I don't know if you have tried windows phone 8, but it's actually not a bad OS for a smartphone. There's a lot that can be said about marketing, consistency of APIs for developers, the app store and the apps MicroSoft includes with a purchase, but the OS itself is the least of the problem here. The real problem is the total package delivered to the consumer. The fact that there is now "one manufacturer less" that sells windows phone makes the windows phone ecosystem even smaller than it already was. Unless they will get their marketing and apps strategy together even less people will buy a windows phone than before.
Alcohol use and probably more "allowed substances" will probably also have a measurable correlation between IQ, IQ loss and demographics. The difference is that alcohol is not illegal and marijuana is in NZ. Notice I said correlation, not relation or causation. Only double blind studies between identical twins in identical demographics who will not use any other substance or partake any activity that has been related to IQ loss will give anything close to scientific proof. I'm not saying that smoking MJ won't make you stupid or that it's not bad for you. I'm merely questioning the validity of the research method.
You are talking about certifying that it will work and back that up with a warranty. That's not the same as making sure it works or actively preventing it to work. RedHat has no control over what other vendors or "loose" open source products do, unless they have contracts and agreements with them to make sure their product are interoperable. You can't seriously expect them to certify their product will work on anybodies hobby project without first knowing what the hobby project will do in the future. Since they have their own OpenStack product, it'd be silly not to warrant at least that. RedHat supports their OS on several competitors hypervisors, so blaming they won't support the competition is nonsense. It's just that they need to be assured what the competitor is doing technically so they can test for that and work with the competitor to iron out any flaws.
It's an advert for a low spec computer presented as if it was high spec. 32G of flash storage? Come on, my phone has more than that. 27" and only 1080p? That's a 22" resolution, at 27" you'd expect it to be 2600*1600 or something equivalent. 8G ram? Try running anything "high spec" with that.
Universities and Colleges spend insane amounts of money on real estate because they are often in "prime areas". They spend a lot on salaries for their boards, usually those people get way better payment than the teachers and professors get. They spend a lot of money on the sports teams and their accommodations, trainers and such. Also, they spend a lot of money on maintaining that name aka "promotion". There are exceptions to that, but in general, those colleges and universities are considered "second grade" and people tend to want to spend more money on a degree from a highly rated college/university. If a potential employer has a choice of four candidates and three of them come from MIT, Carnegy-Mellon and Princeton while the 4th one comes from Tulane (Louisiana), guess which one won't get invited for an interview? Once you are on the short list for "good universities" you can charge more, spend the money on publicity and your own salary and keep the mechanism working. Thats how the mechanism works.
Before you know it, they'll put the expiration of secret documents on par with the copyright law expirations. Only our grand children will be able to read what really happened during our life times and the CIA would get away with way more than they do already.
Why do you have to compare it to other operating systems? Just look at what should be the right way to do it, maybe learn from other operating systems, but don't just look at the speed of what others are doing and try and match that. If things go wrong because you're moving too fast, you should either slow down, or fix your methodology so you can deal with the speed. If things don't get adapted by distributions because it's a pain to keep supporting, slow down, or make it easier for them to support it. If things go too slow and you miss essential features that everybody needs, speed it up. It's not that hard to rely on your own merits and not be dependent on other operating systems to determine how fast you should be going.
You can put authorization codes in transactions, but if they aren't digitally signed, you can alter them in transit. Maybe banks should start exchanging signing keys and not transfer authorization codes?
They had evidence. They just couldn't use it in a court of law, because they had to admit that everything that Snowden stole was true. They were flushing him out in the hope they would get something that could stick without having to reveal any "secrets" and indeed to intimidate him.
What a good idea. They should make that happen everywhere and also for companies. Try ruining the economy with HFT if you have to pay taxes on all the money you make. Investments should be about believing in the company or product, not about gabling on sentiment and other peoples trading algorithms.
Prenda voluntarily chose to use bittorrent as a method of distribution. This means that they themselves approved of the method and the inherited consequences of distributing content via bittorrent. Not only that, but they made the content easy to find, by posting on well known file sharing websites like TPB. By all means, they wanted people to download this, without even giving them a proper payment method, let alone telling them that the content was copyrighted before they downloaded or simply forbidding downloading before payments were made. This inherently means, that they were knowingly giving away the content for free and promoting this free give-away.
