There are plenty of reasons for people to hack into politician's email. Doxing is one of them, but so is investigating wrong doing. Sometimes searching for the wrong doing can lead to bashing. People can get caught early, or have access to the "other" mail server and just dump for their 5 minutes of fame. Is that Doxing? *shrug* I think that depends on intent, and in most cases no.
Yeah, this guy tells us what security people have been saying for more than a quarter of a century. How can the rest of us cash in on this scam of repeating common knowledge and making money?
Bomb at the Boston Marathon? No warning. Columbine? No warning. Oklahoma city? No warning. Cancelled schools and work that impacted my kids, other family members, or myself? At least in the hundreds. Add in what I heard on the "News" and it's at least 4 times as many.
Seems to match the person's point when we look at history.
Now if I believe TV shows and movies were real... well that would be foolish.
Your rhetoric does exactly what you are attempting to do in the opposite direction. Amazing how violence only happens when it's "that" side's argument...
"Fuck off peons, you can't afford what we can and we can live forever!" *mwuhahahaha*
Those who claim the class is half empty are pessimists, those who claim the class is half full are optimists, and those who claim the glass is half as large as it should be are realists. Then we have people that look at half a glass and claim it's overflowing and everyone has half a glass. We call those people delusional... at best.
SJWs don't have to propose things to Congress, because they are working for Congress.
The platform on the Democratic side uses bullshit generated by extremists to push an agenda. The bullshit is that women only make 70c on every dollar a man makes, and that 1 in 3 women are raped. Her personal attack changing Sander's quote from "I'm tired of people yelling about things while not taking action" to "some people call women talking screaming" is such an obvious piece of propaganda that you have to be both blind and mentally retarded to miss it (and no, I'm not a Sander's fan). Read the studies yourself and compare the bullshit to _FACTS_.
Title 9 allowing college tribunals to put people on trial for "sexual assault" was already passed and Universities already ruin people over allegations.
I have not heard any "main stream" media mention that Hillary's "win" in the last debate was based on a sample size of 168 people. I did not hear any difficult questions from the media in that debate for her regarding any of her allegations that she's pro women yet takes many millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar where women are stoned to death for disobeying their husband or doing something without permission. Her obvious lies about email were dropped by the media. But I have heard EVERY station complain about how Ben Carson talks and looks, how "cheap" Sander's suits are. (which includes the Daily show which used to be at least partially unbiased).
SJWs have as much power as the people with real power want them to have. Since it keeps us bickering with each other and them in power, they heap it on by the truckload.
The point is that for at least 3 generations we were taught that Starches and sugars were not just healthy, but necessary in larger quantities. Average people didn't just make this shit up, it was taught in schools at the insistence of Governments (which we could argue is at the behest of large corporations, but that is a different discussion).
You should try less to look like a self righteous prick and much harder to comprehend a few sentences of text.
Swim there for free beer" and "All the Pop Celebrities swim here" still work for Darwin's laws, and with the massive nanny state it's one of the last remaining refuges.
No, it does not mean direct votes of the people. It means that the people have some influence over the republic. The influence can be vocal displeasure at who they elect to represent them, pitchforks, or direct voting on agenda items.
The method of Governing by Republic is as old as dictatorships and monarchies. You should read the book sometime, I found it very enlightening in each of the dozen or so translations I have read (best being Cambridge Texts).
Free does not mean Free from Government, and it takes a special kind of idiocy to make such a claim. If the founders were anarchists they would never have framed the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and formed A GOVERNMENT.
What you claim the US knows is laughable if you read any history at all, especially but not limited to the last half century.
The real answer is that it "depends". Like "What should I get my degree in if I want to head to Law School?" Well, are you going into criminal law, tax law, constitutional law? Theoretically it should not matter, but in practice a History major makes a better Constitutional lawyer where a Business/Accounting major will do much better in Tax law. So what do you plan to get out of the certification or class?
CEH is one of my favorites because it covers lots of the legal aspects of white hat hacking, while teaching you how to hack. The first is more in depth for the CISSP so should be the easy part. OSCP is similar to CEH in that it focuses on the hacking aspects (pen testing). If you are looking to be more independent you may wish to forgo additional "Security" related certifications and get a RHCE/RHCA to provide some clout in that direction. Then as you note there are numerous non certified training camps which are very good to have if you just want to learn. If you plan on Law enforcement you could focus on forensics, cryptography for intelligence, low level network monitoring (in depth Ethernet, TCP/IP inspection), etc.. etc...
