US To Ban Laptops in All Cabins of Flights From Europe (thedailybeast.com) 435
An anonymous reader shares an article: The Department of Homeland Security will ban laptops in the cabins of all flights from Europe to the United States, European security officials told The Daily Beast. An official announcement is expected Thursday. Initially a ban on laptops and tablets was applied only to U.S.-bound flights from 10 airports in North Africa and the Middle East. The ban was based on U.S. fears that terrorists have found a way to convert laptops into bombs capable of bringing down an airplane. It is unclear if the European ban will also apply to tablets. DHS said in a statement to The Daily Beast: "No final decisions have been made on expanding the restriction on large electronic devices in aircraft cabins; however, it is under consideration. DHS continues to evaluate the threat environment and will make changes when necessary to keep air travelers safe."
More reasons never to fly (Score:5, Insightful)
There are plenty of reasons not to fly, this is the second best one yet (being beaten by the airline for a ticket you paid good money for is #1, not sure how that will be topped).
Actually, many business travelers will like this (Score:5, Insightful)
Banning laptops would mean that the business traveler once again legitimately can't get any work done while flying, and has a good reason not to be reachable for the 8-10 hours of the flight (no computer = no real reason to pay for in-flight wifi). Nothing to do but take some time off work, kick back, relax, and catch a movie or two.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? Back when portable computers came with an implicit assumption that you have a towing hitch there was paperwork. It was work, and it was on paper. I'm not that decrepit and I've spent the odd train journey trying to threeconcile timesheets, invoices & bank statements, reading bastarding bug reports written by bugbrained bastards and the like.
Re: (Score:2)
Reading and movies are things passengers could do on tablets. If these go too, you just have to hope the inflight entertainment will work. The way service is going these days, fat chance.
Re: (Score:3)
True, but what about the all the travelers who have no checked luggage because they don't want to wait for an hour to get it back at the destination (if at all) ?
I often visit the US for 2-3 days to attend conferences with no other luggage than a small carry-on backpack. Depending on the location, the flight takes between 8 and 12 hours - I am definitely not interested in watching 5 movies back-to-back.
Re: (Score:2)
Spotted the guy with a 15" or larger laptop.
My 13" laptop (macbook air equivalent) allows me to work comfortably in first class, bulkhead and regular economy seats. Seriously, the best upgrade I ever made was a laptop that fits on my lap while seated on a plane. I don't have to hold my arms like a muscular dystrophy patient to use my laptop anymore and I actually WANT to to dev work on the plane. If I get an empty seat next to me (happens a lot on SWA, apparently people don't like my resting bitch face)
Re: (Score:3)
You have not seen the new economy seating then. The seat in front is right in your face, and your elbows are entangled with the neighbor. How would you fit a laptop in there? I never managed to use more than a tablet, and even that is going to be banned now.
Except it isn't, because the headline is pure click bait. Seriously, can slashdot get any worse?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Here's another reason: every plane will now have cargo holds full of potentially damaged lithium batteries that have been thrown around by baggage handlers. Don't count on the fire suppressant system to save you, it's completely ineffective against lithium battery thermal runaways.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Bring back the travel by ship. I don't want a cruise. I just want a cheap way out of North America that doesn't involve the bullshit. Only things I need on the boat are a bed, washrooms, a place to stuff whatever bags I want to bring, and a cafeteria (I'll bring my own food, but you're welcome to sell me some if you like). I hear they got boat travel down to 2 days across the Atlantic.
Would be nice to bring my car along, for a fee.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget satellite internet. This tends to _severely_ suck on boats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
With an ordinary ship, you never make 2 days.
For that you would need hydrofoils.
Fast container ships need about 7 days.
Most freight ships btw. have passenger cabins, you can give it a try.
Re: (Score:2)
How about you Fly into Mexico or Cuba, THEN take a Boat into the US? :)
Re: (Score:3)
Well a quick check on the Blue Riband Wikipedia page tells me the record for an eastbound Atlantic crossing is 2 days 20 hours held by an ocean-going *CATAMARAN* car and passenger ferry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Technically it would need to go westbound to get the actual Blue Riband, which would be somewhat slower. The USS United States was 10 hours slower westbound than east bound according to the Wikipedia page. Anyways hydrofoils are all out of fashion these days.