If a fake (police) prostitute is being approached and asked to sell sex for money, the john is committing a crime (in most states/countries). If the same fake prostitute was giving away free blowjobs and advertising this loudly, and later on was claiming that people didn't pay for it and they were committing a crime for a going to a prostitute, I doubt any judge would have to think long about who's guilty here.
90% of users, most notably users that are in purchasing positions, are over 95% content users, not creators. The content they create is simple. Tablets are so popular because they offer a simple interface and form factor to consumable content. I see managers type notes on iPads now, send e-mail from them and have everything they need worked out delegated to others. Only secretaries and system admins need something slightly bigger than a tablet in real life. Home users and most office users can get by with just a tablet, even if it's crippling their productivity, they choose the form factor themselves.
You are not allowed to use Office commercially on Windows RT devices. Also, it doesn't come with Outlook. This made the device positively unusable for any "professional" use. You could buy the Surface Pro later, that was supposed to have Outlook and "full legacy application windows compatibility". The fact that they have Office doesn't mean they are licensed, you have to buy a separate license for it. These things made any RT "for amateurs" only at launch. Given the fact that they were more expensive than iPads and at launch time, the iPads had way more apps available and were a proven concept, nobody was very interested in a surface RT at launch.
The keyboard feature on the surface RT is a fallacy. Yes, you can type on it. I haven't tried it myself but it could very well be a nice keyboard too. However, you need a flat surface to place the kick stand on, so it won't really work on your lap, you need a table. The angle at which you can set the screen with the kick stand is "limited" to put it mildly. You can fiddle a bit and maybe use some objects to change it to your liking, but for any semi-serious laptop-like work, you'd want an adjustable angle, so you can sit and type more or less ergonomically. Having to fiddle with this if you can buy a device that is just as expensive that has a proper laptop form factor, will make the RT not very interesting for people that sort of consumer either.
I don't know about the ergonomics of the Dell devices, but evidently, as a "content consumption device" without a keyboard, they weren't very successful, or Dell wouldn't be stopping the sales. If their devices that come with a keyboard are at least ergonomically viable, they may have a chance the surface RT never had. The OS and licensing are still going to be a challenge, but it may economically viable to make and sell these.
It doesn't matter what OS is on these servers. The NSA used to work with a separation of privileges and isolated systems. This means that people would get a limited amount of rights, to do a limited amount of tasks on a limited amount of servers. If they would go rogue, they wouldn't be able to do a lot of damage per individual. This means that any possible form of automation is usually already done, regardless of the OS.
Moving to a "sharing culture" and "Business Intelligence" systems that are shared within the entire organization and with other agencies and countries, means that the NSA lost the advantage of having a lot of small islands of information that can't be "lost to the enemy" all at the same time. Still having the "old" administration policies in place means that they now have a lot of people with admin rights but also access to a large cache of data. They don't want to go back to the segregation system and lose the BI, so they are trying to limit the risk by automating administration over larger sets of servers and removing the manual processes. Regardless of what OS they are running, just moving from a plethora of small platforms to just a few large groups of servers will give them a significant reduction in the amount of people required to admin them. By linking their systems to each other on admin level they probably are creating a new risk, that of an attacker gaining admin rights and walking all over their systems with a single account....
The problem with the NSA is, they think they can see all their systems as "a larger installation" and as such, automation would work. By connecting all their systems into one "larger installation" they are effectively putting all their data in a single place. That's something you really don't want to do. Before you know it, someone tasked with migrating the data to a newer instance of "a larger installation" makes a copy of it and runs off to Hong Kong with it.
By giving "everyone" access to the Business Intelligence systems you have set up on your data pools, the chance that someone will abuse it, will grow exponentially. By not giving anyone access, there is no use for these systems.
The only way to prevent people to run off with any significant amount of imformation, is to keep that information out of their reach. This means you will need a lot of isolated installations and people tasked to do just a few things. Even if they go rogue, the damage is contained to the information they were able to access, not the motherlode. In practice, this means you'll need a lot of "system administrators" doing lots of "manual tasks" that could easily be automated if there would be enough scale for it to make it worthwhile. The NSA wants their cake and eat it too, but they'll keep on moving the risk, not removing it.
The amount of nines in UNIX claims is too damn high!