Then there is the DOD/GOV side which has different rules and certifications. You can start by looking up DISA, JAFAN, NISPOM (should most get you to.mil sites).
Radiation is dangerous and causes cancer. We know this, and have repeatedly proven that fact. We cover ourselves in lead when getting X-rays, and the operator takes the picture from a different and shielded room because radiation is dangerous. We have evacuated areas contaminated with radiation because decades of testing found radiation to be deadly in numerous ways both long term and short term.
That children near Fukushima may have the same risks as children in a different area for one particular type of cancer based on one method of testing does not negate the dangers of radiation. That we don't immediately have people running around with massive amounts of tumors or dropping over dead from radiation poisoning does not negate the dangers of radiation. The risks are known and very real, and if anyone has doubts I'm sure they can find some very cheap beach front property in Japan.
Maybe, just maybe, fear mongering would not be so easy if people were honest to begin with. White washing is not the best, or even a good, answer to fear mongering.
Do you really expect anyone to believe that "Electronics Books" are the same thing as a a device which looks like a bomb? Having people watch you work on an open device is the same as having an enclosed device, built intentionally to look like an explosive device? Those are rhetorical questions intended to demonstrate the idiocy of your position and bogus claim. No sane person would believe either of those things to be true.
I gave you the test, and you don't have the balls to do any such thing. You will continue to troll as if your fantasy matters, but you won't take the test.
The immediate parallel is the woman in "slutty clothes" crying rape.
No, it's not. There is no way to make any such comparison, and in fact the SJW fantasy you are attempting to troll with has been proven wrong on so many occasions that it's not worth doing again.
A person of any race or religion bringing to school something that looks like a bomb, which starts beeping in the middle of class drawing attention to both the student handling it and the device itself (which does not resemble a clock) would be treated the same way. If you do not know what the device looks like you have no place to express an opinion. If you do know what it looks like, as many technical people and experts have stated, the device does not appear to be a clock. In fact it does not appear to be an "invention" but rather appears to be crap cobbled together and appearing to be an explosive device.
If you have any doubts about my claim that race and religion makes no difference with this issue, make some model propane tanks and put some fake timers on them and take them for a walk down the street. I don't care what skin color you are or who's religious garb you are displaying, people are going to detain you until they can prove that the devices are in fact fake. After which, you would be jailed for terrorism. None of this will be a kind polite experience, nor should it be.
Do yourself a favor and actually study the material you are spouting an opinion about. SJWs are almost always anti-justice and are surely not warriors. They are generally "useful idiots" manipulated by social engineers.
People use voltage as a scare tactic, because the numbers are bigger. Even more frightening are "watts" if the number is bigger. Amperage is what kills you, not voltage.
Here is the point: Yes, the world is complex and complicated. But to act, you need to stop overthinking and focus on the main point.
We were not discussing "the world", we were discussing a single action. Once again you relegate the issue to a single statement, though this time it's not a "guy wanting to keep" but a "guy fucking to get". The male perspective is only part of the dialogue on abortion, and the smallest to discuss. The bigger discussion is when the fetus is considered a human with all of the liberties and rights of other humans.
You can not argue my point and have repeatedly demonstrated that you are nothing more than a troll.
POSIX is just a set of standards. Windows was POSIX compliant back in NT 3.5. You must be confusing POSIX with something else. You won't find me defend Microsoft often, so mark this on your calendar..
I don't agree that it's that lopsided, it's directly related in my opinion. Sure, some would be up to city planners but the other side of the coin would be for companies to be forced to pay a living wage. If they are not willing to pay a living wage they will be forced to move jobs to locations that they are willing to pay affordable wages for.
I beg to differ with your opinion, but I have quite a different view. This "planned" seems impromptu based on them accepting a position at Google. If they were offered the same salary at IBM in Plano Texas would they have also chosen to live in a truck? Then we have "mild" which is very subjective. Giving up your freedoms and rights is not mild, and that's what this person did for a job in my opinion.
Seems like the better solution in a truly thinking society would be to refuse the job unless it paid enough to live. That is a big problem with many companies in the Bay area. They hire and don't pay enough for a person to live, so people end up bunking 4-8 adults in a 1 bedroom apartment. Or like this person, living in a car or truck which in all other circumstances is called homelessness and potential vagrancy. This is of course ensuring that the property values don't drop because as long as they keep packing in jobs without housing, people must to go this route.
