with
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
I'm sure she just forgot when she said
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/08/...

I could go on for many more lines, but it's late.

The original author said that "you aren't supposed to use them in aircraft."

Exactly. And he was wrong. There is not a problem with their use. Now, he was cool enough to accept being corrected, but you chose to go on arguing this silly point and exposed yourself as an asshole.

The prohibition comes from FCC regulations, not FAA.

Oh, wow, great (this, BTW, makes it an FCC rule, not "federal law" as you incorrectly asserted earlier.) And FCC is totally cool with such cell-phone use now, which makes their own, yours, and others' earlier assertions, that they are "dangerous" into dirty rotten lies. Congratulations, liar.

And you've been corrected now

No, dear. You have been corrected. Contrary to your assertions, the use of cellular phones inside airplane is harmless — whether or not there is a "federal law" against it is irrelevant. A pilot could use his personal phone — or some more convenient (and 10 times pricier) system using the same cellular network — to talk ATC as well as fellow pilots. Even that may be an improvement, but we don't have to stop there. By switching to TCP/IP we can make things much better (not just secure) for all — if only fewer people in aviation shared your stupid arrogant belief, that aviation has "unique" issues of its very own, which the outsiders have neither solved nor even encountered before.

so you should know better.

I do know better than some upstart, who thinks, his flight hours make him an expert in other walks of life.

So an ADS-B uplink that has 120 aircraft in its viscinity will actually retransmit every ADS-B packet from each aircraft 120 additional times?

Sure, why not? The numbers like 120 aren't at all impressive in the age of millions TCP connections per hour. A home-market WiFi router can handle more than 120 active wireless devices today — big deal...

And thus EVERYONE HAS TO HAVE THE KEY. Every aircraft needs that information.

Every craft needs the information, but they don't need each other's key — everyone just has to know a handful of mutually-trusted Certificate Authorities. Cryptography solved this problem decades ago.

Our military planes can each track dozens of both friendlies and non-cooperating hostiles — and share the information about the latter with the former — securely. A system to do the same with cooperating civilian aircraft and without concerns for enemy's jamming is not only possible, it is trivial.

And you would deliberately exclude every aircraft that has only "ADS-B in" capablility, because they just don't need to know any of this data?

People were flying without ADS-B for decades and mid-air collisions were extremely rare. But I would keep ADS-B installed for a while — as long as the plane's owner does not mind the privacy implications of it working. Perhaps, people would turn it on in busy airspace and off elsewhere.

(Unfortunately, your tone and manner make continuing this discussion too unpleasant. I'm unlikely to continue...)

And this:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/28/...

No, I do not believe the Free Market is the ideal, nor do I believe one can realistically exist any more than a pure democracy or communism.

Prey tell, what do you consider a better ideal than a Free Market based on **voluntary** (and thus, moral) exchange for perceived win-win ? You prefer involuntary (and thus, immoral) win-lose exchanges, such as the system called 'socialism' ?

And there are any number of reasons this country is going to hell but regulation probably is near the bottom of the list.

An alleged independent businessman as yourself wants *more* regulation? ROFL! you are too funny, and rather transparent. But please enlighten us all how your country is not hampered by regulation and how removing regulation would harm the country? I cannot wait to hear this.

I think your claim is pure hyperbole.

http://www.lemonadefreedom.com...
Yeah, you really need *more* regulation in the US.
http://www.foodrenegade.com/do...
http://articles.latimes.com/20...
http://www.naturalnews.com/043...
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
This level of INSANITY is only possible due to assh0les like you, who cheerlead for it. "Land of the Free" ROFL !

Feel free to identify this wonderful land so that we may all feel inferior to your paradise - unless, of course, you feel that we might not agree with you.

I've a better idea. Name an index and I'll tell you whether my country is better or worse than yours. On pretty-much everything except purchasing power parity and military power we're vastly better than the USA. Lower corruption, greater social cohesion, happier populace, lower inequality, debt to GDP, gun crime, broadband availability and speeds, etc. The USA is indeed a very great country, but the smartest and richest people from the USA have been buying up massive estates in my country because once you have made your money in the USA life is MUCH better here.

Let me also add that this country isn't "going to hell" any more than most of the rest of them are - so it would be appreciated if we could keep this discussion inside the bounds of reality.

