Re: Where are they going to drive?
You forgot that they have also replaced the normal two pedals with a single pedal.
They will also be replacing the steering wheel with a touchscreen.
And every year the cigarette lighter shape will be changed.
456 posts • joined 29 Jan 2008
You forgot that they have also replaced the normal two pedals with a single pedal.
They will also be replacing the steering wheel with a touchscreen.
And every year the cigarette lighter shape will be changed.
People don't understand that this is an attempt to protect ISP customers from the unregulated rules of the ISPs.
Without these rules the company down the street can buy 60% of the bandwidth leaving everyone in your small town to share the remaining %40 because the ISP doesn't want to cut into their profits to lay down more lines. (under these rules everyone's traffic is equal, and if they want to sell a quality of service they have to invest in expanding the bandwidth for everyone)
Without these rules there is nothing to keep every ISP between a small upstart and their customers from throttling their traffic unless they give them a cut. (or Facebook, imagine Facebook being charged for the bandwidth you are already paying for or else they get blocked from sending it to you)
Without these rules there is nothing that says they even have to give that small upstart a chance to pay, they could just block their competing services outright.
Without these rules there is nothing that would keep the ISPs from throttling or outright blocking any kind of traffic that they don't like. The ISP is not a government agency and can do what they like without rules. (and if there is only one ISP in your area then I guess you don't really have a choice)
Without rules the ISPs will continue to merge until we have only one choice, and then your internet will be in whatever shape they choose for you. (They only merely collude to give you one choice now by not "expanding" into areas controlled by each other)
Without rules there will be no reason to ever expand bandwidth (aka cutting into profits), because whatever the bandwidth is now can simply be cut up into smaller and smaller packages, and once bandwidth is scarce they can charge whatever they want)
People are fighting against their own best interests because they are scared of "the gubberment", but they don't realize that at least in FCC government control they have a chance to have decisions made in their best interests, but in private hands, the choice legally will have to be whatever makes the ISP more money. (it is the legal requirement for a company to make decisions in the best interest of shareholders over customers in all cases)
Why can't people understand this?
Yeah, because it was the lack of their users simply not requesting a "convert lease to reservation" function in their DHCP server snap-in during the 15 years it took them to implement. //sarcasm
I can think of multiple things that have given me grief for years that Microsoft clearly hasn't cared about fixing.
I agree with the original poster, they want to create a whitepaper for their sales division.
I don't write firmware-virus-hiding-malware so I just assumed it read out the target devices original firmware, inserted itself into the same memory area as the original, and then loaded the original firmware after (and this was possible because the firmware wasn't using the whole memory area in the first place, so there was room for both files in the same space). It seems hard to believe that someone has the time and ability to recreate the factory firmware for so many different devices without access to the original firmware's sourcecode.
Why not have vendors use all the available flash space so that there is no "extra space" to hide anything. Something simple when they write it like "what is the XOR of these two huge numbers (the numbers being the space-taking elements), if the answer is 1, goto next function". Or fill the space with compiled code that doesn't do anything, but looks like the real functions of the firmware. Obviously the bad guys could still just use the harddisk to store their malware like they always have done, but then it could be searched for in the traditional way, and a low-level could clean it off easily.
Like putting your bag down in the empty seat next to you on the bus to stop the crack-head from sitting there.
I just can't stomach their attitude on aftermarket OSes and rooting.
I'm all for my warranty becoming void, and even certain "trusted" apps uninstalling, but to brick or prevent the original OS that came on my phone from running ever again is a deal breaker. (Knox fuse)
I'd settle for even a "Click here to send an SU unlock code email that will forever void your warranty", and then entering said code giving me a factory installed SU app. All of this dependent on whether or not I have paid for my phone outright or if I am just leasing it of course.
They actively attempt to stop me from using my property the way I want, and if I wanted to be treated like that I'd have just bought an Apple device in the first place.
I get it, only a non-1337 admin needs a GUI, but in the real world GUIs add value. Yes you can script this and that, yes you can install server with no GUI, but why? A GUI displays information to the user in a more useful way (and makes that information interactive). There is a reason most OSes have them (other than it not being 1983 anymore). I will agree that no GUI could have less of an attack surface, but that is not going to keep it from needing to be patched 12 times a week anyway, so let's just tell the truth, that console-only servers will intimidate some, and those that is doesn't can get off on that. The end. There is nothing a non-GUI version can do, that a GUI version can't do too, in that any script you run a GUI-less system can also be run in a PowerShell window on a GUI system.
