So instead of a firecracker, this one was the size of a cherry bomb?
Speaking of cherry bomb... That wasn't the strength of an earthquake that was being presented with 5.3. I'm going to say "cm" and let people have a ball with it.
Nukes are so 20th century. Precision weapons are much more useful. Somebody should send O'l Kimmy the memo - obviously he never got it.
Oh, don't start with that crap again. He'll try to get in the Guinness Book for being the leader of a country with the most body/stunt doubles in history.
...'Unstable leaders'... and this is coming from a country where Donald J. Trump could be chosen as the next president?
I feel you limited your logic "is a bit unstable" when you limited "unstable leaders" to only Donald J. Trump. The only other possibility is just as, if not more unstable. Speaking of instability, I heard a nuclear reaction was triggered in NK. *drum roll* I'll be here all week./humor
Can we assume that one day North Korea will attack something? I've always thought that they're just posturing, but this most recent "test" makes me hesitate...
I am much less worried about them than Muslim countries with the bomb. North Korean rulers are ruthless and power hungry but rational to the degree that they don't want to be wiped out in a counter-strike. Many Muslims would see a counter-strike as an advantage, with millions of people becoming martyrs and getting their millions^27 virgins.
You read it wrong. Try again. Thinking humans are anything but part of the imbalance of energy that the rest of the universe (if that's all it is) is governed by is near-theistic self-praise. We're nothing but a tiny blip of energy imbalance that is so insignificant that if all life on earth and everything we have created were to suddenly break apart and release all energy holding ALL of it together would barely be recognizable and measurable to the Voyager crafts we sent out.
It's so disappointing to see people disregard reality to stroke themselves with BS to ease the discomfort of being nearly meaningless in spacetime. We don't mean crap. Enjoy what we have while we have the ability to.
That's too broad. Think only of the components of it.
Plus, if you want to get technical, sedentary leads to less muscle damage, hence less healing. Active requires more healing but leads to more tensile strength....
There comes the issue of balance. When there's something good, there's something negative/bad to counterbalance it. It happens in every part of our lives. Everything biologically (chemically, physically, electromagnetically) must find balance and is always striving to do so. Heck, that's what the universe operates on with everything we've found so far; something got screwed up and things went BOOM, this way, that way, or didn't...but what's always been observed is energy of all types converting, exchanging, repelling, attracting, you name it. Our entire existence is the result of imbalance and everything trying (unsuccessfully so far) to find balance.
Having said that, it's just plain scary to think that there's even a remote possibility that a genetic change can offer something of awesomeness and not have a major negative to counterbalance it. e.g. "I'm 7'2" tall now and have massive muscles. Downside is that I'm lacking calcium and my center of gravity is off."
To try and meet the demand of maintaining balance, more muscle need to be used. Since the rest of the body's components haven't been accounted for when it comes to an imbalance, it's quite possible that one of those imbalances will destroy or injure other parts of that body. It's a complicated mess (and a beautiful one), but we have become what we are today due to accidents (oops, just had sex with a different species of human, but look how tough my kid is), disasters (big rock hit, make everything cold, body must adapt and pass genes on with adaptations), and so many others. Heck, why do we have butt hair? It doesn't really do anything but get in the way as far as we can tell, but the body hasn't mutated it away over time, so it does something, right?
Back to the topic.. If I volunteer to have my kid (don't have one, just saying) given an advantage in advanced brain development with an emphasis on the pre-frontal cortex, perhaps it will trigger a dormant gene somewhere around the age of 25 that breaks down neural connections and causes brain cells to trigger death so it doesn't, you know, explode. I'm stating something that can be argued to death (no pun), but it's just food for thought.
It comes back to what I said in the beginning - everything finds balance, and usually good is just a swinging level of imbalance from the bad which normally causes something else good to cancel it out, but the extreme bad used to cancel out the good might be TOO MUCH for the good to counteract, hence problem. I don't need to state the obvious about not knowing how bad it is until it happens.
So, who wants to sign up as a 100% committed test subject and relieve the testing company from all legal recourse if something goes wrong? I'm not quite there. Need to see more examples where I can ask questions and have the questions answered along with a demonstration of the outcome or a new example with a modification that helps to cancel/counteract something I find wrong. I'm still talking rats at this point. Seeing other humans who have committed to the project and seeing their failures and successes just leads to more questions. I guess I still have something to live for (though I have no idea what it is). I guess it's "I want to see what's gonna happen next".