Really, to get more reliable than Linux with your "UNIX" system, you need to do an awful lot of things very good. Doing the same things good on Linux will probably get you very similar availability statistics. When you are designing a high availability platform you need to design software, middleware, OS, iron, networking and storage to work as an integrated system with fail over and load balancing on all levels. Relying on a single box with a single OS instance on a RAID-5 disk set isn't going to get you the numbers you are after. It doesn't matter who makes the hardware or the OS, it's going to fail and it will hurt your availability.
Linux has for many years been just as reliable as the traditional UNIX flavors. The real difference is in the people that make all the mistakes and shortcuts that will hurt availability. With traditional UNIX, everything used to be sacred and partially because of the costs, a lot of investments were made into solid operation and design of systems. "Oh put it on Linux, it's not important and it's cheaper. Just use some old written of Windows server hardware for it, it'll take the load just fine." has been the mantra of many shops for a lot of years. This sort of attitude would result in Linux getting lower reliability numbers. Not because of the OS, but because of the way it was deployed. Once more and more companies started to use Linux seriously to get a competitive edge, or just because they didn't have the budget for the legacy UNIX stuff, it turned out it was actually just as good.
I remember taking about 10% of the local web hosting market 14 years ago with a linux-only company. All the competition was running on IRIX and Solaris and just couldn't match our prices. They had big money behind them and weren't making a profit, we were. The entire company was only funded once at the start and the entire growth was funded from profits. You can't do that if the OS isn't good enough to work competitively. We did about 99.8% on single instance web servers and we probably would have done 99.9% if we didn't have a single uplink causing several hour long down times a year at the time. This was 14 years ago and it's only gotten better.
NASA and several other space agencies are using Linux for mission critical applications. I've worked on a satellite data crunching platform that had 6hr service windows that would lose measurements forever if that window got missed or data wasn't backed up after processing within 24 hours. Due to cost, there was no spare hardware and storage was on RAID5. Some servers were single instance and failover was manually. This platform is now over 10 years up and running and it hasn't missed a single bit of data.
These examples were from before there was "enterprise grade" high availability built into Linux distributions. It was from before raid6 or iSCSI storage networks and such. Linux has had enough reliability for a long time and it's gotten better and better. The amount of nines in the claims of traditional UNIX has little to do with the OS or the hardware, but much more with the way you work with it. Lately, I've seen expensive traditional UNIX systems behave like an unpatched windows95 PC. Single instance, EOL hardware, EOL OS, EOL software will do that to you. Spontaneous reboots, no vendor support, data loss, intermittent failures, the works. Even though they bought everything "first class", it was giving them all the trouble that Linux was supposed to give you if you believed the FUD the traditional UNIX vendors would like you to believe. It's not (so much) about what you buy, but it's about how you use it that matters most.
You must live in a rural area where it's hard to put gas pipes in the ground. There are plenty of places where it's cheaper to just put lines in the ground then to keep driving around with gas bottles or a big tanker truck to fill home tanks.
So where's the mirror? You'd expect someone to mirror this. Even just to investigate a death with unnatural causes, you'd expect the police to want a full copy of the web site?
Terrorism is nothing new. People have died from violent acts of insurgents since the beginning of history. The fact is, that terrorism is statistically insignificant as a cause of death. It has always been that way and it hasn't changed much. The leading cause of death "related to terrorism" is trying to fight it. Thousands of soldiers and civilians have gotten hurt and killed in "the war on terrorism" in situations that would not have occurred if this "war" hadn't been fought.
The leading cause of loss of freedom is fighting terrorism. There is no war. Stop calling it a war. There are clear definitions of what a war is and it has to be between two or more countries, or it has to be a "civil war" in which two or more parts of the same country go to war amongst themselves. Terrorism is nothing new and you're feeding it by giving it the attention it's after. The terrorists achieve more of their goals by this "war on terrorism" than they would if they were to be successful just a bit more often than they are now and we would ignore them. You can't fight this sort of terrorism anyway, since it's using every "freedom right" we want so much for ourselves, which our forefathers fought for so hard. If we give up those rights, we have nothing left to fight for and the terrorists have won.
The more you fight terrorism, the worse the situation gets. Let it go and enjoy your freedom. Don't spend money, lives and freedom on it. I'm not saying you should stop trying to prevent attacks, but you should stop giving up freedom and privacy for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if you have tried windows phone 8, but it's actually not a bad OS for a smartphone. There's a lot that can be said about marketing, consistency of APIs for developers, the app store and the apps MicroSoft includes with a purchase, but the OS itself is the least of the problem here. The real problem is the total package delivered to the consumer. The fact that there is now "one manufacturer less" that sells windows phone makes the windows phone ecosystem even smaller than it already was. Unless they will get their marketing and apps strategy together even less people will buy a windows phone than before.
