My bleeding heart. I've been given tasks before by managers who expect 50 hours worth of work done in a single week, on-top of my normal responsibilities. Truth is, I think businesses need to start evolving their ideas of what constitutes "good potential." What the hell is the point of going to college, spending $20K+, and umpteen man hours if the company that hires me is just going to shove me through 2-3 months worth of training? I could have learned the basics in 1-2 years of college (skip the stupid ass philosophy and art classes) and not wasted my time/energy/money.
I have and use Office 2013 (got a discount from work...$22 and it came w/ the CD). Office 2013 doesn't require, but uses Skydrive to store documents/notes/etc as the "first choice" if you go with the default setup options.
"Which Droid phones would those be? A Motorola Droid? An HTC Droid? No need to answer; that's a rhetorical question. None of the Android phones I've used support full encryption. BlackBerry 10 has it built-in, so all the phones that run it will most likely have it. That is a distinct advantage over Android."
First there's no such thing as a "HTC Droid". Droid is a registered trademark (I assume now) of Disney and is used under license by Motorola for a series of Verizon Wireless focused Android phones. So when I say Droid I mean THOSE specific phones. I don't know, nor care, what phones YOU have used. I can tell you that the Droid series of Androids have FULL phone encryption. I can also tell you that starting with Android 3.0 the option to encrypt your device (http://www.howtogeek.com/120599/6-things-you-dont-have-to-root-android-to-do-anymore/).
"Yes, I understand that, and after several years, third-party CalDAV and CardDAV sync adapters finally turned up for Android. They mostly work, though Anroid's calendar and account management and UI stumble over them in certain places, making them a little awkward to use and a bit tricky to set up. BlackBerry 10 has both built-in, which is another distinct advantage."
Most likely it is because the demand isn't there. There was a great demand to have full encryption and it was added in to the stock Android OS. Also what you find "tricky" or "graphically displeasing" doesn't mean others do. The beauty of Android is that you can modify the kernel and do what you want, write an app, or just wait and apps get better and better over time.
"It was about privacy."
You do realize you're using a device that continually broadcasts a signal telling anyone with the know how where you are, right? You do realize that all of your 3G/4G/2G data including calls, texts, and data use goes through your phone carrier, right? You do realize that these companies routinely work with the government and provide full access to your data at any time with or (in some cases) without a warrant (AT&T), right? If you're using a smartphone then you truly cannot expect to have any real sense of privacy. Even less so with a Blackberry.
"I understand that old BlackBerry devices used a central email gateway, but I haven't read anything indicating that BlackBerry 10 uses a central gateway to access my POP3/IMAP accounts, or that it prevents me from running a messaging app of my choice. I don't need their "push" feature."
I haven't read anything that indicates it doesn't and previous Blackberries did just that. When I read something definitive I may change my opinion, but if you're going to stand there and criticize iOS and Android while looking at Blackberry through rose-tinted glasses, then I am going to call you delusional. That would be like me saying "Well, I haven't heard that Android 6.0 doesn't have full encryption with no monitoring of anything and is the perfect privacy shell!"
Until the company says something otherwise what you HAVEN'T heard/read about isn't something to stand on.
"File encryption so a lost/stolen phone is a little less risky."
The Droid phones (and I believe at least some of the Samsung Galaxy models) have full encryption.
"Built-in CalDAV and CardDAV so I can sync my calendar and contacts with the server of my choice instead of handing all that information to Google. Yes, please!"
Android wasn't designed to be the "end all, be all" OS. Hell even the Tech demo on Youtube told you that much. It was designed to make an open platform so that OTHERS could have a full-featured phone OS and either modify it to add features OR build third-party applications. This is important because it's much easier to update an app than an entire OS, which usually takes carriers deciding to do their job and almost never happens in the US.
Android is a fairly secure OS. This new Blackberry OS is going to have bugs and security issues too. Oh and for bitching about privacy you're such sucking the long, hard, dong of a company who routes all of their messages through a global server system (which presents a point of failure that has failed before and caused massive issues). And since we all know encryption can eventually be broken, your messages are stored for however long RIM/Blackberry wants to.
That's the biggest problem with banks -- they're allowed to invest in securities. At a WORST case scenario with Glass–Steagall Act is that you would've had a housing market collapse. Houses would've been repo'd and put up for sale for private investors and investment firms to come in, buy them up, and rent them out or tear them down and build other stuff there. You'd have had an entire industry of "buy 'em cheap, fix 'em up, sell 'em for a big paycheck" boom.