Re: (Score:2)
I could go for this as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I believe they have them shipped in advance, and meet them by airplane. Here's a company that ships them. [seabridge-tours.de] They talk about roll-on, roll-off. This might be via the same ships used to transport new cars from Europe to North America.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't need a ship to get out of North America; you can just take a plane. Notice that this rule about laptops only refers to incoming flights. Be sure to take a flight with a non-US airline. I hear that Emirates, Lufthansa, JAL, and Korean Air are the best.
For your car, you can ship it to Europe with a bunch of different companies for under $1k. It'll probably take a couple weeks though.
Now if you're about to ask about getting back with your laptop and without a lot of hassle, or complain that 2 week
Re: (Score:2)
Re:More reasons never to fly (Score:4, Insightful)
An obvious stimulus for the american coal industry, what better than steam ships burning coal.
Re: More reasons never to fly (Score:5, Informative)
Transatlantic cruises have *incredibly* bad internet connectivity. As in, 19.2kbps when it works... and mostly, it doesn't.
Caribbean cruises have fast internet because the Bahamas only has a few TV stations, but the same ~900MHz of UHF spectrum as the US, and cruise ships can have good antennas & high-power radios (unlike cell phones) to communicate with a LTE or WiMax site 40-80 miles away (few caribbean cruise routes are ever more than 100 miles from an island). There's also a huge market for Caribbean-cruise internet service, so the infrastructure got built. In contrast, the North Atlantic has a lot less cruise-ship traffic to pay for it, and sticking LTE towers in a glacier field in Greenland is several orders of magnitude harder than doing it on a caribbean island.
There's satellite too, but for Caribbean cruises, the *really* fast connectivity is terrestrial.
Re: More reasons never to fly (Score:3, Interesting)
SSL/TLS happened. In 2012, most sites & apps didn't use SSL. Now, they do... and a bunch of SSL handshakes for ephemeral connections from multiple users at once can make a formerly-tolerable slow data link grind to a complete halt. First, the handshakes start failing, because TLS has strict time limits to limit replay attacks & make MITM harder. Then, the repeated handshaking attempts end up saturating the link so nothing else -- not even DNS lookups -- can get through. Even with a few hundred kbps,
How much longer until... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How much longer until... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh please, don't be so hyperbolic. Intravenous sedatives would work just fine without the additional weight all those chains would require. As an added bonus, the airlines would save a fortune, not needing to cook and carry all those meals and drinks. And they wouldn't have to deal with unruly and ungrateful passengers that demand to sit in the seats they paid for.
All they'd have to do is having the plane crew walk around now and then, poking the passengers with sticks.
simulated altitude: 4000m (Score:3)
They do. I believe that they run at 0.7 atmospheres. It makes people sleepy and docile.
I'm a ski instructor, you insensitive clod!*
3'800m is a pretty normal altitude for me.
I'm not abnormally sleepy at 4000m.
---
Well at least that's my week-end hobby.
God Emperor of Dune (Score:5, Insightful)
So... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Comes with Safety Risks (Score:3)
Is there actionable intelligence to back up this ban...
Even if there is actionable intelligence for the plan to work the terrorists have to be able to get the explosive filled laptop past security. If they can do get explosives past inside a laptop case why can't they do the same using clothes, books, shoes etc.? ...and if they can do that unless you ban all electronics you still have a major security problem for which the only solution is background checks for all passengers.
Requiring laptops to be put in the hold also increases the danger of an unnoticed
Re:Comes with Safety Risks (Score:4, Insightful)
The guy did not put explosives in his shoe. He tried to light a cigarette in the toilet by striking a non-safety match on the sole of his shoe. That requires leather soles, and he had plastic soles, so when the sulphur in the match caught, bits of burning sulphur were embedded in the plastic, and it caught fire.
The idiot then lied his head off because it is illegal to smoke in the toilets, and the plane crew had probably been over-hyped about terrorist risks and were not old enough to know about non-safety matches.