If I wanted a pure non-GUI environment why would I pay Microsoft for it? They need to watch who they piss off. Why would I want to use a flawed Policy-Server from Microsoft, when I could build from source something comparable on Linux, and either write or find someone's code that will let me do exactly what I want with it?
So people hate Windows 8, now will hate Server 2016, and hate Windows Mobile. What's next making the Xbox ONE controller shock people with each button press.
Is there a bet going on inside Microsoft as to who can disenfranchise the most customers?
"Siri, please turn on the lights, but this time don't tell Apple about it please."
"We noticed that you go to bed at around 23:30 every night, here is an ad about melatonin."
You know the adage, but I often wonder why the people that spout it still buy curtains. I mean if they have nothing to hide, then why use curtains to block the police from looking inside? I'm guessing it's because normal people could then see in too. If I develop a curtain that lets only the police see through the curtains I could make a lot of money, right? Come to think of, we could do away with the whole "selectable curtain" problem by just hooking a camera up inside of the house, and have it only display to the police. So, I wonder how many of the "no encryption" advocators we can get on-board the camera-in-the-house idea? I mean, if they are doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to hide, right?
Imagine a walled-garden car, because that's what Apple will be selling.
Only works with Apple phones (Android phones will work for calls only, but the car'sscreen will be blank).
Only works with Apple's special square charger.
Only air from an approved Apple air-compressor with an approved Apple nozzle will work on the tires
Quick charge units that work only at 55hz (additional adapter from 50 or 60 to 55hz coming end of year).
Only one door on the drivers side (for design reasons) and no trunk.
Only available in gray or white for the first 5 years.
Made with slave labor from China.
All body panels made from glass (including the bumpers).
No firmware updates for last year's models.
Available in 8gb and 16gb music storage models (sorry no upgrade vector from model to model).
Thanks, but no thanks.
When you are born in Korea (as most East Asian countries), you are a 1 year old. So a 19 year old in Korea is actually really 18 (or even 17) mostly everywhere else (or on some official documents).
Had to go check that my ROMs were still in my cabinet with all these ROM thieves running about as you say. It's OK, they are.
Funny thing is that if someone really did steal my ROM chips, I could use the ones the MAME users have to re-program some real ones for me. I'm curious, how much does Nintendo charge for a new set of Donkey Kong replacement ROMs? Oh, wait, that's right they don't sell them anymore.
If it wasn't for a lot of those MAME programmers (and their ROMs), a lot of old games would just be gone.
"I wish I was clever enough to put a nice GUI on it"
Google MAMEUI, then simply add the source of it to the source of MAME, and compile with MAME 64 compiler and 45 minutes later out pops MAME with a shiny new interface. Modify the mame.lst in the source folders to remove any of the 30,000 unwanted games if you are feeling froggy.
Seriously, what did he do, add an extra line to the engine-thrust.ini file under "c:\windows\system32"? I'm no electrical engineer, but I'm pretty certain that the engine does not have a cat-5 jack that you can send URL-based thrust instructions to, nor do I think the they send control data across the same VLANs as the in-flight entertainment (if they are even using IP for that data at all and not some manufacture specific control language).
Do I think he looked up on-line how to enter "diagnostic mode" on the in-flight entertainment, probably, do I think it got him anything other then free pay-per-view, no.
I'm open to a real engineer telling me how wrong I am, but I would hope that a multimillion dollar plane has better security safeguarding the lives of 200+ people than an 1999 Xbox has at blocking copied DVDs.
Then it doesn't enter the country. Take a hardline and watch the number of obstructions drop to zero shortly thereafter. It's not like Apple is bringing them in due to the kindness in their hearts, they want to make money of the country's citizens.
As far as the manufacturing cost differing due to location, well it seems like this would solve the problem of "outsourcing" as well. Pay a lower cost to make something, then pay higher import taxes, pay a higher cost to make, then you pay lower import taxes. Looks like it would level the playing field and make locally made goods a more viable choice over slave-labor.
So you want every country in world to play "I'm the cheapest whore pick me."? It seems like the corporations would just play it continuously until they found the one that gave them the tax amount they want to pay, zero. I wouldn't put it past them to purchase one themselves (some corporations make more than some country's GDPs).