Instead what we got was banks that made bad mortgages (the reasons can be whatever you want them to be), rolled them up, and sold them as A++ securities that were bought, rerolled, and resold by other banks thousands and thousands of times. It got to the point that simply TOUCHING a real-estate deal made you a ton of money...money that truly came out of thin air. Then reality came knocking and instead of a low-medium dip in the economy, we took a MASSIVE hit because insurance companies, investment firms, and banks were all a lot too greedy and too little of brain to look out for their CUSTOMERS.
Banks = small-medium sized loans, savings, very low risk, very low return, very safe
Investment firms = small-mega-sized loans, stocks/bonds/securities/etc, very high return, medium-very high risk, not safe but the benefits can definitely outweigh the costs
Insurance companies = invest in safe methods, low to low-medium risk, risk depending upon whether the "money under the mattress" can more than cover a large amount of claims
The above is HOW these types of companies work within our economic system. They're unique and serve very different purposes and these kinds of companies should NEVER be allowed to be more than ONE type of these companies, because when they get big and they crash others pay the price. We need to reinstate Glass–Steagall.
Posts like this are why you drive people away. I love Linux, but for an Enterprise Desktop system...it'll NEVER be adopted. And people use at home what they use at work (OS/Office products). Instead of calling people "faggot", however taking that constructive critique and actually USE it? Most people won't care to have/won't want/won't need to have a release every 6 months or even every year. I wish some of the Linux Devs out there would step back and realize that Linux doesn't have to be/should be a "niche" thing anymore.
To some extent. It heavily relies upon Google's search engine (for most devices), Google's app market (for most devices), and it allows Google to sell their own hardware.
Android was very much a business model, which is why Google is spending millions to defend it in court.
You act like that's some inconvenience, but ignore the fact that you'll be carrying this device around with you everywhere you go. With/without your cell phone. Furthermore my cellphone is much more powerful than this is and if I lose the controller...well...it's not that expensive to replace.
It was to my understanding that you can protest to a point where you start causing private businesses/individuals loss of income and/or endanger their lives (such as blocking a sidewalk so people have to walk in the street). Is this invalid?
"In principle and theory, yes. In practice, maybe not. You would almost certainly use libraries installed on the device, unless you plan to roll your own from scratch (and that's going to eat a lot of SRAM). They could still sniff and snoop at the library level."
While I agree with you, I think most of the open source browsers (such as Firefox) tend to rely on other open source libs.
"Or, they could simply sniff and snoop whatever is displayed on the screen. Your open-source browser is "clean," but Nokia is, in essence, a snoop looking over your shoulder. "
Well device security is a bit different than software security. There's open source hardware, but generally it's not nearly as nice as the proprietary stuff. Of course then we get into other aspects of hardware security (like using a can of CO2 and freezing the ram chips, removing them, and reading the data off of them) and whatnot. In truth one really shouldn't expect a grain of privacy when you interact with the internet unless you're viewing a static web page full of Loreum Ipsum and then no one cares. At least that's generally my opinion and I've just figured that as long as I don't do anything illegal (or illegal enough to be important) than I'm reasonably alright with the lack of true privacy.
Not true. If it's open source YOU have the power to stop it from doing anything like that, by reviewing the source code and making changes wherever needed. A third-party server run by a multi-national corporation is unlikely to allow the same level of access.
Low ranking managers, nurses/doctors/etc who only make "rounds" every other day or something to see patients, remote coders who stopped in the office for some reason, IT support persons with access to shared drives to spreadsheets/data containing patient information, etc, etc.
There are a number of reasons why laptops leave facilities. The question is why wasn't it encrypted?
As a developer who works on software I'm curious -- why would you not pay for it, but steal it instead? If I've worked long and hard on my application, what exactly gives YOU the right to STEAL MY hard work? I put a lot into the software that I write and if I sell my software (sometimes I just release as open source) than why should you not give me what I ask for it? I'm not even forcing you to use my software.
What a stupid response. Not only did you not address my question, but your comment is devoid of anything that resembles intelligence above a retard.
You know what this comment: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3350353&cid=42440929 was actually good. It presented me with options I did not think about, it wasn't some veiled threat or call for violence. What makes you even more stupid is that you wouldn't ever punch me in the face and you've delegated yourself to the millions of armchair, internet "tough guys" who would never actually DO anything that you describe.