Thank you. That was one of the most informative and educational, while analytical and based on direct and scientific observations and sharing things I rarely see the ilk of. Basically, thank you for not being an asshole. Your information is as well-worded as I believe any can be. You know, without getting a gag order.
Humor aside, thank you again for real information and helping someone keep their head on straight, knowing that the disgusting actions and reactions observed are not always based on ill will or even fractional knowledge of what one is doing. If finance-ed ever makes it to a ballot, I will attempt to not place a plus sign next to my vote. Plus sign... Reading sex-ed above has starting the humor engine again. Cheers!
That was very in-depth and quite educational. I've seen plenty of stuff about other loan types; pretty much describes what you said. That means I know what you're saying, though my in-depth knowledge barely breaks the proverbial meniscus.
What I don't understand is the difference between people who got loans in, let's say, 1998, and didn't have to pay a single cent on their own and made it all the way through to a PhD. Still owe no money. Pretty much a grant, I'd assume. Persons with the same scores coming from the same school would apply for this "grant", which was nothing but a "super special high score personal loan" at the time at the knowledge of the student, but they were actually thrown into the common loan pool to drown.
What I'm trying to figure out is what differentiates one student from the other, and WHO did it in a way that the student thought they were in the same "grant" status as the other.
Can you tell I didn't go through the college loan process? Har har.
Every person who did get a loan doesn't want to talk about it but is so pissed that they basically say they will be paying on this loan until their 50s, if they're lucky. Their words and mumbles, not mine.
Banks are incredibly greedy, no doubt. They're always looking for new fees and new ways to prey on consumers. I nearly took out a student loan with Wells Fargo a few years ago, and I'm really glad I didn't. Federal loans are pretty sketchy, too, though. It's not the government, necessarily, that's the problem. The issue is that you get assigned to a student loan servicer. Nelnet is mine, and they're a complete disaster. I've always made my payments on time, and pay a little extra along the way, but they've claimed I've missed a payment when I didn't. Then they tried to tell me I was wrong when I claimed I didn't miss a payment. Finally, I asked which payment was late and, not being able to tell me, they admitted they were wrong. The next month they again claimed I'd missed a payment and, upon me threatening to report them to the BBB and attorney general and threatening to sue them, the problem magically got fixed. I've concluded that ALL student loans are sketchy, and I can't wait to pay mine off and never look back.
I do not intend to be off-topic (and certainly hope I'm not), but I don't understand how the lucky (who have stories to tell about it) people that got BS/MS/PhD degrees managed to not pay a cent, or only a 1% fee on their loans. What did the loan "companies" have to gain from those individuals versus people with almost identical SAT/etc scores that got shafted with the generic bait and hidden-text switch regular student loan method? Is it like the way they target torrent downloaders/hosts - just do a random pick of a few in a state with hard laws and go with those?
Not only do they engage in fraud, but also money laundering. To this day, they and HSBC and BoA, etc. etc. etc. remain immune and untouchable. And we continue to stand by and reelect the politicians that also benefit, totally distracted by *he who shall not be named*, not that anybody cared beforehand.
It is probably a wise move for Amazon to keep its distance, lest they get caught up in this tornado and lose everything.
Why they would get involved in the first place is a mystery to me...... Unless they thought that selling student loans and tying it to reduced prices for said students to purchase nearly everything through them. Or, perhaps, just showing student loans somehow increased students' confidence in Amazon so they just plain purchased things through them (quick bait tactic). Once the loans started to actually go through, they realized that the cost exceeds benefit. I don't know.
Finding out what they got themselves into indicates that there was almost no planning beyond marketing, or the effing asshats at the loan companies BSed them as well as they BS students (no pun).
Yes. Exactly. Let them make their mistakes and pay for it with their freedom, their health, their life. Others will get the picture through observation, and when one feels psychologically free to make a decision, they will weigh the costs and benefits more effectively knowing that their decision counts... Big time. In other countries hands are chopped off for certain crimes. This is a more personally-centered method of trial and "freak show error". Lack of freedom triggers one to seek or prove their freedom with less regard to the harm of themself and more of a desire to prove their ability to accomplish something they were lead to believe they cannot. Also, humans get a chemical reward for avoiding getting caught. Remove the restriction, there's no getting caught, just getting criticized by peers and feeling shame.
Sorry for replying to my own post, but in reading further I see AMD is joining the conga-line of criminal-collusion also.