You can't push back a turd. They'll have to accept that the truth eventually tends to come out and it will make them look rather bad and undemocratic.
How much did apple pay for this front page? Most of the times, it's just way too obvious...
Alcohol use and probably more "allowed substances" will probably also have a measurable correlation between IQ, IQ loss and demographics. The difference is that alcohol is not illegal and marijuana is in NZ. Notice I said correlation, not relation or causation. Only double blind studies between identical twins in identical demographics who will not use any other substance or partake any activity that has been related to IQ loss will give anything close to scientific proof. I'm not saying that smoking MJ won't make you stupid or that it's not bad for you. I'm merely questioning the validity of the research method.
You are talking about certifying that it will work and back that up with a warranty. That's not the same as making sure it works or actively preventing it to work. RedHat has no control over what other vendors or "loose" open source products do, unless they have contracts and agreements with them to make sure their product are interoperable. You can't seriously expect them to certify their product will work on anybodies hobby project without first knowing what the hobby project will do in the future. Since they have their own OpenStack product, it'd be silly not to warrant at least that. RedHat supports their OS on several competitors hypervisors, so blaming they won't support the competition is nonsense. It's just that they need to be assured what the competitor is doing technically so they can test for that and work with the competitor to iron out any flaws.
I can't believe nobody mentioned "Twister" yet. You don't even need a computer!
It's an advert for a low spec computer presented as if it was high spec. 32G of flash storage? Come on, my phone has more than that. 27" and only 1080p? That's a 22" resolution, at 27" you'd expect it to be 2600*1600 or something equivalent. 8G ram? Try running anything "high spec" with that.
Universities and Colleges spend insane amounts of money on real estate because they are often in "prime areas". They spend a lot on salaries for their boards, usually those people get way better payment than the teachers and professors get. They spend a lot of money on the sports teams and their accommodations, trainers and such. Also, they spend a lot of money on maintaining that name aka "promotion". There are exceptions to that, but in general, those colleges and universities are considered "second grade" and people tend to want to spend more money on a degree from a highly rated college/university. If a potential employer has a choice of four candidates and three of them come from MIT, Carnegy-Mellon and Princeton while the 4th one comes from Tulane (Louisiana), guess which one won't get invited for an interview? Once you are on the short list for "good universities" you can charge more, spend the money on publicity and your own salary and keep the mechanism working. Thats how the mechanism works.
Before you know it, they'll put the expiration of secret documents on par with the copyright law expirations. Only our grand children will be able to read what really happened during our life times and the CIA would get away with way more than they do already.
You wouldn't put it on a fishing boat, that' be way too conspicuous. It's inside the volcano!
Why do you have to compare it to other operating systems? Just look at what should be the right way to do it, maybe learn from other operating systems, but don't just look at the speed of what others are doing and try and match that. If things go wrong because you're moving too fast, you should either slow down, or fix your methodology so you can deal with the speed. If things don't get adapted by distributions because it's a pain to keep supporting, slow down, or make it easier for them to support it. If things go too slow and you miss essential features that everybody needs, speed it up. It's not that hard to rely on your own merits and not be dependent on other operating systems to determine how fast you should be going.
You can put authorization codes in transactions, but if they aren't digitally signed, you can alter them in transit. Maybe banks should start exchanging signing keys and not transfer authorization codes?
They had evidence. They just couldn't use it in a court of law, because they had to admit that everything that Snowden stole was true. They were flushing him out in the hope they would get something that could stick without having to reveal any "secrets" and indeed to intimidate him.
What a good idea. They should make that happen everywhere and also for companies. Try ruining the economy with HFT if you have to pay taxes on all the money you make. Investments should be about believing in the company or product, not about gabling on sentiment and other peoples trading algorithms.
Prenda voluntarily chose to use bittorrent as a method of distribution. This means that they themselves approved of the method and the inherited consequences of distributing content via bittorrent. Not only that, but they made the content easy to find, by posting on well known file sharing websites like TPB. By all means, they wanted people to download this, without even giving them a proper payment method, let alone telling them that the content was copyrighted before they downloaded or simply forbidding downloading before payments were made. This inherently means, that they were knowingly giving away the content for free and promoting this free give-away.