Yes, when you say "most" this is true. My country is one of the few NOT going to hell - because it follows the policies I'm talking about, and not the ones you are talking about. You are so certain that what you strongly believe in now is the only possible course of action - you are delusional in your ignorance and your bad temper and arrogance is keeping you blind.

No, it's not regulations and even the fact that you would say that shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

Compliance costs money. A LOT of money. This is what makes straightforward things *unnecessarily* expensive - reducing coverage.

But living in Mythical Land, you also are astute enough to understand that if you don't build out a sustainable business model, your competitor will immediately open up and take those more profitable locations. Of course, this gives him the competitive advantage seeing as he is making more per customer (ARPU) and since he is far more profitable than you, he is now capable of building out faster than you are while also controlling the more profitable locat

No superfund site has been created for activities that has taken place after 1986. The private sector simply doesn't operate that way anymore.

That is entirely unknown. They are still adding locations so they may just not have gotten to them yet. Full disclosure: I have not fully researched this topic, my conclusions are based on the fact that sites are still being added, and incidents like this mine spill and these leaks and these incidents. The latter was only not a fund candidate because a) company had significant resources and b) cleanup needed to happen asap.

Co2 most definitely is born by the private sector. Almost all negative aspects if any are actually measurable are realized through reduced costs of products and lowered land values (most of which is controlled or owned by the rich who can afford the losses ).

You are partially correct, the costs are born by the land owners, many of whom are not rich, as they don't hold the mineral rights. Perhaps you should take a good look at the issues around fracking wells and who bears the cost. Here's a hint, it's not the company and in many cases not the land owners that are affected.

As the experiment of Mark Haub has shown (the famous Twinkie diet), even a very loop sided diet taken for several months can be ok and actually improve your health if you take care of what "proper portions" are.

You mean the *next* next NASCAR... I have it on good authority from 2005 that the Rocket Racing League is the *next* NASCAR.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/s...

I am sorry, but if it was fixed in few days, it was not found in few days. This bug existed for many versions of OpenSSL before being finally discovered. That's not quite true to say it was discovered in days.

Microsoft had a flaw in Windows that lasted for almost 20 years before being fixed, and they also had one that took 17 years to fix, and another one that took 15 years to fix. There are many, many more with shorter lifespans but are just as severe in terms of how much they compromise. Heartbleed was in use for 2, being introduced in March 2012 and fixed April 2014.

My point here is that open source software has a better track record for security, and you don't seem to be really disputing that.

The alternative is to do away with fines as they are in essence "uncollectible." Or raise the traffic tickets from $15 to $1000 to make them worthwhile to collect.

What do you do when you encounter somebody that has $20 but not $1k? Toss them in jail, crediting them $100/day, while spending ~$100/day in expenses to keep them in jail?

Doesn't take many of them to exceed the money gotten from those who actually have it.

That's not how the modern for-profit justice system works, you don't get *credit* for serving time, instead you *pay* for serving time:

      http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/1...

I've personally not installed any ad blocking on my phone, tablet or computers as I don't find Ads a problem.
Sympathy for the Devil? Perhaps. Someone has to pay. I'm just saying it could be worse.

You'll change that tune the first time your machine gets a drive-by infection from an ad network from an unpatched vulnerability or some other hole in the security. I had a user a few years ago where I was rebuilding the machine every few months due to drive-by infections. Switched to FlashBlock and NoScript and the infections went away for years at a time.

Did you visit any of the sites served by AOL's ad network in the last month? Oops, there they go serving up malware again because they can't be bothered to secure their services.

Like this one?

I would really like to believe that Democrats are just as stupid as Republicans. I don't see any reason why there would be a monopoly on stupid. And I certainly have seen lots of stupid democrats individually, And yet, my unscientific impression is that whenever something truly idiotic tries to become law there a preponderace of republicans backing it. How can this possibly occur? Same is true with the presidential race.

What is the mechanism that causes this lack of collective filtration for logic in one party but not the other.

Or am I mistaken? does the internet selectively bring me stories of republican idiocy and remove the democratic party stunts? If so this would explain a lot of why people are so angry and polarized these days.

I'm not talking about subjective disagreement. it's okay for people to disagree on some things. But legislating science? surely reasonable people in both parties would recognize the pattern here.

Republicans get a lot of the religious right vote. It's scary:
http://edition.cnn.com/interac...

the assassins at the CIA actually wander out into the real world and do things.