Since this person is putting a dent in their student loans (their words), it sure does not sound like they are making enough to purchase property any time within the next decade. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but housing in this area is 800K for a small house with no yard. I think it's more likely that they end up job hopping to get raises and become financially stable, or they will move away once their experience is high enough. I don't envy them, and advocate the thinking society method of correcting this.
You didn't even bother to read your own page did you? You could not have, because you would have noticed that the specific cases mentioned are luxury items limited to a specific financial class and limited in quantity. Such as the Rolls Royce pictured right at the top of the damn page. The exception mentioned is the bandwagon effect, which is not stable economics and can be illegal (deceptive advertising). It is not a "normal" function of capitalist economics.
Your first paragraph completely contradicts itself. You start by agreeing with me that it's extremely complex, but then relegate the issue to a single aspect as the entirety of the argument. You then do the same thing with your 2nd paragraph. All "good" people are bad in your world view.
I'm not going to teach you how to think, just point out that you are probably suffering from severe headaches from cognitive dissonance.
This is not some ancient belief system we are talking about, and it's not about women being owned. This is basic biology and evolution that occurred over millions of years. The former is pure bullshit spread primarily by Marxists who are attempting to engineer the society that they want. How does it feel to be a pawn exactly? That last is rhetorical and intended for you to contemplate not answer.
Here are some facts for you to consider.
1. Women must carry a child and are the only sex that can breast feed. With the exception of the last couple decades, If the child did not have a way of breast feeding the child died. Not sometimes, but always. This is why women sold themselves as wet nurses, villages had midwives, and often generations of women would share the same dwelling. No woman with milk meant extinction.
2. Child rearing is time consuming. If you dump yours off at daycare you are not rearing your child, you are letting the stated do that for you. Rearing a child is not however a 100% of the time task, and as children age they can help with certain tasks (which teaches them how to perform them).
3. Smaller tasks like cooking, mending, sewing, knitting, etc.. do not require massive amounts of muscle. In fact fine motor skills require the opposite of massive amounts of muscle. On the other hand, killing a 100 lb deer, cleaning it, and dragging it home before the bears eat both you and the deer DOES require massive muscle. Men evolved larger and with more muscle mass.
4. As with item 1 there is a very brief amount of history in which food and clothing were readily available at a store. In fact there are many areas where its still an issue for people to get basic food, and if they didn't sew their own they would have no clothing at all. Given the facts provided in 2 and 3 evolution is why women stayed at home and men went out to work.
Until very recent times, the overwhelming majority of jobs were physical labor. So again this is not some ownership ancient belief, but evolutionary biology at work.
So you want to erase the evolution for one aspect and completely ignore evolution for others? You can't, or at least you can't and not be morally bankrupt.
I have no idea how people can be so ignorant, and blind to their own idiocy.
I believe you are putting the cart before the horse. Nobody gives a shit about security in medical devices because it's not profitable to do so. If there was money to be had, you can bet your ass you would have FUD commercials running 24/7 and companies offering lifetime protection for just about everything.
People did not care too much about what us techie people said in regards to their digital security. We don't own enough media to be heard. But, WHOLLY BUCKETS OF CASH BATMAN! INFOMERCIAL! has people scared enough to care.
No, I am arguing basic economics which you seem to be completely ignorant to. In fact you just attempted to cherry pick something beneficial, but inadvertently demonstrate my point. The reason those special clothing lines are increased in price is because there are limited quantities. Scarcity is always at play in the market, and yes that is literally 100% of the time.
I gave you the primer material, but I see that you are way too self important to actually attempt to learn. Nothing else to see here.
NO again! You are giving a false cause relationship. The first half, "demand can increase when prices drop" is a correct correlation. The second part "When demand increases, prices usually increase in response." is incorrect. Prices increase with demand _ONLY_ when there is scarcity. If there is no scarcity prices will level off and become maintained at a reasonable profit margin for the producer at the best price for the consumer.
Very simply, the reason for the price increase when demand increases is NOT due to the demand, it's due to scarcity.