I guess this means buying used/older hardware from this point on. At least, until Intel/AMD/MS lobby for laws making the sale/transfer of old PC hardware and running of non-MS approved OSes illegal.
Strat
I wouldn't worry about it. MS and the chip makers will destroy themselves from an image standpoint (cuz when the hate becomes viral, even the uneducated and stupid will get behind it financially). They'll still make something that others want. It's just a certain type of computer tied to a certain type of processor (and vice-versa) at worst. Well, second-worst. Worst would be limiting everyone because that's creating multiple monopolies.
Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot, and it will bleed out.
I wish it were that easy.
Unfortunately, Computer arch/OS is like politics in a way.
1.) There are many that have an opinion and need/want that conversely disagrees with the most popular two providers of (computers|politics). 2.) The number of those people is less than the number that listen to whatever they're told, shout "Ohhhh, Shiny", pay attention to only what they see and hear in commercials, and do what their peers do to remain in a (work|personal) relationship with them that isn't soured by thinking deeply and seeing how bad something(s) really is/are.
A short way to say it is that there are far too many that have an opinion and a feeling of direction in their actions, but don't see it outweighing immediate popular social gain.
This user is not driven by irrational hate against Microsoft and Windows since he would like to continue to use an older version of Windows.
Irrational? Really? I don't recall ever meeting anyone that didn't hate Windows that wasn't a Windows developer. People didn't flee from Windows Phone because it was bad. They fled because it was associated with Microsoft and Windows. After decades of shit from Microsoft, the brand is so tarnished that people relish the ability to escape it.
I like your words, but could you please cite some evidence / proof that it's the case? I'm not arguing. Just looking for the info. If it is the case, people are looking at a LOT of things from the wrong angle, not just CPU/OS vendors.
To give you some perspective. I use Win7 as my home/gaming OS and Linux as my work/dev OS. I went to Win10, tried it for a month, grew to hate it. Went back to Win7 to wait for Win10 to improve in a few more years. But if MS doesn't want to give me the option to avoid Win10 then I'll just start finding a way to work Linux into being my full time OS.
Amen to that.. and I'm on board with the idea. The problem is that AMD/Intel/MS don't really give a crap about the Linux threat because people keep threatening to move to it but don't. They still have a Windows installation for SOME reason. The only reason I have some is familiarity with the Win boxes, and I like to use the same OS at home as I do in my career (to stay on the same proverbial page as the employer). Unless we become a communist state, I don't see any real reason for forcing people to slide toward a certain processor architecture and operating system by making it hard or impossible not to........but if we DO become a communist state (or even an unofficial communist gov't with a society that just listens to whatever is thrown at them through the television but still thinks they live in a democratic republic), I can see a big advantage to the gov't having control over everyone's computer. HOWEVER, they'll try (as usual) to find all of the bad people but as time as told, they'll find people that feel bad, sound bad, or use evil words but miss the actual evil because they're smart enough to not use such an obvious path of easy eavesdropping by gov't. If someone is really addicted to smartphones and certain operating systems on their computers AND commit terrorist or anti-government/threatening acts, they deserve to be caught. That, however, doesn't justify the use of devices in that manner under the Constitution et al.
I'm not being demeaning, just pointing out the obvious to the college...
When you tell someone they can't do something or limit them, they.........? You don't know the answer to this, obviously, or you're trying to get MORE medical transports to up the budget. When you tell people they can't do something, they go to every effort to do it, more often to excess. When you limit something, it triggers the immediate dismissal of the order by the user, and encourages non-users to use because they feel they're missing out on something awesome.
Slashdot Mirror
So instead of a firecracker, this one was the size of a cherry bomb?
Speaking of cherry bomb... That wasn't the strength of an earthquake that was being presented with 5.3. I'm going to say "cm" and let people have a ball with it.
Sorry, sorry, but I have to...
"Pizza..The..HUT!!!"
They need to just hurry up and fire something at us. The day after that, the North Korea problem will essentially be solved.
..but but..what about all of the innocent people?
Nukes are so 20th century. Precision weapons are much more useful. Somebody should send O'l Kimmy the memo - obviously he never got it.
Oh, don't start with that crap again. He'll try to get in the Guinness Book for being the leader of a country with the most body/stunt doubles in history.
...'Unstable leaders' ... and this is coming from a country where Donald J. Trump could be chosen as the next president?