If they use a country's infrastructure to make money (roads, bridges, shipping ports, law enforcement), then they can pay their share of the upkeep of that infrastructure in the form of taxes.
Have an independent 3rd party (or two) determine the objects actual cost to manufacture, and allow for a percentage of discrepancy in the "purchase price" from one subsidiary to an other.
Well if you leave your computer in "grandma mode" a la "Hide extensions for know types" then you get what get. We should blame Microsoft for still making it the default after all these years, the least they could do would be a warning about "This file has 2 extensions, this is indicative of a virus!"
We will build an AI give it some (seemingly) benign task like make a better mousetrap, and it will end up turning all matter in the universe into mousetraps and mousetrap-manufacturing machines.
There is no need to inject malice or feeling into any of it, if we don't build in safety boundaries into our AIs they will "literally" kill us to accomplish any task we give them.
Above is paraphrased from an interesting article at:
FYI, Hollywood bastards (and any ultra-rich) long ago stopped having those problems.
Do a search on Kaleidescape media player. They put them in their yachts and private planes, it lets them stream their DVDs and Blurays around their toys at will. Their literature even says something along the lines of "When a drive fails a crewmember can replace it easily." Must be nice.
"particularly following what appeared to be a sudden change in approach following President Obama's unexpected intervention."
I would like to think that the President said something along the lines of "If you don't step in and do the right thing, not only will your children and grandchildren suffer from the current trend, but your name will be the one they said should have done something. Do the right thing for all Americans not just a select few."
Let's not forget the volume of Americans that asked for this ruling.
We're taking about a guy that actually got to hear the ISP CEOs talking behind closed doors when he was their lobbyist, he knows exactly how bad it could have really gotten had the FCC not stepped in. I would like to think he did the right thing for the right reasons.
I think I've been misunderstood, I was not talking on behalf of a home user, I was talking to the point that he is some sort of IT guy in charge of at least 22 users. I even tried to make it clear that even an under-funded SA could "manage" patches with the lowest form of tools I could think someone could acquire, DOS and PSEXEC.
Should home users leave their PCs set to auto-update, absolutely yes. Should an "SA" be letting MS push whatever the catch of the day is to the machines they "manage", no.
There are a billion ways to manage patches, and when your Java-based data entry program stops working because Java pushed an update, it is the SA's fault for having them auto-install and not testing that patch on at least one test machine to know if it is going to impact their company's ability to work.
"locating sources on the LAN"
The first time MS uses a machine on my internal network to circumvent my firewall rules for the other machines on my internal network I'm going to be very angry. Using one machine as a proxy for the others without my permission has to be some sort of agreement violation.
I'm sure there are bad people in every region, and I want no record of my machine talking to any of them. Ever.
At the minimum an attacker could watch their own outgoing connections to find other machines, machines that they now know are missing specific patches. Facepalm. I don't think they've thought this through.
"You most definitely should unless you have a regular review / patching process in place."
If it's at the house, no problem, that's your risk and you are assuming it for yourself. If someone is paying you to "manage" their machines, then maybe it shouldn't be on MS's shoulders to keep your systems patched. You also can't complain about bandwidth usage if you have a way to negate it.
"I don't know why my computer was in communication with that known criminal's computer officer, but could you please take me off your watch-list and no-fly-list anyway?"
You don't have to download 22 patches, simply download them once and remote push them onto your boxes via scripts.
You really shouldn't let Microsoft push whatever they want to your boxes anyway, it's just a bad idea. (even if you do have enough money for WSUS or SCCM)
For instance, say you have 22 ASUS 8.0 boxes and MS decides they are going to update them to 8.1 for you, well that's great if you have updated graphics drivers that won't make every single thing you have into a BSOD display, but you don't, so now everything you have needs to be re-imaged back to 8.0 until your vendor can create a driver that works correctly under 8.1.
Do a search for PSEXEC and save yourself some trouble.
what's the number to 999 again? oh yeah, 0118 999 88199 9119725 3
What if my robot assisted surgery is more important than some other person's robot assisted surgery (i.e. I make more money), with net neutrality, how will I pay to make my more important packets get the priority that someone of my stature expects? /sarcasm
They can divvy up bandwidth from now until the cows come home, but the real solution is to expand their bandwidth. Maybe they shouldn't oversell their real capacity, or maybe, just maybe, things requiring 9 nines of connectivity shouldn't be dependent on a shared network filled with cat videos in the first place.