Slashdot Mirror
There are plenty of reasons for people to hack into politician's email. Doxing is one of them, but so is investigating wrong doing. Sometimes searching for the wrong doing can lead to bashing. People can get caught early, or have access to the "other" mail server and just dump for their 5 minutes of fame. Is that Doxing? *shrug* I think that depends on intent, and in most cases no.
Yeah, this guy tells us what security people have been saying for more than a quarter of a century. How can the rest of us cash in on this scam of repeating common knowledge and making money?
Bomb at the Boston Marathon? No warning. Columbine? No warning. Oklahoma city? No warning. Cancelled schools and work that impacted my kids, other family members, or myself? At least in the hundreds. Add in what I heard on the "News" and it's at least 4 times as many.
Seems to match the person's point when we look at history.
Now if I believe TV shows and movies were real... well that would be foolish.
Your rhetoric does exactly what you are attempting to do in the opposite direction. Amazing how violence only happens when it's "that" side's argument...
"Fuck off peons, you can't afford what we can and we can live forever!" *mwuhahahaha*
Those who claim the class is half empty are pessimists, those who claim the class is half full are optimists, and those who claim the glass is half as large as it should be are realists. Then we have people that look at half a glass and claim it's overflowing and everyone has half a glass. We call those people delusional... at best.
SJWs don't have to propose things to Congress, because they are working for Congress.
The platform on the Democratic side uses bullshit generated by extremists to push an agenda. The bullshit is that women only make 70c on every dollar a man makes, and that 1 in 3 women are raped. Her personal attack changing Sander's quote from "I'm tired of people yelling about things while not taking action" to "some people call women talking screaming" is such an obvious piece of propaganda that you have to be both blind and mentally retarded to miss it (and no, I'm not a Sander's fan). Read the studies yourself and compare the bullshit to _FACTS_.
Title 9 allowing college tribunals to put people on trial for "sexual assault" was already passed and Universities already ruin people over allegations.
I have not heard any "main stream" media mention that Hillary's "win" in the last debate was based on a sample size of 168 people. I did not hear any difficult questions from the media in that debate for her regarding any of her allegations that she's pro women yet takes many millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar where women are stoned to death for disobeying their husband or doing something without permission. Her obvious lies about email were dropped by the media. But I have heard EVERY station complain about how Ben Carson talks and looks, how "cheap" Sander's suits are. (which includes the Daily show which used to be at least partially unbiased).
SJWs have as much power as the people with real power want them to have. Since it keeps us bickering with each other and them in power, they heap it on by the truckload.
The point is that for at least 3 generations we were taught that Starches and sugars were not just healthy, but necessary in larger quantities. Average people didn't just make this shit up, it was taught in schools at the insistence of Governments (which we could argue is at the behest of large corporations, but that is a different discussion).
You should try less to look like a self righteous prick and much harder to comprehend a few sentences of text.
Swim there for free beer" and "All the Pop Celebrities swim here" still work for Darwin's laws, and with the massive nanny state it's one of the last remaining refuges.
No, it does not mean direct votes of the people. It means that the people have some influence over the republic. The influence can be vocal displeasure at who they elect to represent them, pitchforks, or direct voting on agenda items.
The method of Governing by Republic is as old as dictatorships and monarchies. You should read the book sometime, I found it very enlightening in each of the dozen or so translations I have read (best being Cambridge Texts).
Free does not mean Free from Government, and it takes a special kind of idiocy to make such a claim. If the founders were anarchists they would never have framed the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and formed A GOVERNMENT.
What you claim the US knows is laughable if you read any history at all, especially but not limited to the last half century.
The real answer is that it "depends". Like "What should I get my degree in if I want to head to Law School?" Well, are you going into criminal law, tax law, constitutional law? Theoretically it should not matter, but in practice a History major makes a better Constitutional lawyer where a Business/Accounting major will do much better in Tax law. So what do you plan to get out of the certification or class?
CEH is one of my favorites because it covers lots of the legal aspects of white hat hacking, while teaching you how to hack. The first is more in depth for the CISSP so should be the easy part. OSCP is similar to CEH in that it focuses on the hacking aspects (pen testing). If you are looking to be more independent you may wish to forgo additional "Security" related certifications and get a RHCE/RHCA to provide some clout in that direction. Then as you note there are numerous non certified training camps which are very good to have if you just want to learn. If you plan on Law enforcement you could focus on forensics, cryptography for intelligence, low level network monitoring (in depth Ethernet, TCP/IP inspection), etc.. etc...