In simple terms, the entire business of taking off your shoes for the search is entirely based on gross stupidity - like almost all the airport security policies.
You are about 100 times more likely to die in a traffic accident on the way to the airport than in a terrorist incident in flight. These people have no grip on reality, let alone risk management.
Re:Comes with Safety Risks (Score:4, Insightful)
How about reading the wikipedia article linked in the OP before writing something that is not consistent with the evidence presented at the trial, nor consistent with the information about the case released before and after the trial?
"Authorities later found over 280 grams (10 oz) of plastic explosives TATP and PETN hidden in the hollowed soles of Reid's black shoes"
But I guess that's how a normal shoe is constructed according to you?
BTW checking shoes have been a standard security measure since forever - my uncle commented on the search of his shoes after visiting USSR in the 80's. Guess that's because the Soviets had learned to foresee the future and didn't want anyone to be able to light a match?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You have nothing to offer an intelligent conversation, please lurk more.
You have obviously not paid attention to the Muslim ban controversies. Trump's policies are stuck in court because they weren't made on actionable intelligence as Obama's band was in 2011, but racist remarks that Trump made on the campaign trail. My question is relevant: does Trump have actionable intelligence or is he using Europe to whitewash his racist ban?
Re: (Score:3)
First of all, Muslim isn't a race.
Secondly, those bans were halted due to activist judges. They didn't base their decisions on the actual text of the Executive Orders as one would expect.
Re: (Score:2)
Garbage Haulers of Milpitas?
Re: (Score:3)
Garbage Haulers of Milpitas?
I love bean burritos like anyone else, but I'm not responsible for how Milpitas smells when the wind picks up. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't take kindly to stupid ugly rejects.
I don't take too kindly to asshats. Slashdot is an open forum. You don't like me being here, complain to management. Since mods consistently up vote me more than they down vote me, I doubt anything will happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Easy with sockpuppet accounts [...]
I don't sock puppet accounts, but thanks for the suggestion.
[...] and all day on the taxpayer's dime to waste.
As an IT Support contractor and entrepreneur, I'm judged by one metric: Do I get my numbers in every day? Yes, I do.
Re: (Score:2)
Laptops are now a racial differentiator? Whoodathunkit.
The Chinese laptops are always suspect. You never know what's in the firmware.
I didn't think it was "all" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but going specifically for the known problem is politically incorrect, so they have to ban all laptops instead of just the ones that might blow up.
Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is DHS really this easy to manipulate? And are they really this stupid? If a laptop shell packed with explosives is enough to "bring down an airplane" (and with the right explosive, it certainly is)(but it would have to be packed with explosive, in which case what's all that swabbing and x-raying of passengers for if it couldn't detect that modification?), how does having it in the cargo hold help? It still makes a giant hole in the fuselage and down goes the plane.
I guess my real question is, are people stupid enough to be convinced by this security theater? And then I realize P.T. Barnum was right: you can't go broke overestimating people's stupidity.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Interesting)
Congressmen are basically stupid, scared children. They've got a surprising amount of shit to sift through, no bandwidth, and sheer impulse to run on; and they have to weigh in as experts on every issue, regardless of timeline or personal understanding. When national security, Internet crimes, or child pornography come up, they can't even understand what's possible and what's just nutty; they see the maximum threat, and they respond by screaming and flailing.
One day, I want to get myself voted into the House largely so I can respond to any topic that's not central to my interests with blunt detachment and input that's given on the stated condition that my understanding of the topic is limited and my interest is largely in bothering people with questions nobody's thought to ask. For most of it, I can cite firm attention to economics and risk as a primary reason to not take action for trivial things that might be real and scary, but also unlikely to happen with any frequency or to any great severity.
Re: Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're right about being scared children and seeing the maximum threat.
But, I think you give them too much credit. The only threat they are scared of is being voted out of office. No one ever got voted out of office for protecting someone's safety, but the first time you pass legislation that protects liberty, and some one gets a skinned knee, well the you're outa there buddy.
