301–310 of 420 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Acts of war and nuclear disasters are excluded from insurance.
Buffett's insurance business took a $2.4 billion underwriting loss from the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks. The insurance industry as a whole paid $33 billion in claims (in 2001 dollars).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buffett (via Berkshire Hathaway) has made huge amounts of money selling insurance against catastrophes. This includes natural disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and floods, as well as other catastrophic events including terrorism.
You realize insurance companies make the most money by selling policies that never get exercised, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be their database, but it's our lives.
People can put their lives on Facebook's database, it's still Facebook's database. The problem is not that Facebook is sharing this information, it is that people are sharing it with Facebook.
I'm saddened to see Dropbox on the list. Did they choose to participate or is it mandatory? In any case, we've moved several projects to BTSync recently from Dropbox (for no other reason than to free up space on Dropbox for our personal files) and have been enjoying the service. As a p2p encrypted protocol, I imagine it's much more difficult to eavesdrop on your files and would actually require a warrant to obtain. I…
Devil's advocate, here: As long as it's restricted to terrorism investigations I don't care. If it stops bombs from going off go ahead and snoop through Facebook's database, big deal. If it ever trickles down to DEA or local police then it's a problem. If secret courts and SQL dumps become standard procedure then everything falls apart. If this is considered constitutional I don't know how you're going to tell Office…
Are you really playing Devil's Advocate when you argue a position because you actually believe in it?
Devil's advocate, here: As long as it's restricted to terrorism investigations I don't care. If it stops bombs from going off go ahead and snoop through Facebook's database, big deal. If it ever trickles down to DEA or local police then it's a problem. If secret courts and SQL dumps become standard procedure then everything falls apart. If this is considered constitutional I don't know how you're going to tell Office…
Are you really playing Devil's Advocate when you argue a position because you actually believe in it?
Devil's advocate, here: As long as it's restricted to terrorism investigations I don't care. If it stops bombs from going off go ahead and snoop through Facebook's database, big deal. If it ever trickles down to DEA or local police then it's a problem. If secret courts and SQL dumps become standard procedure then everything falls apart. If this is considered constitutional I don't know how you're going to tell Office…
Are you really playing Devil's Advocate when you argue a position because you actually believe in it?
Devil's advocate, here: As long as it's restricted to terrorism investigations I don't care. If it stops bombs from going off go ahead and snoop through Facebook's database, big deal. If it ever trickles down to DEA or local police then it's a problem. If secret courts and SQL dumps become standard procedure then everything falls apart. If this is considered constitutional I don't know how you're going to tell Office…
Are you really playing Devil's Advocate when you argue a position because you actually believe in it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buffett's insurance business took a $2.4 billion underwriting loss from the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks. The insurance industry as a whole paid $33 billion in claims (in 2001 dollars).
Which is why acts of 'terrorism' are no longer covered under almost any insurance policy unless you pay through the nose for an additional rider.
I've lived under surveillance before, so I feel my perspective might be somewhat appropriate. I won't comment on the specifics (uninteresting and irrelevant, had to do with where I was living). I won't even make a statement about whether it's justified in my case or in general. I'd just ask everyone here to do one thing: Watch this, then ask yourself how you feel (if it doesn't go directly to 6:40, fastforward to it,…
At a very minimum - this guy needs to be tried for perjury and removed from his post. And millions of americans should sign a petition to have this happen.
Lets make it an online petition, that way we don't even have to do anything than click and type and spread our online outrage instead of actually making this issue a big deal.