I have wanted to replace my aging phone for some time now, here are the things keeping me from buying an S6 phone from you:
1) Knox. Void my warranty if you want, but not allowing me to run the OS that came with my phone because I wanted root access is going too far.
2) No SD card, sorry but whatever size storage you may find it in your heart to bestow upon us is never going to be enough, so leave it up to us to choose.
3) No removable battery. Fail, not just because I can't swap it for a new one in a year when the current one is only charging to 85%, but because now I'll have to wait until my battery dies if my phone locks up to be able to use it again. Did you know some people use 2 physical batteries and swap them out when charging is not an option. I guess not.
4) Glass back. Are you freaking kidding me? What's the bezel made out of? Egg shells? How about you make the back out of a material that would let the device survive an accidental drop better and not the stuff they made Cinderella's slippers out of.
5) Curved screen? Who cares. Talk about a solution to a made up problem.
6) Not waterproof? Are you from the past? Because in the past phones weren't waterproof. I thought we were moving forward. Especially since you cannot take out the battery now if it does get wet. Fail.
7) Not giving me a choice of launchers. Fail. Especially since you'll break my phone if I try to change it myself.
8) Root. I want root, would you buy a computer if you didn't know the administrator password? No. Either would I. Just make it part of the EULA "I realize that if I press Root that I can't cry to anyone about anything. Yes/No" I mean is it my phone, or your phone Samsung? If it's your phone then why am I paying for it?
People really should stop buying TVs with these kind of "features" in them. Manufactures are slow to fix issues related to third party "plugins" and even if they get better at it, why would I want to be able to choose only from the plugins that they happened to be able to get everyone's lawyers to agree with this week? It adds cost and complexity, and to suffer those two things for a sub-par experience is dumb. I would like a TV with many HDMI inputs, some old-timey analog ports, the ability to read the occasional USB stick, and lots of adjustment features. Not some half-baked "Smart" TV. "Oh sorry, your TV is too old to run Youtube 4.3, please buy another TV and try again."
I will simply not give it my Wifi password and not plug it into a CAT5 cable, so unless they put a SIM and transceiver in my TV it can't ever phone home. They can want it connected all they want, but we decide whether to let it into our data network. Who cares what crappy players they put in their TVs, I would never use it anyway, they never support every codec and usually have menu systems created by morons anyway. Add in privacy issues and the choice becomes clear, just don't use those features.
But for a more powerful solution (for fancy skins with fancy menus), use a cheap <$150 Intel NUC (with built-in IR) and OpenELEC (Linux+Kodi [previously known as XBMC]). It will play every swinging file you can throw at it (and decode it in hardware if your kit can do it), it can even decode H.265 in software if you are running something a little more beefy.
If you run Windows there are ways (addons) to use Amazon and Netflix too.
I imagine you already know all that Dan55, I was just sharing because I really like Kodi.
We can go round and round all day. Who keeps the 802.1x certs updated when they have no staff? What does a company with one media gateway "test" the new IOS on? How does a small company ever hope to have the ability to test a new IOS and how it will react with all the different daughter cards they may have installed? In most places the idea of a "spare" Cisco 3945 would cause the IT guy to laugh out loud.
I was not trying to sway anyone away from VOIP with its "insurmountable problems", I like VOIP, I think people should setup VOIP in most places, I was just trying properly weight the con side of the argument. The article will send a marginally knowledgeable person racing straight to their IT department (or guy), so I was providing some real-world worries for them to chew on and think about. This site is read by both SAs and managers alike is it not?
I didn't intend to make my questions sound like actual questions? I know all too well the virtues of UPS (and their 5-10 year lead-acid battery lifespans). They were meant to be more of a heads-up to the VP that says "hey we should switch to VOIP?" when they long ago out-sourced their tech staff to some temp agency and now have zero technical staff on-site. I have seen many places where some pseudo-tech-savy department head gets taken out to lunch by a gentleman in a nice suit selling Cisco phones and comes back with lofty ideas about how all we need to do is buy this $4,000 router and we will all be running VOIP tomorrow.
I was going for more of a devil's advocate roll.