It's too bad Slashdot doesn't have an ignore button, because I'm perfectly convinced there is not a single thing further you can say that would come off as anything that's intelligent or reasonable. Congratulations on being mediocre.
I don't mean to sound rude or ignorant, but really...who cares? Will the foundations of society crumble because someone can't get out that ONE GOOD Hamlet remake where everyone dresses like they're in present times, but speak in Shakespearean language? We should focus on the REAL issues of copyright and that's the lack of ownership of digital copies or something serious.
No one benefits from a good "ass chewing". You may scare the shit out of your employees and make them feel like shit -- but they're not happy at the end of it all. I guarantee it, they're just not going to tell you anything different because you'll probably fire them.
"to many in the US government who have been working hard at crippling the free and open nature of the internet and the ability to communicate anonymously, and for many of the same reasons they would want TOR effectively de-fanged."
Who? Who is going after TOR? I can't think of any Congressman off the top of my head. The President hasn't spoken on the subject. It's technically legal to use in the US.
"And for all the people I see and hear cheering on the expansions of government, and then hear them bitch and moan whenever the government gets all jack-booty, it makes me think that maybe the colonists should have just paid the damned tea taxes and the stamp taxes, swore fealty to King George, and kept their damned mouths shut."
Based on this and your "Modern Progressivism & Liberalism: Ideas so good they have to be mandatory" signature I'm thinking this is nothing more than a cheap shot attempt at Liberals. Clearly America doesn't agree with your line of thinking. So basically your post is full of unproven "information" and petty political cheap shots because "hurr CONSERVATIVISM!!!@@!@#@#@#".
Shut up.
Why are you bitching? First off it's not like Ubuntu can't be totally re-rolled to remove the components you don't want in it. Secondly you're not REQUIRED to use Ubuntu's flavor of distribution. You can go and get any of the number of "based off Ubuntu" distros out there. Linux Mint is one I personally prefer.
I think it's exciting that someone is ignoring all of the "OH NOES IT MUST BE OPEN SOURCE AND IT MUST NOT DO ANYTHING AND IT MUST USE TEXT FILES FOR CONFIGURATION WAAAAAA" vitriol that accompanies Linux. People like me would LOVE to switch to 100% Linux, but it's missing things that Windows or Mac OSX offers. Just because I'm not part of the RMS fanboy club, it doesn't mean my wants/needs are any more or less important than anyone else's. That SHOULD be the beauty of Open Source -- trying out new ideas and if it doesn't work or it doesn't work the way YOU want it to work, then fork it and do your own thing. But for all that's holy, quit your bitching.
That's the cost of sane privacy controls -- sometimes it can be used for bad purposes. Society should be looking inwards at the cause of this. Spying on people, tracking their every movement, and abusing the legal systems of countries created a need (and a demand) for a type of security system that would protect you to the n-th degree.
Now we've got a solution and it will be abused. What needs to happen is companies that make software need to invest into security and response. We're never going to stop the threat, but we can minimize the damage and downtime.
Do you know if there is actually a cost? TFA says it's a big microwave and thus it's not actually irradiating the food in the manner that you seem to suggest.
Furthermore according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven#Effects_on_food_and_nutrients) no nutrients are lost so long as the microwaving process is done correctly. TFA has nothing in it about the loss of nutrients, so where do you derive your facts from? Your quotations around the word treatment suggests derision to a technology that it seems you don't understand. Microwaves are safe and indeed pass through your body everyday from both man-made and natural sources.
I'd suggest doing some research into this -- it's not a harmful thing and it's nothing new. It's just applied in a different way (assuming TFA's oversimplification of the device wasn't too over simplified).
No.
"If the process kills all mold spores"
The key in your statement is the "kills ALL" -- if there's nothing left to evolve new traits then resistant strains can't develop.
"We really need to pull the companies we work for out of those equations. it will be a nice break for them and it will be better for the rest of us."
The only viable option would be government ran healthcare and retirement plans. Sure you could have private industry -- but the overhead (paying executive salaries and whatnot) tends to be far greater then a well-structured government option.