Even the personal liberty screamers in Congress never get any bills passed to ensure privacy and liberty. To much chagrin, it takes an action by a judge appointed for life (personal survival always trumps the greater good).
Re: (Score:3)
Congressmen are basically stupid, scared children.
No, I think you're quite wrong. I've never met any, but from what I've seen and read, there are quite a lot of intelligent, rational people in Congress. Many appear to be highly qualified in areas like law.
It appears that instead, the do pander to the electorate and are concerned to appear to be weak on terrorists (or crime, or foreigners, or commies, or whatever the next scare is).
The problem is that the people who elect Congress are on who average stupid scared children, or at least outnumber the intellig
Re:Really? (Score:5, Interesting)
The theory is that if you press the laptop up against the fuselage in the passenger cabin, you can bust a big enough hole to bring the airplane down; if it's in the hold, there's no opportunity to do that.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
The theory is that if you press the laptop up against the fuselage in the passenger cabin, you can bust a big enough hole to bring the airplane down; if it's in the hold, there's no opportunity to do that.
So you're stating that all that scanning, "nude" photographing and feeling up crap that makes you arrive at the airport 2 hours early is completely ineffective?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I saw a program where they did some experiments, it was just after the shoebombers farcical attempt.
IIRC the conclusion was that it might maybe - with a fair wind and if the gods wish it - puncture the pressure hull, but not catastrophically.
Re: (Score:2)
A big laptop weights about a killogram.
My Dell here is close to 2kg.
If that is filled with C4, it does not matter where it explodes ... the plane is toast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only would a laptop packed with explosives still bring down a plane while in the cargo hold, but anything else at least the approximate size of a laptop would do as well. So are they planning to ban anything laptop-sized or larger?
Re: (Score:2)
Has it ever occurred to you that they can subject baggage to more stringent screaming?
You can use manual searching, stronger X-Rays and radiation to detect explosives, insert them into vacuum chambers to set off pressure sensitive triggers and a whole host of other techniques to catch explosives before they get on board. They also can take more time than would be convenient when screening people and their carry-ons.
Re: (Score:2)
The argument I heard was that explosive carrying capacity is low, since the payload needs to be concealed. Thus, it could breach the fuselage if pressed against it when detonated but is unlikely to do so from the cargo hold. Either because the cargo hold is reinforced or because odds are it won't be close enough to the outer wall of the aircraft.
I think all this is an over reaction, but the above is how the thinking process apparently goes.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't need to be full, it just needs enough explosives that if pressed against the hull and detonated that it would rip a hole in the fuselage. The information I saw said that they had figured out how to cut a chunk of the battery out and fill it full of some explosive that's been shaped into a shaped charge, set one of the keys or switchs to detonate it.
The laptop would turn on a function like normal and would explode with enough force to breach the fuselage if pressed against the wall before being detonated. This arrangement was viewed to be virtually undetectable without disassembling the laptop. Experts that had reviewed the plans they recovered believed this was not only possible but that the groups in question were actively building these bombs. The crucial weakness is that the bomb wouldn't be strong enough to breach the fuselage if it wasn't pressed against the wall, so all you need to do is ban laptops from the passenger compartment to make the bomb worthless.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Could you please include a reference to a public source of this information?
Re: (Score:3)
A bomb that was apparently in a laptop casing blew a hole in the fuselage and injured two people aside from the suicide bomber. The plane returned safely to the airport. The CNN article says there was a danger to the entire plane, bu the Wikipedia article doesn't. The apparent laptop did not board the plane by normal means, but was given to the bomber by airport workers.
In this case, the "laptop" needed to pass as one only to a cursory inspection. It didn't have to function, or even open up. The bom
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
A sadder part of this security theatre: a few weeks ago when boarding a flight from Taiwan my father had to hand in the scissors of his first aid kit, which happened to be in his hand luggage. Short (about 5 cm blades) with round tips. Apparently a dangerous weapon.
It was sad to see how many much more dangerous weapons were sold after security.
First I noticed make-up kits, with glass mirrors. Makes for nice sharp shards.
Second chopsticks. Combined with a piece of sandpaper like those paper nail buffing boards it can make for a nice piercing weapon.