What happens to your phones when your power goes out? What about when you loose your PS in your VOIP switch? When your IOS update for your media gateway goes south? Or when a user sets their BYO phone to the gateway's IP? There are also a lot of hidden yearly costs with licenses and the price differences from one tier to the next can be steep. Do you have a team of people always available to reset your users voice-mail pins? If you out-source the install and setup, how much are they going to charge you to add one more phone later, for adding a new area-code rule, another telco trunk?
I'm all for VOIP, but running your own phone network is a lot like being your own pilot, it's great if you're good at it. It does allow you to do some cool stuff, but you need to have techs that know what they are doing.
It should come as no surprise that Republicans don't want government regulation. They have had this concept drilled into their minds for years by the leaders of their party. They'll scream all day about deregulating this or that, never once making the association that clean water, safe food, and the ability to use whatever phone you want all come FROM regulations. Ask them if they want the internet to change, they'll say no, then try to explain that the "regulations" in question were perceived to have always been there, it's only now that the ISPs have gotten so big that they are chewing on the leash and we need to better define the rules. I mean this is the party who's actual presidential candidate was advocating disbanding the EPA.
Why is it again that we don't give IQ and personality tests to candidates prior to letting them run for office?
Sounds like McDowell is a complete lap-dog. He is saying "You don't want the government to 'regulate' the internet do you? Like China does." But he knows full-well that what he is really saying is "If ISPs aren't free to first create monopolies and then be able to do what ever they want forever, how will they be able to make infinite money?"
The "regulation" the FCC is taking about is basically (as far as the consumer is concerned) ensuring freedom, freedom from being at the mercy of whatever pricing and usage terms the only ISP in your town decides you will be offered. Things like caps, and throttling, tracking your data usage. Without that "regulation" ISPs can do whatever they please.
How did that whole Bio-dome thing work out again? Oh, yeah, it didn't (twice). We don't even know how to do that, let alone launch, fly, land, build, and live on a foreign planet.
I say put them under the ocean and see if they can even do that, if they live THEN spend a couple billion dollars to lob them at Mars.
"for those that promote untraceable financial transaction systems, be aware that this is the enabler"
That right there.
Where did the popup come from? Irrelevant. (it's not the computer of the bank account holder, and in the end after trace after trace, it may have simply come from some random WEP secured wifi anyway)
The only reason this persists is that at some point a government or police department can't gain access to the bank account holder. Period. The end.
I agree with the commenter above that the only real way to combat this is with education. Educate people that the police will never "bill" you with Bitcoin or Paypal and the problem goes away. I mean really educate, not some PSA played 3 times at 23:56 in the middle of the night in-between infomercials, but in the paper, on the local movie theater ads before the movies, and billboards.
I think you mean Vista-nentially.
I will never buy a subscription to Office 365, I will use my current copy until I can longer use it, then switch to an opensource. I'm not sure why ANYONE would back themselves into a "Pay Forever" strategy but it's not for me. I'm not really a Luddite either, I just like having equity. If a business is "renting" their building, and "renting" their rackspace, "renting" their software, and basically "renting" their employees, how much value can they have "in" their company?
I was under the impression that the company owned the patent for the glass tech, and that the company signed an exclusive contract for them to make them only for Apple, and in exchange Apple would loan them the money to purchase the equipment needed to meet Apple's demand. However the contract stated that if they failed to make the payments on time that the company's IP was collateral. Then Apple simply didn't order any screens, and because the company couldn't sell the tech to any other manufacturer due to the exclusivity clause, Apple just sat and waited until they defaulted and now they simply own the company. Not really playing fair in my opinion, and the fault is solely with the company's lawyer that didn't realize that Apple was under no obligation to purchase anything.
Apple tricked a small company out of their IP, it's that simple.
Anytime I hear that someone "can't wait for Obama to leave" I pretty much know right away that:
1) Your easily led.
2) Don't have any idea about what you are talking about.
3) Watch Fox news while pumping your fist in the air screaming Yeah!!.
4) Are white (and probably southern).
5) Have a memory that only goes back 6 years.
6) The word "Begazi" while be coming out of your mouth shortly.