I feel you limited your logic "is a bit unstable" when you limited "unstable leaders" to only Donald J. Trump. The only other possibility is just as, if not more unstable. Speaking of instability, I heard a nuclear reaction was triggered in NK. *drum roll* /humor
I'll be here all week.
Kim Jong Un. Kim Jong Il is his late father, that champion golfer who once hit 9 holes-in-one
Does "un" indicate that he is incapable of the same? Wait.. base language barrier. "My bad". /humor
...I KNEW Hitler was a time traveler!!...
But there's less lead in the water now. This one could be.. uh... well they're already out of their real-world minds in NK, so.. yeah.
It is terrifying to think that there are people who have no conception of the destructive power of nuclear weapons.
Amen. And the idea that if they send one out to punish some entity that they will be around to appreciate it for more than a day, if that. WTF?
...(Rockets have no guidance, so only a total F'ing moron would put one on a rocket.)...
So you're saying he'll do it..? Har.
Some people in some parts of the world don't understand what "real world" is when they've been brainwashed since birth.
Can we assume that one day North Korea will attack something? I've always thought that they're just posturing, but this most recent "test" makes me hesitate...
I am much less worried about them than Muslim countries with the bomb. North Korean rulers are ruthless and power hungry but rational to the degree that they don't want to be wiped out in a counter-strike. Many Muslims would see a counter-strike as an advantage, with millions of people becoming martyrs and getting their millions^27 virgins.
Took care of a little mistype for ya. ;)
You read it wrong. Try again. Thinking humans are anything but part of the imbalance of energy that the rest of the universe (if that's all it is) is governed by is near-theistic self-praise. We're nothing but a tiny blip of energy imbalance that is so insignificant that if all life on earth and everything we have created were to suddenly break apart and release all energy holding ALL of it together would barely be recognizable and measurable to the Voyager crafts we sent out.
It's so disappointing to see people disregard reality to stroke themselves with BS to ease the discomfort of being nearly meaningless in spacetime. We don't mean crap. Enjoy what we have while we have the ability to.
That's too broad. Think only of the components of it.
Plus, if you want to get technical, sedentary leads to less muscle damage, hence less healing. Active requires more healing but leads to more tensile strength....
The "hidden fixes whenever we want, oh and full control of your device for your safety and ours" maneuver starts now.
Apple is next.
There's always a BUT.
There comes the issue of balance. When there's something good, there's something negative/bad to counterbalance it. It happens in every part of our lives. Everything biologically (chemically, physically, electromagnetically) must find balance and is always striving to do so. Heck, that's what the universe operates on with everything we've found so far; something got screwed up and things went BOOM, this way, that way, or didn't...but what's always been observed is energy of all types converting, exchanging, repelling, attracting, you name it. Our entire existence is the result of imbalance and everything trying (unsuccessfully so far) to find balance.
Having said that, it's just plain scary to think that there's even a remote possibility that a genetic change can offer something of awesomeness and not have a major negative to counterbalance it. e.g. "I'm 7'2" tall now and have massive muscles. Downside is that I'm lacking calcium and my center of gravity is off."
To try and meet the demand of maintaining balance, more muscle need to be used. Since the rest of the body's components haven't been accounted for when it comes to an imbalance, it's quite possible that one of those imbalances will destroy or injure other parts of that body. It's a complicated mess (and a beautiful one), but we have become what we are today due to accidents (oops, just had sex with a different species of human, but look how tough my kid is), disasters (big rock hit, make everything cold, body must adapt and pass genes on with adaptations), and so many others. Heck, why do we have butt hair? It doesn't really do anything but get in the way as far as we can tell, but the body hasn't mutated it away over time, so it does something, right?
Back to the topic.. If I volunteer to have my kid (don't have one, just saying) given an advantage in advanced brain development with an emphasis on the pre-frontal cortex, perhaps it will trigger a dormant gene somewhere around the age of 25 that breaks down neural connections and causes brain cells to trigger death so it doesn't, you know, explode. I'm stating something that can be argued to death (no pun), but it's just food for thought.
It comes back to what I said in the beginning - everything finds balance, and usually good is just a swinging level of imbalance from the bad which normally causes something else good to cancel it out, but the extreme bad used to cancel out the good might be TOO MUCH for the good to counteract, hence problem. I don't need to state the obvious about not knowing how bad it is until it happens.