Actually, the CIA learned a long time ago that character assassinations work a lot better than the kind with bullets. Just ask the former head of the IMF, who dared to challenge the U.S. Dollar as a standard world currency.

Fails as I don't drink.

So because you don't drink, nobody every drinks? Well argued. Guess this didn't happen then. or this. or this. or this. or this. Aren't the things that don't happen amazing?

- I then stab my spouse to death because the gun wouldn't fire. outcome worse than 'bad'.

So it's ok to kill people while on methamphetamine, because people high on coke also kill people sometimes?

Well argued.

Scenario 2: (a) the burglar isn't a burglar, he's a home invader.

And also, he's constantly chasing a long legged bird with the aim of capturing/killing said bird with products he has purchased from ACME corporation. And you forgot to mention he is a coyote.

(b) daughter knows not to sneak in.

Oh. that's all right then, I guess. We don't need to worry about the dead kids.

(c) try finding this actually happening. Removing a firearm from an armed person's hands only really happens in the movies. It's too easy to just shoot somebody trying to snatch your weapon.

OK then

(d) bad conservative/libertarian police: So what? It's the intruder's fault for breaking in. If he doesn't want to risk getting shot, he shouldn't be breaking in.

Sure. We don't need to worry about the dead kids. Just pile em up out back.

New York City... safest in the country... you're so funny.

Do you even hear the nonsense coming out of your mouth?

New York City was the only American city to crack the world Safe cities index compiled by the Economist. http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/29/... It comes in at number 10, and as no American cities were ranked any higher, his statement is not necessarily nonsense.

Remember, Law and Order and Law and Order Special Victims Unit are fiction, not the news. I admit it doesn't sound truthy, but hey, I've walked around New York City without fear. Then again, I'm not a fearful person.

WTF is a GPU?

An indication that you stumbled onto the wrong site, read the wrong article, and then proceeded to comment just to figure out where on the internet you ended up.

Here let me direct you back to mainstream media

How the hell did this get modded 'funny'!? It's real, it's scary:
Obama declares emergency in Michigan over bad water
How tap water became toxic in Flint, Michigan

GM has missed the boat on this one. Uber already went in and poached all of CMU's top robotics individuals. The same CMU team that failed to finish DARPA 2004. GM has had the last decade to hire away self driving car experts but decided to make deadly design decisions instead.

Uber can find a body builder easier than GM is going to find Uber's expertise.

We're going to see a major shakeup in transportation across the board in the next 15-20 years, I wouldn't be surprised if GM didn't survive (or got broken apart and acquired). They've missed the boat on quite literally everything.

US is closer to communism than China. In China, if you lose your job - no unemployment. Have no income - no welfare. No food - no food stamps. No housing - no section 8. We "give stuff" to our residents much more than China...

Now that's some Trump-channeling.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Sure, Chinese welfare programs are a lot poorer than the US ones.
But China is a developing nation with 1.5 billion people and a far lower standard of living than the world's largest economy with a mere 319 million people.

As for housing... They started over 30 million and finished over 20 million affordable and social housing units during the 2011-2014 period alone.

Well, disregarding all the energy it takes to raise a cow, turn a into a nice steak or burger, and store and transport the finished product, there are other factors:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/opinions/sutter-beef-suv-cliamte-two-degrees

it would have work hard at it, given the lazybone habits of americans.

You're going to have to work harder at it, considering you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Have you seen the article about the pumpkin? http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/06/...

There are many articles about the poor ratio of intended targets vs. "collateral damage" or civilian deaths.

http://mic.com/articles/16949/...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/...

But you know that because you can Google too.

The US now prefers killing poor people in 3rd world countries with robots. Not very brave or noble. Not very good for our standing in the world. Not good for poor people in 3rd world countries.

In fact, it isn't good for anyone but defense contractors.