If a fake (police) prostitute is being approached and asked to sell sex for money, the john is committing a crime (in most states/countries). If the same fake prostitute was giving away free blowjobs and advertising this loudly, and later on was claiming that people didn't pay for it and they were committing a crime for a going to a prostitute, I doubt any judge would have to think long about who's guilty here.
90% of users, most notably users that are in purchasing positions, are over 95% content users, not creators. The content they create is simple. Tablets are so popular because they offer a simple interface and form factor to consumable content. I see managers type notes on iPads now, send e-mail from them and have everything they need worked out delegated to others. Only secretaries and system admins need something slightly bigger than a tablet in real life. Home users and most office users can get by with just a tablet, even if it's crippling their productivity, they choose the form factor themselves.
You are not allowed to use Office commercially on Windows RT devices. Also, it doesn't come with Outlook. This made the device positively unusable for any "professional" use. You could buy the Surface Pro later, that was supposed to have Outlook and "full legacy application windows compatibility". The fact that they have Office doesn't mean they are licensed, you have to buy a separate license for it. These things made any RT "for amateurs" only at launch. Given the fact that they were more expensive than iPads and at launch time, the iPads had way more apps available and were a proven concept, nobody was very interested in a surface RT at launch.
The keyboard feature on the surface RT is a fallacy. Yes, you can type on it. I haven't tried it myself but it could very well be a nice keyboard too. However, you need a flat surface to place the kick stand on, so it won't really work on your lap, you need a table. The angle at which you can set the screen with the kick stand is "limited" to put it mildly. You can fiddle a bit and maybe use some objects to change it to your liking, but for any semi-serious laptop-like work, you'd want an adjustable angle, so you can sit and type more or less ergonomically. Having to fiddle with this if you can buy a device that is just as expensive that has a proper laptop form factor, will make the RT not very interesting for people that sort of consumer either.
I don't know about the ergonomics of the Dell devices, but evidently, as a "content consumption device" without a keyboard, they weren't very successful, or Dell wouldn't be stopping the sales. If their devices that come with a keyboard are at least ergonomically viable, they may have a chance the surface RT never had. The OS and licensing are still going to be a challenge, but it may economically viable to make and sell these.
It doesn't matter what OS is on these servers. The NSA used to work with a separation of privileges and isolated systems. This means that people would get a limited amount of rights, to do a limited amount of tasks on a limited amount of servers. If they would go rogue, they wouldn't be able to do a lot of damage per individual. This means that any possible form of automation is usually already done, regardless of the OS.
Moving to a "sharing culture" and "Business Intelligence" systems that are shared within the entire organization and with other agencies and countries, means that the NSA lost the advantage of having a lot of small islands of information that can't be "lost to the enemy" all at the same time. Still having the "old" administration policies in place means that they now have a lot of people with admin rights but also access to a large cache of data. They don't want to go back to the segregation system and lose the BI, so they are trying to limit the risk by automating administration over larger sets of servers and removing the manual processes. Regardless of what OS they are running, just moving from a plethora of small platforms to just a few large groups of servers will give them a significant reduction in the amount of people required to admin them. By linking their systems to each other on admin level they probably are creating a new risk, that of an attacker gaining admin rights and walking all over their systems with a single account....
The problem with the NSA is, they think they can see all their systems as "a larger installation" and as such, automation would work. By connecting all their systems into one "larger installation" they are effectively putting all their data in a single place. That's something you really don't want to do. Before you know it, someone tasked with migrating the data to a newer instance of "a larger installation" makes a copy of it and runs off to Hong Kong with it.
By giving "everyone" access to the Business Intelligence systems you have set up on your data pools, the chance that someone will abuse it, will grow exponentially. By not giving anyone access, there is no use for these systems.
The only way to prevent people to run off with any significant amount of imformation, is to keep that information out of their reach. This means you will need a lot of isolated installations and people tasked to do just a few things. Even if they go rogue, the damage is contained to the information they were able to access, not the motherlode. In practice, this means you'll need a lot of "system administrators" doing lots of "manual tasks" that could easily be automated if there would be enough scale for it to make it worthwhile. The NSA wants their cake and eat it too, but they'll keep on moving the risk, not removing it.
The amount of nines in UNIX claims is too damn high!