Slashdot Mirror
My bleeding heart. I've been given tasks before by managers who expect 50 hours worth of work done in a single week, on-top of my normal responsibilities. Truth is, I think businesses need to start evolving their ideas of what constitutes "good potential." What the hell is the point of going to college, spending $20K+, and umpteen man hours if the company that hires me is just going to shove me through 2-3 months worth of training? I could have learned the basics in 1-2 years of college (skip the stupid ass philosophy and art classes) and not wasted my time/energy/money.
I have and use Office 2013 (got a discount from work...$22 and it came w/ the CD). Office 2013 doesn't require, but uses Skydrive to store documents/notes/etc as the "first choice" if you go with the default setup options.
"Which Droid phones would those be? A Motorola Droid? An HTC Droid? No need to answer; that's a rhetorical question. None of the Android phones I've used support full encryption. BlackBerry 10 has it built-in, so all the phones that run it will most likely have it. That is a distinct advantage over Android."
First there's no such thing as a "HTC Droid". Droid is a registered trademark (I assume now) of Disney and is used under license by Motorola for a series of Verizon Wireless focused Android phones. So when I say Droid I mean THOSE specific phones. I don't know, nor care, what phones YOU have used. I can tell you that the Droid series of Androids have FULL phone encryption. I can also tell you that starting with Android 3.0 the option to encrypt your device (http://www.howtogeek.com/120599/6-things-you-dont-have-to-root-android-to-do-anymore/).
"Yes, I understand that, and after several years, third-party CalDAV and CardDAV sync adapters finally turned up for Android. They mostly work, though Anroid's calendar and account management and UI stumble over them in certain places, making them a little awkward to use and a bit tricky to set up. BlackBerry 10 has both built-in, which is another distinct advantage."
Most likely it is because the demand isn't there. There was a great demand to have full encryption and it was added in to the stock Android OS. Also what you find "tricky" or "graphically displeasing" doesn't mean others do. The beauty of Android is that you can modify the kernel and do what you want, write an app, or just wait and apps get better and better over time.
"It was about privacy."
You do realize you're using a device that continually broadcasts a signal telling anyone with the know how where you are, right? You do realize that all of your 3G/4G/2G data including calls, texts, and data use goes through your phone carrier, right? You do realize that these companies routinely work with the government and provide full access to your data at any time with or (in some cases) without a warrant (AT&T), right? If you're using a smartphone then you truly cannot expect to have any real sense of privacy. Even less so with a Blackberry.
"I understand that old BlackBerry devices used a central email gateway, but I haven't read anything indicating that BlackBerry 10 uses a central gateway to access my POP3/IMAP accounts, or that it prevents me from running a messaging app of my choice. I don't need their "push" feature."
I haven't read anything that indicates it doesn't and previous Blackberries did just that. When I read something definitive I may change my opinion, but if you're going to stand there and criticize iOS and Android while looking at Blackberry through rose-tinted glasses, then I am going to call you delusional. That would be like me saying "Well, I haven't heard that Android 6.0 doesn't have full encryption with no monitoring of anything and is the perfect privacy shell!"
Until the company says something otherwise what you HAVEN'T heard/read about isn't something to stand on.
"File encryption so a lost/stolen phone is a little less risky."
The Droid phones (and I believe at least some of the Samsung Galaxy models) have full encryption.
"Built-in CalDAV and CardDAV so I can sync my calendar and contacts with the server of my choice instead of handing all that information to Google. Yes, please!"
Android wasn't designed to be the "end all, be all" OS. Hell even the Tech demo on Youtube told you that much. It was designed to make an open platform so that OTHERS could have a full-featured phone OS and either modify it to add features OR build third-party applications. This is important because it's much easier to update an app than an entire OS, which usually takes carriers deciding to do their job and almost never happens in the US.
Android is a fairly secure OS. This new Blackberry OS is going to have bugs and security issues too. Oh and for bitching about privacy you're such sucking the long, hard, dong of a company who routes all of their messages through a global server system (which presents a point of failure that has failed before and caused massive issues). And since we all know encryption can eventually be broken, your messages are stored for however long RIM/Blackberry wants to.
Enjoy your delusional fantasy.
That's the biggest problem with banks -- they're allowed to invest in securities. At a WORST case scenario with Glass–Steagall Act is that you would've had a housing market collapse. Houses would've been repo'd and put up for sale for private investors and investment firms to come in, buy them up, and rent them out or tear them down and build other stuff there. You'd have had an entire industry of "buy 'em cheap, fix 'em up, sell 'em for a big paycheck" boom.