Sad truth: the messenger matters to how we get the message. We've seen a slew of stories along those lines -- physics tests lower if gender is known, violin auditions need to be anonymous to be judged on sound quality, insufficient peer review given to bad ideas of famous scientists such that death is the only thing that opens up the field to opponents (I can't find my citation on that one, but it was in the news last year), and just the fact that we reject ideas that come from political opponents, regardless of facts. But at the same time, true anonymity makes people behave in a much crueler way (much better cites exist, but this one will do for today). And all those "AC" labels make it hard to carry on a conversation -- I can't tell when the same person replies to me. Also, that name eventually develops a reputation for making good comments, which makes it possible to dredge out of the morass of people who just dump inanity, attacks, or lies -- those get recognized over time. The pseudonym of Slashdot seems to me to be a pretty good compromise. Pick a number to be your screen name, something large and random to avoid any connotations. But give me something to see you as a source of information.

I like how you cherry pick stats to layout your agenda. How do you think Israel feels about the military aid given to Afghanistan and Iraq (who both receive more than Israel) or Egypt, Pakistan, Bahrain, Turkey, etc? Israel gets money because it suits the US's needs in the region, that's it. If you need any help figuring out what that need is, just plot all those countries on a map and see who is square in the middle.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/11/politics/us-foreign-aid-report/

The top five recipients of foreign military financing in 2014:

1. Israel:

$3.1 billion
2. Egypt: $1.3 billion
3. Iraq: $300 million
3. Jordan: $300 million
5. Pakistan: $280 million

It always amuses me when Israeli right wingers tell me that Israel pays for it's military almost entirely out of it's own pocket. Apart from the US military aid they get, Israel pays for that stuff with loans guaranteed by US taxpayers, loanst that no sane investor on the free market would ever give the state of Israel. On top of that these debts get forgiven by the US congress.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/11/politics/us-foreign-aid-report/

The top five recipients of foreign military financing in 2014:

1. Israel: $3.1 billion
2. Egypt: $1.3 billion
3. Iraq: $300 million
3. Jordan: $300 million
5. Pakistan: $280 million

At least we know what the cash is for.

California has long been in the total control of one political party. The Democrats have super-majorities in both the state senate and the state assembly (the entire legislative branch), they have the governor, the lieutenant governor, the atty general, sec state, etc (the entire executive branch) and had those two branches for so long that they have appointed nearly all the judges (total control of the judicial branch, less the relative handful of elected judges in the state). California has TOTAL one-party rule. Yeah, we briefly had the "governator" (a celebrity who while technically a Republican, was after the previous Democrat governor jacked-up the car taxes and did nothing while the state suffered rolling blackouts. The "governator" won, not as a Republican (which he is, but at the left-edge of the party while married into the Democrat Kennedy family) but as a celebrity and an "action hero". Schwarzenegger mostly went along with the Democrat legislature to the point of even granting a pardon to murderer Esteban Nunez, "the son of Fabian Nunez, California's most powerful Democrat and a political ally to the governor" (here's the obligatory CNN link) and was barely a political hiccup.

When one party has THAT much political power (to the point of being able to totally ignore the other party and their voters for decades) they tend to lose any sight of the very CONCEPT of a there being any limit to their power and authority. It's made worse when the people with that power are "progressives" with an ideology that rejects the idea of limiting government authority and power, so that there is absolutely no internal pushback on even the craziest overreaches. No other party in modern history has had the level of political power over a state that the Democrats have over California.

Or how about this one? "Results from a recent AAS survey were reported at the last week's plenary session on harassment, defined as unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information. Some 82% of astronomers have heard sexist remarks from their peers; 44% heard sexist remarks from supervisors; 9% experienced physical harassment from peers or supervisors."

Those articles do not read like SJWs and the do seem to indicate some sort of a problem.

I read that bullet-point summary cited in the article and they didn't define unwelcome conduct. That can be as innocuous as inviting someone to have dinner after a conference. Or striking up an unwelcome conversation. Or criticizing a scientist's paper. Or anything that anyone subjectively decided was unwelcome conduct.

Anything could wind up in that survey as unwelcome conduct, whether it was reasonable conduct or not.

Did anyone read this article?. "Geoff Marcy, a leader in the field of exoplanet research, has resigned from his position as a professor of astronomy at the University of California, Berkeley, following an investigation that found he violated the school's sexual harassment policies."

Or how about this one? "Results from a recent AAS survey were reported at the last week's plenary session on harassment, defined as unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information. Some 82% of astronomers have heard sexist remarks from their peers; 44% heard sexist remarks from supervisors; 9% experienced physical harassment from peers or supervisors."

Those articles do not read like SJWs and the do seem to indicate some sort of a problem.