So, who wants to sign up as a 100% committed test subject and relieve the testing company from all legal recourse if something goes wrong? I'm not quite there. Need to see more examples where I can ask questions and have the questions answered along with a demonstration of the outcome or a new example with a modification that helps to cancel/counteract something I find wrong. I'm still talking rats at this point. Seeing other humans who have committed to the project and seeing their failures and successes just leads to more questions. I guess I still have something to live for (though I have no idea what it is). I guess it's "I want to see what's gonna happen next".
Thank you. That was one of the most informative and educational, while analytical and based on direct and scientific observations and sharing things I rarely see the ilk of. Basically, thank you for not being an asshole. Your information is as well-worded as I believe any can be. You know, without getting a gag order.
Humor aside, thank you again for real information and helping someone keep their head on straight, knowing that the disgusting actions and reactions observed are not always based on ill will or even fractional knowledge of what one is doing. If finance-ed ever makes it to a ballot, I will attempt to not place a plus sign next to my vote. Plus sign... Reading sex-ed above has starting the humor engine again. Cheers!
That was very in-depth and quite educational. I've seen plenty of stuff about other loan types; pretty much describes what you said. That means I know what you're saying, though my in-depth knowledge barely breaks the proverbial meniscus.
What I don't understand is the difference between people who got loans in, let's say, 1998, and didn't have to pay a single cent on their own and made it all the way through to a PhD. Still owe no money. Pretty much a grant, I'd assume. Persons with the same scores coming from the same school would apply for this "grant", which was nothing but a "super special high score personal loan" at the time at the knowledge of the student, but they were actually thrown into the common loan pool to drown.
What I'm trying to figure out is what differentiates one student from the other, and WHO did it in a way that the student thought they were in the same "grant" status as the other.
Can you tell I didn't go through the college loan process? Har har.
Every person who did get a loan doesn't want to talk about it but is so pissed that they basically say they will be paying on this loan until their 50s, if they're lucky. Their words and mumbles, not mine.
Banks are incredibly greedy, no doubt. They're always looking for new fees and new ways to prey on consumers. I nearly took out a student loan with Wells Fargo a few years ago, and I'm really glad I didn't. Federal loans are pretty sketchy, too, though. It's not the government, necessarily, that's the problem. The issue is that you get assigned to a student loan servicer. Nelnet is mine, and they're a complete disaster. I've always made my payments on time, and pay a little extra along the way, but they've claimed I've missed a payment when I didn't. Then they tried to tell me I was wrong when I claimed I didn't miss a payment. Finally, I asked which payment was late and, not being able to tell me, they admitted they were wrong. The next month they again claimed I'd missed a payment and, upon me threatening to report them to the BBB and attorney general and threatening to sue them, the problem magically got fixed. I've concluded that ALL student loans are sketchy, and I can't wait to pay mine off and never look back.
I do not intend to be off-topic (and certainly hope I'm not), but I don't understand how the lucky (who have stories to tell about it) people that got BS/MS/PhD degrees managed to not pay a cent, or only a 1% fee on their loans. What did the loan "companies" have to gain from those individuals versus people with almost identical SAT/etc scores that got shafted with the generic bait and hidden-text switch regular student loan method? Is it like the way they target torrent downloaders/hosts - just do a random pick of a few in a state with hard laws and go with those?
Shrug.
Not only do they engage in fraud, but also money laundering. To this day, they and HSBC and BoA, etc. etc. etc. remain immune and untouchable. And we continue to stand by and reelect the politicians that also benefit, totally distracted by *he who shall not be named*, not that anybody cared beforehand.
It is probably a wise move for Amazon to keep its distance, lest they get caught up in this tornado and lose everything.
Why they would get involved in the first place is a mystery to me...... Unless they thought that selling student loans and tying it to reduced prices for said students to purchase nearly everything through them. Or, perhaps, just showing student loans somehow increased students' confidence in Amazon so they just plain purchased things through them (quick bait tactic). Once the loans started to actually go through, they realized that the cost exceeds benefit. I don't know.
Finding out what they got themselves into indicates that there was almost no planning beyond marketing, or the effing asshats at the loan companies BSed them as well as they BS students (no pun).
Yes. Exactly. Let them make their mistakes and pay for it with their freedom, their health, their life. Others will get the picture through observation, and when one feels psychologically free to make a decision, they will weigh the costs and benefits more effectively knowing that their decision counts... Big time. In other countries hands are chopped off for certain crimes. This is a more personally-centered method of trial and "freak show error".