Instead what we got was banks that made bad mortgages (the reasons can be whatever you want them to be), rolled them up, and sold them as A++ securities that were bought, rerolled, and resold by other banks thousands and thousands of times. It got to the point that simply TOUCHING a real-estate deal made you a ton of money...money that truly came out of thin air. Then reality came knocking and instead of a low-medium dip in the economy, we took a MASSIVE hit because insurance companies, investment firms, and banks were all a lot too greedy and too little of brain to look out for their CUSTOMERS.
Banks = small-medium sized loans, savings, very low risk, very low return, very safe
Investment firms = small-mega-sized loans, stocks/bonds/securities/etc, very high return, medium-very high risk, not safe but the benefits can definitely outweigh the costs
Insurance companies = invest in safe methods, low to low-medium risk, risk depending upon whether the "money under the mattress" can more than cover a large amount of claims
The above is HOW these types of companies work within our economic system. They're unique and serve very different purposes and these kinds of companies should NEVER be allowed to be more than ONE type of these companies, because when they get big and they crash others pay the price. We need to reinstate Glass–Steagall.
Posts like this are why you drive people away. I love Linux, but for an Enterprise Desktop system...it'll NEVER be adopted. And people use at home what they use at work (OS/Office products). Instead of calling people "faggot", however taking that constructive critique and actually USE it? Most people won't care to have/won't want/won't need to have a release every 6 months or even every year. I wish some of the Linux Devs out there would step back and realize that Linux doesn't have to be/should be a "niche" thing anymore.
To some extent. It heavily relies upon Google's search engine (for most devices), Google's app market (for most devices), and it allows Google to sell their own hardware. Android was very much a business model, which is why Google is spending millions to defend it in court.
You act like that's some inconvenience, but ignore the fact that you'll be carrying this device around with you everywhere you go. With/without your cell phone. Furthermore my cellphone is much more powerful than this is and if I lose the controller...well...it's not that expensive to replace.
It was to my understanding that you can protest to a point where you start causing private businesses/individuals loss of income and/or endanger their lives (such as blocking a sidewalk so people have to walk in the street). Is this invalid?
"In principle and theory, yes. In practice, maybe not. You would almost certainly use libraries installed on the device, unless you plan to roll your own from scratch (and that's going to eat a lot of SRAM). They could still sniff and snoop at the library level."
While I agree with you, I think most of the open source browsers (such as Firefox) tend to rely on other open source libs.
"Or, they could simply sniff and snoop whatever is displayed on the screen. Your open-source browser is "clean," but Nokia is, in essence, a snoop looking over your shoulder. "
Well device security is a bit different than software security. There's open source hardware, but generally it's not nearly as nice as the proprietary stuff. Of course then we get into other aspects of hardware security (like using a can of CO2 and freezing the ram chips, removing them, and reading the data off of them) and whatnot. In truth one really shouldn't expect a grain of privacy when you interact with the internet unless you're viewing a static web page full of Loreum Ipsum and then no one cares. At least that's generally my opinion and I've just figured that as long as I don't do anything illegal (or illegal enough to be important) than I'm reasonably alright with the lack of true privacy.
Not true. If it's open source YOU have the power to stop it from doing anything like that, by reviewing the source code and making changes wherever needed. A third-party server run by a multi-national corporation is unlikely to allow the same level of access.
What a surprise, SOME cops are bullies, liars, and thugs. That's not exactly "news".
Fixed that for ya.
Low ranking managers, nurses/doctors/etc who only make "rounds" every other day or something to see patients, remote coders who stopped in the office for some reason, IT support persons with access to shared drives to spreadsheets/data containing patient information, etc, etc.
There are a number of reasons why laptops leave facilities. The question is why wasn't it encrypted?
"and why iTunes gift cards and not the President, is the current incarnation of the anti-christ."
Had to sneak that little conservative tidbit in there, didn't we?
As a developer who works on software I'm curious -- why would you not pay for it, but steal it instead? If I've worked long and hard on my application, what exactly gives YOU the right to STEAL MY hard work? I put a lot into the software that I write and if I sell my software (sometimes I just release as open source) than why should you not give me what I ask for it? I'm not even forcing you to use my software.
If I had modpoints, I would mod this up. I had honestly not considered Braille, audio, or other functional editions. Thank you for enlightening me.
What a stupid response. Not only did you not address my question, but your comment is devoid of anything that resembles intelligence above a retard.