Allow rates to return to their market levels and this will change and we can go back to sustainable growth. Of course we won't do this because it would hurt the Wall St. Banks and politicians pocketbooks.

It seems you aren't up-to-date on market news. The Fed decided to raise interest rates for the first time in almost a decade last month, and may decide to raise them several more times this year if the economy remains strong.

Yeah, a form of patent-pending poison designed to simulate some of cannabis' good properties while providing all the usual side-effects and benefits of a drug. Benefits are defined as huge profits to the drug company who produced it.
 
  People have been making this shit for years. Surprising it hasn't received the bad press it deserves. If Bial had done the trials by coercing children in a shitty south American country a la GlaxoSmithKline the fines might have been only $17k per death.
 
It's like the idiots eating Aquabounty salmon, Aspartame and GMO corn instead of natural food that's been tested for safety in the real world for millions of years. You can't improve on marijuana.

Okay thanks for the clarification but I have to disagree.

While the Indian government puts a premium on protecting girls (perhaps because of the gender imbalance), perspective parents evidently do not.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indep...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/11/...
http://www.scientificamerican....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

Humans place a premium on their own life but we aren't talking about suicide here.

Okay thanks for the clarification but I have to disagree.

While the Indian government puts a premium on protecting girls (perhaps because of the gender imbalance), perspective parents evidently do not.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indep...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/11/...
http://www.scientificamerican....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

Humans place a premium on their own life but we aren't talking about suicide here.

Were it me answering, I'd ask who the fuck she was to accuse my husband of being a bad person before she ever spoke to him...and despite the fact that she was offered a couch for free!

No one in my town would think it's that odd of a request. This is what happens to people who respond to free Craigslist items here: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/...

The fear runs strong in you! You actually said, that all people who respond to craigslist ads kill women.

Since I have a true shaking, shitting in their pants safety culturist who has managed to turn eveyone in the world to a killer.... How in the hell do you extrapolate one killer to everyone? Do you even come out of the basement? People are killed on the streets. People are killed in the basement, people are killed in their panic rooms. True enough, but people are actually seldom killed. That's why its news. Its unusual.

Sucks to be you, scared one. Fear is the mind killer, and has just about destroyed your's. Take a deep breath, come out of the basement. It's a beautiful world out there.

Just be careful hiking, There was a killer on the Appalachian trail a few years back. So all people you meet on the trail are probably killers?

Were it me answering, I'd ask who the fuck she was to accuse my husband of being a bad person before she ever spoke to him...and despite the fact that she was offered a couch for free!

No one in my town would think it's that odd of a request. This is what happens to people who respond to free Craigslist items here: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/...

Human genes cannot be patented.

He's really a PETA plant. I knew it! They're everywhere.

Obama wiping his ass with The Second Amendment sure shows what he thinks of the civil rights of US citizens.

You're the confused one. Obama has been the best gun salesman ever. Every time he says the word 'gun', thousands fly off shelves. You think this isn't part of a well coordinated plan? How do you think Obama plans to support his retirement? Social Security? Remember, he's pretty young yet. His presidential pardon is just pocket change.

I bet that he is heavily invested in Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger....

And this, dear readers, is why we can't talk about mental illness online. Or gender differences. Or racial differences. Or religious differences.

Anyone who is *actually biased* uses descriptive language that picks out one side or the other.

Therefore, any descriptive language that picks one side or the other necessarily means the writer is actually biased.

And this is why we can't talk about inequalities or differences, online or in person. Whenever someone tries to point out differences they are labelled as racist, or sexist, or whatever.

It is impossible to have a rational discussion about any of these issues.

(It's called the fallacy of the reversed conditional, and it's used to lock down discussion in many places. It's an easy win for one side, just call the other side "sexist" and take offense.)

Your taxes actually do go to the 1% via mass, multi-billion dollar tax breaks, refunds, pre-tax exemptions, etc. JPMorgan, 1.3 billion tax refund in 2013, American Airlines, $22 million refund, Boeing $82 million tax refund in 2013. These numbers took 10 seconds on a Google search of "tax breaks and refunds for corporations". My stats come from The Nation, and in general these "tax breaks" cost the US economy over $150 billion last year. Corporate inversions are transferring money out of the US into foreign firms.

case in point, this just happened: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/...
Officer shot with a stolen gun.