Then there is the DOD/GOV side which has different rules and certifications. You can start by looking up DISA, JAFAN, NISPOM (should most get you to .mil sites).
Having no law restricting abortion is firmly libertarian. Having a law restricting abortion, is government enforcement.
You are confusing Libertarian with Anarchist. Nothing else you claim can be, or should be trusted on the subject.
Radiation is dangerous and causes cancer. We know this, and have repeatedly proven that fact. We cover ourselves in lead when getting X-rays, and the operator takes the picture from a different and shielded room because radiation is dangerous. We have evacuated areas contaminated with radiation because decades of testing found radiation to be deadly in numerous ways both long term and short term.
That children near Fukushima may have the same risks as children in a different area for one particular type of cancer based on one method of testing does not negate the dangers of radiation. That we don't immediately have people running around with massive amounts of tumors or dropping over dead from radiation poisoning does not negate the dangers of radiation. The risks are known and very real, and if anyone has doubts I'm sure they can find some very cheap beach front property in Japan.
Maybe, just maybe, fear mongering would not be so easy if people were honest to begin with. White washing is not the best, or even a good, answer to fear mongering.
I had to read that subject a few times because I kept seeing a redtube offering premium youtube.
Do you really expect anyone to believe that "Electronics Books" are the same thing as a a device which looks like a bomb? Having people watch you work on an open device is the same as having an enclosed device, built intentionally to look like an explosive device? Those are rhetorical questions intended to demonstrate the idiocy of your position and bogus claim. No sane person would believe either of those things to be true.
I gave you the test, and you don't have the balls to do any such thing. You will continue to troll as if your fantasy matters, but you won't take the test.
The immediate parallel is the woman in "slutty clothes" crying rape.
No, it's not. There is no way to make any such comparison, and in fact the SJW fantasy you are attempting to troll with has been proven wrong on so many occasions that it's not worth doing again.
A person of any race or religion bringing to school something that looks like a bomb, which starts beeping in the middle of class drawing attention to both the student handling it and the device itself (which does not resemble a clock) would be treated the same way. If you do not know what the device looks like you have no place to express an opinion. If you do know what it looks like, as many technical people and experts have stated, the device does not appear to be a clock. In fact it does not appear to be an "invention" but rather appears to be crap cobbled together and appearing to be an explosive device.
If you have any doubts about my claim that race and religion makes no difference with this issue, make some model propane tanks and put some fake timers on them and take them for a walk down the street. I don't care what skin color you are or who's religious garb you are displaying, people are going to detain you until they can prove that the devices are in fact fake. After which, you would be jailed for terrorism. None of this will be a kind polite experience, nor should it be.
Do yourself a favor and actually study the material you are spouting an opinion about. SJWs are almost always anti-justice and are surely not warriors. They are generally "useful idiots" manipulated by social engineers.
People use voltage as a scare tactic, because the numbers are bigger. Even more frightening are "watts" if the number is bigger. Amperage is what kills you, not voltage.
Link
Here is the point: Yes, the world is complex and complicated. But to act, you need to stop overthinking and focus on the main point.
We were not discussing "the world", we were discussing a single action. Once again you relegate the issue to a single statement, though this time it's not a "guy wanting to keep" but a "guy fucking to get". The male perspective is only part of the dialogue on abortion, and the smallest to discuss. The bigger discussion is when the fetus is considered a human with all of the liberties and rights of other humans.
You can not argue my point and have repeatedly demonstrated that you are nothing more than a troll.
POSIX is just a set of standards. Windows was POSIX compliant back in NT 3.5. You must be confusing POSIX with something else. You won't find me defend Microsoft often, so mark this on your calendar..
I don't agree that it's that lopsided, it's directly related in my opinion. Sure, some would be up to city planners but the other side of the coin would be for companies to be forced to pay a living wage. If they are not willing to pay a living wage they will be forced to move jobs to locations that they are willing to pay affordable wages for.
mild, planned hardship
I beg to differ with your opinion, but I have quite a different view. This "planned" seems impromptu based on them accepting a position at Google. If they were offered the same salary at IBM in Plano Texas would they have also chosen to live in a truck? Then we have "mild" which is very subjective. Giving up your freedoms and rights is not mild, and that's what this person did for a job in my opinion.