Then I realised they also sell big glass bottles, usually with some alcoholic substances in it. Break the bottom off of them, and they become pretty nasty weapons - popular in bar fights as well.
And finally we got nice metal cutlery on the flights. Even those knives (and the pointy forks!) looked more dangerous to me than those scissors. Or a bottle of water, for that matter.
I'm sure there are a lot more of these "innocent" items for sale, that can be turned into weapons in the blink of an eye. I just haven't thought about it really, I just looked around a bit while wondering why he had to hand in those scissors. A dedicated criminal would for sure be able to find many other options.
So why again aren't we allowed to bring small scissors? Security theatre optima forma!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
planes have fire extinguishing systems, mr armchair analyst. and not just a single shot like NOS, they can fire extinguish for something like 30 straight minutes if necessary. also, the cargo is not pressured, so an explosion is not as dangerous and a fire smothers much easier when there isn't enough air to breathe.
Re: (Score:2)
Cargo holds ARE pressurized... They are not heated or ventalated, but they are inside the pressurized area.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually they are heated. They may or may not be heated to the temperature of the passenger cabin but they are heated. What they are heated to depends on the cargo being sent. If there are live animals they will be heated to approximately same temperature as the passenger cabin, if not they it may be set to ~5C. If they weren't heated all the cargo would freeze as the outside temperature is around -55C.
Re: (Score:2)
Well... That's an interesting theory there... A theory you have little evidence for.
Remember, last time I came into the USA, you picked up your baggage pretty quickly after landing, just before you clear customs. There is no time after the flight to search so I ask you... Who will be doing the preflight inspections outside the USA if what you say is true?
This is a big boon... (Score:2)
...to inflight alcoholic beverage sales.
But the terrorists are dumb! (Score:3, Funny)
The baggage compartment, awesome fix (Score:2)
The evildoers will listen to the instructions of the flight crew and place their electronics in airplane mode so they can't communicate with anything. They would also never dream of bringing about communication devices that are not FAA certified and that might interfere with the airplane's electronic systems.
Honestly my nine year old could figure out ways some evildoer could make this work.
Security theater (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh. As a US academic this is terrible (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Sigh. As a US academic this is terrible (Score:5, Insightful)
Move the conferences. The US is no longer a viable venue.
Re:Sigh. As a US academic this is terrible (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, so far, you could hold it anywhere else in the Americas. Canada's nice.
I mean, I imagine they'll get around to screwing that up, too, but they haven't said that yet.
The thing is that the US really isn't a viable venue any more without the laptop thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Goes beyond academia. I visit the US regularly for work and traveling with goddamn cellphones has been a concern for months now.
I have no idea what you guys are doing anymore.
Next up: (Score:2)
Banning stand-alone DVD players, cell phones and hand-help games (basically anything with a battery). Traveling with kids is going to be really fun. Also, anyone looking forward to checking their laptop along with baggage?
Re: (Score:3)
seat back scenes to come back?
maybe even have sky Vegas with slots / blackjack and more at your seat with comps like free flights / free beer / free food and more just swipe your card and play!. must be 18 to play the tables or slots. For the kids we have the fun games zones for only $2.99-$10.99 a flight.
movies from $2.99 to $19.99 for stuff still in the theaters.
Just dose everyone with ketamine (Score:2)
It'll make it easier for the crew, too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Completely untenable (Score:5, Interesting)
If this is true, I'm horrified that the airlines would put up with having all those lithium batteries in uncontrolled luggage in the cargo hold. If it were my airline I'd refuse the fly the routes. I certainly won't get on a plane full of cargo hold batteries. I'm equally horrified that any business would put up with the loss of time and potential loss of assets due to theft, never mind the potential loss of employees if a cargo fire brings down a plane.