Happens fairly often too, stolen guns being used in a crime.
After all, as the gun lobby likes to remind us, "gun control doesn't work because criminals will just steal them or something".

But stolen smart guns are just useless lumps of metal without the token.

So while this looks like a "dud" as a fusion weapon test, they already have bombs like the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Of course, Bill Clinton assured us that his 1994 "nuke deal" with North Korea would stop their nuclear weapons development program. That was the deal his "social worker" and Democrat activist friend Wendy Sherman negotiated - since innner-city poverty work is clearly the primary qualification needed for international nuclear weapons deal negotiations. Sadly, this is the same incompetent woman President Obama turned to to negotiate the equally feckless Iran nuclear deal and that Harvard will now allow to indoctrinate young Americans into terminal stupidity. Of course, as with her North Korea nuke deal, this woman was so incompetent that she never even READ the Iran "deal" she brokered. Expect Iranian nuke tests soon, and global nuclear terrorism and blackmail in the decades ahead.

Leftist lunatics with "social justice" agendas should never be allowed near serious issues. Even most right-wingers are too un-serious and insufficiently suspicious/cautious to be involved in such matters. Such negotiations should only involve people who have been on a battlefield smelling and tasting death with a gritty awareness that such things are REAL and not some damned abstract polysci exercise to slam-dunk an "achievment" or "legacy" during a short political term with no concern for the people who will face the results decades later.

Something like 80% of the population supports stricter gun laws

You're apparently stuck in a left-wing bubble somewhere. Even right after a mass shooting, a majority of the population opposes stricter gun control laws.
Here's the first reference I found in Google from CNN. Care to cite your 80% number study?

no.
as usual you're wrong and ignorant.

these initiatives all operate through existing mandates for existing government agencies and those agencies' jurisdictions.

they are neither unfunded, no 'rule by decree'.

in fact, most of the things Obama stated were things that Republicans used to support...until Obama supported it too.

According to reporting by the Huffington Post, in January 2013 Ryan called closing the so-called gun-show loophole in background checks "reasonable" and "obvious."

In fact, Ryan told the editorial board of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that he recalled thinking the loophole was a problem when he first arrived in Congress. "There is a loophole here. We should address that," Ryan told the board in the 2013 interview.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/...

As usual, they'd self-asphyxiate out of spite if Obama declared Oxygen important.

Do you want to guess who else minds likely work that way? I'll give you a hint. They might be the victims of previous mass shootings. I can only guess but i would wager that most of the dead in France's terrorist attacks and at the mass shootings all around the world wished they had the means to save their own life shortly before being killed by the shooters. Do you think they sat there and said I'm anti gun so kill me and get it over with? Of course you don't. But outside of wishing the killers would leave them alone, don't you think they wished for anything that could help them? Even anti gun people wish someone with a gun (likely the cops ) would show up in time to save their lives.

Let's compare the number of Americans killed by gun deaths on US soil (406,496) vs. the number of Americans killed by terrorism globally for the same period 2001 to 2013 (3,380), and then consider if easy availability of guns for self defense is realistic or just a nice dream.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10...

Regarding unlimited plans: http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/1...

Okay, let me see if I remember things properly, and in the right order.

GM was headed into bankruptcy, but the US government bailed them out because they were too big to fail.

Over the next couple of years, the government lost 11 billion dollars on the deal, money that all the rest of us taxpayers have to make up.

During that same time, GM made 22.6 billion dollars..

Also during that time, GM made vehicles with faulty ignition switches which killed over a hundred people, vigorously denied doing so, quietly fixed the problem, and back-edited the documentation to show that it was fixed all along.

Today, GM has enough spare cash to invest in other companies.

Oh, and also today we have an article on the front page about improving school performance by fighting poverty, and the comments are all responses to people who want to eliminate handouts to the poor.

This is the news and state of the world presented to us on the first working day of the new year.

I made no comment about it being good or bad (which is subjective). However, looking at sales, and most critics, it's not a failure. Though again that's subjective.

Disney spent $4Bil on this, it's not too hard to believe that some of those reviews have come under the influence of the Disney marketing budget.
I'm willing to believe that this movie had some smarts that I completely missed, but so far everything I've seen and read says that this is a turkey. And after the hype curve fades, time will reveal more honest opinions.

It hasn't caused a neo-nazi uprise anywhere so far

Well...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/03/...