You know what this comment: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3350353&cid=42440929 was actually good. It presented me with options I did not think about, it wasn't some veiled threat or call for violence. What makes you even more stupid is that you wouldn't ever punch me in the face and you've delegated yourself to the millions of armchair, internet "tough guys" who would never actually DO anything that you describe.
It's too bad Slashdot doesn't have an ignore button, because I'm perfectly convinced there is not a single thing further you can say that would come off as anything that's intelligent or reasonable. Congratulations on being mediocre.
I don't mean to sound rude or ignorant, but really...who cares? Will the foundations of society crumble because someone can't get out that ONE GOOD Hamlet remake where everyone dresses like they're in present times, but speak in Shakespearean language? We should focus on the REAL issues of copyright and that's the lack of ownership of digital copies or something serious.
No one benefits from a good "ass chewing". You may scare the shit out of your employees and make them feel like shit -- but they're not happy at the end of it all. I guarantee it, they're just not going to tell you anything different because you'll probably fire them.
"to many in the US government who have been working hard at crippling the free and open nature of the internet and the ability to communicate anonymously, and for many of the same reasons they would want TOR effectively de-fanged." Who? Who is going after TOR? I can't think of any Congressman off the top of my head. The President hasn't spoken on the subject. It's technically legal to use in the US. "And for all the people I see and hear cheering on the expansions of government, and then hear them bitch and moan whenever the government gets all jack-booty, it makes me think that maybe the colonists should have just paid the damned tea taxes and the stamp taxes, swore fealty to King George, and kept their damned mouths shut." Based on this and your "Modern Progressivism & Liberalism: Ideas so good they have to be mandatory" signature I'm thinking this is nothing more than a cheap shot attempt at Liberals. Clearly America doesn't agree with your line of thinking. So basically your post is full of unproven "information" and petty political cheap shots because "hurr CONSERVATIVISM!!!@@!@#@#@#". Shut up.
Why are you bitching? First off it's not like Ubuntu can't be totally re-rolled to remove the components you don't want in it. Secondly you're not REQUIRED to use Ubuntu's flavor of distribution. You can go and get any of the number of "based off Ubuntu" distros out there. Linux Mint is one I personally prefer. I think it's exciting that someone is ignoring all of the "OH NOES IT MUST BE OPEN SOURCE AND IT MUST NOT DO ANYTHING AND IT MUST USE TEXT FILES FOR CONFIGURATION WAAAAAA" vitriol that accompanies Linux. People like me would LOVE to switch to 100% Linux, but it's missing things that Windows or Mac OSX offers. Just because I'm not part of the RMS fanboy club, it doesn't mean my wants/needs are any more or less important than anyone else's. That SHOULD be the beauty of Open Source -- trying out new ideas and if it doesn't work or it doesn't work the way YOU want it to work, then fork it and do your own thing. But for all that's holy, quit your bitching.
That's the cost of sane privacy controls -- sometimes it can be used for bad purposes. Society should be looking inwards at the cause of this. Spying on people, tracking their every movement, and abusing the legal systems of countries created a need (and a demand) for a type of security system that would protect you to the n-th degree. Now we've got a solution and it will be abused. What needs to happen is companies that make software need to invest into security and response. We're never going to stop the threat, but we can minimize the damage and downtime.
Do you know if there is actually a cost? TFA says it's a big microwave and thus it's not actually irradiating the food in the manner that you seem to suggest. Furthermore according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_oven#Effects_on_food_and_nutrients) no nutrients are lost so long as the microwaving process is done correctly. TFA has nothing in it about the loss of nutrients, so where do you derive your facts from? Your quotations around the word treatment suggests derision to a technology that it seems you don't understand. Microwaves are safe and indeed pass through your body everyday from both man-made and natural sources. I'd suggest doing some research into this -- it's not a harmful thing and it's nothing new. It's just applied in a different way (assuming TFA's oversimplification of the device wasn't too over simplified).
No. "If the process kills all mold spores" The key in your statement is the "kills ALL" -- if there's nothing left to evolve new traits then resistant strains can't develop.
"We really need to pull the companies we work for out of those equations. it will be a nice break for them and it will be better for the rest of us." The only viable option would be government ran healthcare and retirement plans. Sure you could have private industry -- but the overhead (paying executive salaries and whatnot) tends to be far greater then a well-structured government option.