I thought it was about minimizing the feelings of guilt on the part of the executioners. Since (in theory) nobody can tell which of them actually killed the person, everybody gets whatever plausible deniability they need to sleep at night.
"Some people are bona fide killers and will kill anyone for any reason or none at all. "
Agreed. However, the reason I think the death penalty needs to go away has nothing to do with that. I think the death penalty needs to go away because people get put to death for crimes they didn't commit. Even one single innocent person being wrongfully put to death is murder, and that's enough to warrant doing away with the system unless it can be made perfect.
Which it can't. Errors are inevitable (and, in the US, aren't terribly rare). As long as that's the reality, then the punishments being given should be reversible, so the errors can be corrected if they're discovered later.
If the justice system never wrongfully convicted people, then I would be fine with the death penalty because I think that putting someone to death is less cruel than locking them up for the rest of their life.
"How is zero rating really different from, for example, my ISP offering me discounted subscriptions to Hulu+ or HBO's streaming service? In both instances, the ISP is telling me, "If you use our service and the service of our preferred partner, you get a discount"."
In my view, there are two key differences. The first, and easiest, difference is that offering discounted subscriptions is actually honest. Zero rating is a bit slimy. The second, and more important, is that offering discounted subscriptions doesn't encourage ISPs to degrade the internet service of people who don't want the subscriptions. Zero rating does. The idea is that ISPs should not be giving preference to any traffic based on who that traffic is coming from.
But, really, this zero rating nonsense is merely a symptom of the underlying disease: there needs to be a clear separation between ISPs and content providers. It's bad for everyone when the same company is doing both.
Re: Re: Plenty of women in administrative and executive positions are able to do their jobs even with PMS
Your wife's unfortunate experience is not representative of the majority of women. Your extrapolation is no different than saying that all men are a hair-trigger away from violent rage because you had a friend with poor impulse control.
Re: Even the Communications Minister Mr Turnbull has described
"I’ve called you by Skype"
Too bad he listed Skype, since Skype is compromised and isn't a solution. But then, my first instinct when I hear high government officials encourage people to use specific services is that you should avoid those specific services anyway. It seems likely that they want to herd people into compromised services than that they want to enable people to maintain their privacy and security.
True, but the phrase in question is "broadband delivery". On that narrow point, Comcast has been stellar in my personal experience. They suck so hard on every other point though, including customer service, that stellar broadband delivery isn't enough to balance everything out. That's why I would give Comcast an "F" overall.
It's just like buying random crap to use up the rest of a budget for the fiscal year: if you don't spend it, next year's budget gets reduced. Since the purpose of forfeiture is to increase revenue, if they don't use up all that stolen money then they might have problems justifying the ability to steal it.
"YOU have decided that something like (such as everyone's favorite whipping boy) Creationism is completely false."
I have? Note that nowhere in my comment have I said anything remotely approaching that. In fact, I said nothing about any issue aside from the problems with the whole notion that there are "always two sides to an issue". As I said, usually there are many more than two sides.
There are two nicer ways to handle this (assuming that you are interested in providing some sort of public Wifi access but don't want it abused.) The easiest way is to use a more modern Wifi device that allows you to run a "guest" AP that is independent of your private AP, and to restrict what people can do on the guest AP. There are numerous inexpensive consumer Wifi rigs that let you easily do this out of the box.
Or, if you don't mind running a more complex router, you can set up your AP so that it runs with limited resources for everything but a VPN connection, then use the VPN connection for your own unlimited access.