This will be a huge boon to Canadian air travel. If this astounding idiocy is enacted, my Europe travel will all be going through Toronto, assuming that it occurs at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Laptops will get shoved into suitcases, where they will ignite clothing. Just one isn't likely to crash an airplane, but just one in the passenger compartment -- whether fire or explosive -- isn't bringing down a plane either. It's a lot easier to properly contain a battery fire when you can handle it. Even a smoky cargo fire would be a massive loss to the airline, which will already be hurting due to reduced flights. This whole notion is crazy and I really don't know what sort of asshole would think it
Will they cover damage / theft and loss (Score:2)
Will they cover damage / theft and loss? of them in checked bags? Will they only do it with an $20-$50 laptop checked bag service?
Will business people sneak them on board.
Will business pay for overnight shipping with fedex / ups for them to have insurance on them that the airlines will not have?
Can't Check Either (Score:4, Informative)
The big catch here is that you aren't allowed to check li-ion batteries. So you can't bring a laptop from Europe to the USA at all.
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't say you couldn't carry on the batteries. So check the laptop and carry one the batter? Maybe it's an anti-Apple play for them not playing ball on backdooring phones. ;-)
Well... (Score:2)
If there weren't enough reasons already, this completely cinches it. No way in hell I'm flying to the US so long the current administrations lasts.
There's no way I'm checking in my laptop, and there's no reason to bring my money to a place that is going to great lengths to make me feel unwelcome.
More damage to US airlines (Score:2)
If you really -must- use your laptop en-route to the US from Europe then Iceland Air [icelandair.com], with a little stop over in Keflavik, should at least give you screen time for the 1st half of the journey. Plus you can go take a dip in the blue lagoon [bluelagoon.com] in between flights. :)
This is just another nail in the coffin for US airlines.
I stopped flying via the US (NZ - UK) due to the un-necessary harassment travellers have to endure just changing flights in the US, let alone entering the country.
I fly via Dubai with Emirates.
I can see the logic here (Score:2)
After a wave of airline-related incidents like the Dao dragging and the Schear ejection, the FAA is defusing the situation by cutting down the number of people willing to fly to and from popular tourist destinations to perhaps 50 or fewer per flight. A reduced passenger count means that people will be able to sit farther apart, most passengers will get aisle seating, there will be fewer brawls over seat reclining and toilet usage, and the security lines will be shorter.
Can I have the password for your laptop (Score:2)
Can I have the password so I can look through your laptop?
No it's in my checked baggage I haven't got to the baggage carousel yet
They haven't thought this through have they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Could be more sinister (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
How is it unintended? The TSA is part of the government. When the government makes it easier to steal your laptop then steals your laptop it's hard to call that unintended.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, that's EU's rules, but only if you are coming from another EU country.. Which are "special" (as in short bus special) and required as part of being a member...
I assure you, MOST countries I've been to do it the same way the US does and the UK did it this way too last time I was there (although this was 10 years ago).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, this is actually kinda funny. I suppose it's too late to short your airline stocks though. I guess there's enough domestic business to keep them afloat.
I hope there would be significant economic fallout from this, but given the history of such things, I don't really expect much reaction at all.
Maybe the airlines can build tablets into the seat backs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The bombing of Air India flight 189. It was the deadliest terrorist incident involving an aircraft prior to the September 11th attacks. The bomb was concealed inside a piece of stereo equipment being shipped as baggage. It detonated in the forward compartment of the aircraft, and caused it to break up at 31,000' off the coast of Ireland.
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Looks like he's on the right track if you ask me.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not an expert. Nor do I care about the government out to get me. If they want me, it's quite easy to get me.
However... this would greatly affect my ability to travel. My laptop is my only saviour from the noisy, rude idiots around me, the cabin crew that want to CONSTANTLY interrupt me and make me do things, and the sheer boredom of many hours of sitting in a too-small seat that I have to disturb a stranger to move from.
Literally, you just removed my state-of-the-art entertainment system with movies,
Re: (Score:3)
The only people that were not responsible for the outcome are the non-voters
They are also responsible for the result, because they were capable of acting, but chose not to act. The people who voted for the loser are not responsible for the outcome, because they acted, and their action did not result in their choice. How can you be responsible for the actions of the winner, when you acted to not put him/her in power?
if the voter turnout is south of 1% then that monster will have very little power.
We live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Direct Democracy. If only 1% of the population votes in the US, and results in a PotUS, that PotUS has all the power that