Let me guess, you also think the Earth is 6,000 years old, and jesus is coming soon? Listen, I'm no great fan of president Obama's accomplishments to date, but he did help get millions of people healthcare (in order to get rid of the whole "prior condition" bullshit), and if you could read charts and graphs you would know that the country is better now than when Bush left. There is no need to argue back, I was just reminding you what your "lib-tard" cousin or brother-in-law probably already tells you all the time on Facebook, that you are kind of simple-minded and really shouldn't voice your opinions in a public place.
I would be happy if ALL candidates had to take/retake the SAT (or at least the ASVAB) to be eligible for a seat in congress. At least we would know that they had the minimum education we expect a 17 year old to have.
I have seen entirely too many on both sides that didn't sound like they should be making cookies let alone laws.
If technical people need to be certified to work on routers and servers shouldn't the people that are making laws that govern situations involving ALL routers and servers be held to the same standard, or at least be able to tell one from the other?
Who should be on "The Committee on Science, Space and Technology"? How about scientists not 30 lawyers. Seriously only about 5 are qualified to be on that committee out of the 40 that are. Most of them have no idea about what they are voting on and therefore they shouldn't be voicing any opinion.
Fuel Cell + location in which water freezes = fail
Even if the making, storing, and filling problems are all solved (they aren't going to be solved anytime soon BTW). Fuel cells create water in the process, and that means they are viable only places where water doesn't freeze.
So let's just put this to bed, and break the news to the car manufactures that their cash cow of hydrogen burning cars as an interim solution to low cost fuel cell power cars (yeah right) isn't fooling anyone. The truth is that they want to hold on to ICE powered cars as long as they can because they make insane amounts of money off the hundreds of replacement parts they require. They clearly want a hydrogen infrastructure in place while they work out the kinks and get the price down of fuel-cell cars (aren't the prices of rare Earth metals like scandium, platinum (palladium) dropping daily, no?), is it their fault that the stuff can be burned in the mean time?
Own all the pipes you want, but no media or production ownership, ever.
Who can't see that one GIGANTIC company owning not only the pipes, but also the content as well as the news outlets won't end in a dystopia.
"Your ONLY choice in news, television, movies, telephone, and internet. Warn-cast"
I'll do you one better, one cannot copyright something occurring naturally in/from nature, (a rock, the tree, honey). Therefore unless we are now adding monkeys to our special classification that we have put ourselves in (separate from nature), this is basically the same thing as a bee making honey or a crow using a nail to open a nut. No copyright.
"it's clear that Microsoft got the interface right for the next generation of users."
Yep, in the future if the need arises for people to use their fingers to fling things or mash the screen a certain number of times, we'll be all ready. There is no doubt that simple people can do simple tasks with a tablet OS, but there is a reason that no one invented the sausage-interface-wand before now. Trying to use a meat-stick to control precise movement is inefficient, well for anything other than throwing birds at pigs.
There is a simple solution to the 'Win8 GUI sucks' problem and it will solve itself. We only need to wait for the programmers at Microsoft to try to make the next version of Windows while using it. The huge hits to workflow and the unfriendliness of the current OS will have to be addressed at that point.
I blame Sinofsky.
I'm not saying the U.S. is the greatest with phone contracts, but at least once our "Contract Period" is up, (which by the way is only so someone can get a $800 phone for $1), we are free. In Germany you have to sign a contract for 2 years whether you get a $800 phone or not. If you bring your own you're still locked into a 2 year contract (of which you are on the hook to them for the whole total of 24 months worth of bills). If you want to cancel your "contract" you owe them money for services you haven't used yet. Add crazy sauce to that, and you get the fact that unless you send "in writing" a request to cancel it 90 days prior to its end, you will get auto-renewed for 12 more months. If you try to cancel that auto-renewed contract a month in, you will have to pay for 11 months of future monthly payments.
I've never understood why anyone would agree to a multi-year auto-renewing contract with no monetary benefits, but the Germans do it all the time. So, at least the U.S. is better then someone.
"Yes but considering Obama's predilection for executive actions in so many other instances "
"By the end of 2004, George W. Bush had issued 108 signing statements containing 505 constitutional challenges. As of January 30, 2008, he had signed 157 signing statements challenging over 1,100 provisions of federal law.
Obama has issued 28 signing statements as of June 17, 2014."
So, um, no, you're wrong, he does not do what you just said he does. Now you have no reason to say that anymore. So you and every other person like you that regurgitates FOX's "opinion shows" can put it to rest, you have the facts, so stop. Every, damn, day.