Really, to get more reliable than Linux with your "UNIX" system, you need to do an awful lot of things very good. Doing the same things good on Linux will probably get you very similar availability statistics. When you are designing a high availability platform you need to design software, middleware, OS, iron, networking and storage to work as an integrated system with fail over and load balancing on all levels. Relying on a single box with a single OS instance on a RAID-5 disk set isn't going to get you the numbers you are after. It doesn't matter who makes the hardware or the OS, it's going to fail and it will hurt your availability.
Linux has for many years been just as reliable as the traditional UNIX flavors. The real difference is in the people that make all the mistakes and shortcuts that will hurt availability. With traditional UNIX, everything used to be sacred and partially because of the costs, a lot of investments were made into solid operation and design of systems. "Oh put it on Linux, it's not important and it's cheaper. Just use some old written of Windows server hardware for it, it'll take the load just fine." has been the mantra of many shops for a lot of years. This sort of attitude would result in Linux getting lower reliability numbers. Not because of the OS, but because of the way it was deployed. Once more and more companies started to use Linux seriously to get a competitive edge, or just because they didn't have the budget for the legacy UNIX stuff, it turned out it was actually just as good.
I remember taking about 10% of the local web hosting market 14 years ago with a linux-only company. All the competition was running on IRIX and Solaris and just couldn't match our prices. They had big money behind them and weren't making a profit, we were. The entire company was only funded once at the start and the entire growth was funded from profits. You can't do that if the OS isn't good enough to work competitively. We did about 99.8% on single instance web servers and we probably would have done 99.9% if we didn't have a single uplink causing several hour long down times a year at the time. This was 14 years ago and it's only gotten better.
NASA and several other space agencies are using Linux for mission critical applications. I've worked on a satellite data crunching platform that had 6hr service windows that would lose measurements forever if that window got missed or data wasn't backed up after processing within 24 hours. Due to cost, there was no spare hardware and storage was on RAID5. Some servers were single instance and failover was manually. This platform is now over 10 years up and running and it hasn't missed a single bit of data.
These examples were from before there was "enterprise grade" high availability built into Linux distributions. It was from before raid6 or iSCSI storage networks and such. Linux has had enough reliability for a long time and it's gotten better and better. The amount of nines in the claims of traditional UNIX has little to do with the OS or the hardware, but much more with the way you work with it. Lately, I've seen expensive traditional UNIX systems behave like an unpatched windows95 PC. Single instance, EOL hardware, EOL OS, EOL software will do that to you. Spontaneous reboots, no vendor support, data loss, intermittent failures, the works. Even though they bought everything "first class", it was giving them all the trouble that Linux was supposed to give you if you believed the FUD the traditional UNIX vendors would like you to believe. It's not (so much) about what you buy, but it's about how you use it that matters most.
You must live in a rural area where it's hard to put gas pipes in the ground. There are plenty of places where it's cheaper to just put lines in the ground then to keep driving around with gas bottles or a big tanker truck to fill home tanks.
So where's the mirror? You'd expect someone to mirror this. Even just to investigate a death with unnatural causes, you'd expect the police to want a full copy of the web site?
Terrorism is nothing new. People have died from violent acts of insurgents since the beginning of history. The fact is, that terrorism is statistically insignificant as a cause of death. It has always been that way and it hasn't changed much. The leading cause of death "related to terrorism" is trying to fight it. Thousands of soldiers and civilians have gotten hurt and killed in "the war on terrorism" in situations that would not have occurred if this "war" hadn't been fought.
The leading cause of loss of freedom is fighting terrorism. There is no war. Stop calling it a war. There are clear definitions of what a war is and it has to be between two or more countries, or it has to be a "civil war" in which two or more parts of the same country go to war amongst themselves. Terrorism is nothing new and you're feeding it by giving it the attention it's after. The terrorists achieve more of their goals by this "war on terrorism" than they would if they were to be successful just a bit more often than they are now and we would ignore them. You can't fight this sort of terrorism anyway, since it's using every "freedom right" we want so much for ourselves, which our forefathers fought for so hard. If we give up those rights, we have nothing left to fight for and the terrorists have won.
The more you fight terrorism, the worse the situation gets. Let it go and enjoy your freedom. Don't spend money, lives and freedom on it. I'm not saying you should stop trying to prevent attacks, but you should stop giving up freedom and privacy for it.
But... how about that flying car?
I looked at his reviews over a month ago and he's been at it for a while. I guess I should read up if he's been at it again lately.