Lack of freedom triggers one to seek or prove their freedom with less regard to the harm of themself and more of a desire to prove their ability to accomplish something they were lead to believe they cannot. Also, humans get a chemical reward for avoiding getting caught. Remove the restriction, there's no getting caught, just getting criticized by peers and feeling shame.
Sorry for replying to my own post, but in reading further I see AMD is joining the conga-line of criminal-collusion also.
I guess this means buying used/older hardware from this point on. At least, until Intel/AMD/MS lobby for laws making the sale/transfer of old PC hardware and running of non-MS approved OSes illegal.
Strat
I wouldn't worry about it. MS and the chip makers will destroy themselves from an image standpoint (cuz when the hate becomes viral, even the uneducated and stupid will get behind it financially). They'll still make something that others want. It's just a certain type of computer tied to a certain type of processor (and vice-versa) at worst. Well, second-worst. Worst would be limiting everyone because that's creating multiple monopolies.
> I presume that this isn't creating windows 10 lock in though; and that linux / bsd / etc will be fully supported??
Sounds like the lock-in is specific to versions of Windows. I think we would have seen folks in the Apple Universe flip their shit by now otherwise.
I just wouldn't but that tablet/PC then. I'd get another one that isn't in that weird locked brotherhood or whatever you want to call it. :)
Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot, and it will bleed out.
I wish it were that easy.
Unfortunately, Computer arch/OS is like politics in a way.
1.) There are many that have an opinion and need/want that conversely disagrees with the most popular two providers of (computers|politics).
2.) The number of those people is less than the number that listen to whatever they're told, shout "Ohhhh, Shiny", pay attention to only what they see and hear in commercials, and do what their peers do to remain in a (work|personal) relationship with them that isn't soured by thinking deeply and seeing how bad something(s) really is/are.
A short way to say it is that there are far too many that have an opinion and a feeling of direction in their actions, but don't see it outweighing immediate popular social gain.
This user is not driven by irrational hate against Microsoft and Windows since he would like to continue to use an older version of Windows.
Irrational? Really? I don't recall ever meeting anyone that didn't hate Windows that wasn't a Windows developer. People didn't flee from Windows Phone because it was bad. They fled because it was associated with Microsoft and Windows. After decades of shit from Microsoft, the brand is so tarnished that people relish the ability to escape it.
I like your words, but could you please cite some evidence / proof that it's the case? I'm not arguing. Just looking for the info. If it is the case, people are looking at a LOT of things from the wrong angle, not just CPU/OS vendors.
To give you some perspective. I use Win7 as my home/gaming OS and Linux as my work/dev OS. I went to Win10, tried it for a month, grew to hate it. Went back to Win7 to wait for Win10 to improve in a few more years. But if MS doesn't want to give me the option to avoid Win10 then I'll just start finding a way to work Linux into being my full time OS.
Amen to that.. and I'm on board with the idea.
The problem is that AMD/Intel/MS don't really give a crap about the Linux threat because people keep threatening to move to it but don't. They still have a Windows installation for SOME reason. The only reason I have some is familiarity with the Win boxes, and I like to use the same OS at home as I do in my career (to stay on the same proverbial page as the employer).
Unless we become a communist state, I don't see any real reason for forcing people to slide toward a certain processor architecture and operating system by making it hard or impossible not to........but if we DO become a communist state (or even an unofficial communist gov't with a society that just listens to whatever is thrown at them through the television but still thinks they live in a democratic republic), I can see a big advantage to the gov't having control over everyone's computer. HOWEVER, they'll try (as usual) to find all of the bad people but as time as told, they'll find people that feel bad, sound bad, or use evil words but miss the actual evil because they're smart enough to not use such an obvious path of easy eavesdropping by gov't.
If someone is really addicted to smartphones and certain operating systems on their computers AND commit terrorist or anti-government/threatening acts, they deserve to be caught. That, however, doesn't justify the use of devices in that manner under the Constitution et al.
I'm not being demeaning, just pointing out the obvious to the college...
When you tell someone they can't do something or limit them, they.........? You don't know the answer to this, obviously, or you're trying to get MORE medical transports to up the budget. When you tell people they can't do something, they go to every effort to do it, more often to excess. When you limit something, it triggers the immediate dismissal of the order by the user, and encourages non-users to use because they feel they're missing out on something awesome.
*head-desk*