Seems like the better solution in a truly thinking society would be to refuse the job unless it paid enough to live. That is a big problem with many companies in the Bay area. They hire and don't pay enough for a person to live, so people end up bunking 4-8 adults in a 1 bedroom apartment. Or like this person, living in a car or truck which in all other circumstances is called homelessness and potential vagrancy. This is of course ensuring that the property values don't drop because as long as they keep packing in jobs without housing, people must to go this route.
Since this person is putting a dent in their student loans (their words), it sure does not sound like they are making enough to purchase property any time within the next decade. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but housing in this area is 800K for a small house with no yard. I think it's more likely that they end up job hopping to get raises and become financially stable, or they will move away once their experience is high enough. I don't envy them, and advocate the thinking society method of correcting this.
You didn't even bother to read your own page did you? You could not have, because you would have noticed that the specific cases mentioned are luxury items limited to a specific financial class and limited in quantity. Such as the Rolls Royce pictured right at the top of the damn page. The exception mentioned is the bandwagon effect, which is not stable economics and can be illegal (deceptive advertising). It is not a "normal" function of capitalist economics.
Your first paragraph completely contradicts itself. You start by agreeing with me that it's extremely complex, but then relegate the issue to a single aspect as the entirety of the argument. You then do the same thing with your 2nd paragraph. All "good" people are bad in your world view.
I'm not going to teach you how to think, just point out that you are probably suffering from severe headaches from cognitive dissonance.
This is not some ancient belief system we are talking about, and it's not about women being owned. This is basic biology and evolution that occurred over millions of years. The former is pure bullshit spread primarily by Marxists who are attempting to engineer the society that they want. How does it feel to be a pawn exactly? That last is rhetorical and intended for you to contemplate not answer.
Here are some facts for you to consider.
1. Women must carry a child and are the only sex that can breast feed. With the exception of the last couple decades, If the child did not have a way of breast feeding the child died. Not sometimes, but always. This is why women sold themselves as wet nurses, villages had midwives, and often generations of women would share the same dwelling. No woman with milk meant extinction.
2. Child rearing is time consuming. If you dump yours off at daycare you are not rearing your child, you are letting the stated do that for you. Rearing a child is not however a 100% of the time task, and as children age they can help with certain tasks (which teaches them how to perform them).
3. Smaller tasks like cooking, mending, sewing, knitting, etc.. do not require massive amounts of muscle. In fact fine motor skills require the opposite of massive amounts of muscle. On the other hand, killing a 100 lb deer, cleaning it, and dragging it home before the bears eat both you and the deer DOES require massive muscle. Men evolved larger and with more muscle mass.
4. As with item 1 there is a very brief amount of history in which food and clothing were readily available at a store. In fact there are many areas where its still an issue for people to get basic food, and if they didn't sew their own they would have no clothing at all. Given the facts provided in 2 and 3 evolution is why women stayed at home and men went out to work.
Until very recent times, the overwhelming majority of jobs were physical labor. So again this is not some ownership ancient belief, but evolutionary biology at work.
So you want to erase the evolution for one aspect and completely ignore evolution for others? You can't, or at least you can't and not be morally bankrupt.
I have no idea how people can be so ignorant, and blind to their own idiocy.
I believe you are putting the cart before the horse. Nobody gives a shit about security in medical devices because it's not profitable to do so. If there was money to be had, you can bet your ass you would have FUD commercials running 24/7 and companies offering lifetime protection for just about everything.
People did not care too much about what us techie people said in regards to their digital security. We don't own enough media to be heard. But, WHOLLY BUCKETS OF CASH BATMAN! INFOMERCIAL! has people scared enough to care.
No, I am arguing basic economics which you seem to be completely ignorant to. In fact you just attempted to cherry pick something beneficial, but inadvertently demonstrate my point. The reason those special clothing lines are increased in price is because there are limited quantities. Scarcity is always at play in the market, and yes that is literally 100% of the time.
I gave you the primer material, but I see that you are way too self important to actually attempt to learn. Nothing else to see here.
NO again! You are giving a false cause relationship. The first half, "demand can increase when prices drop" is a correct correlation. The second part "When demand increases, prices usually increase in response." is incorrect. Prices increase with demand _ONLY_ when there is scarcity. If there is no scarcity prices will level off and become maintained at a reasonable profit margin for the producer at the best price for the consumer.
Very simply, the reason for the price increase when demand increases is NOT due to the demand, it's due to scarcity.