[www.af.mil] Section 4.16. Again.

Yes, there are. As noted by another poster, section 4.16 at this document: [www.af.mil]

USAF Policy, as referenced upthread, doesn't seem to think it's an "extenuating" circumstance or something about which we should get all squeamish. But you're general argument is good: just get on with it. Most women breastfeed very discreetly, rather like the woman on the right in the picture that leads this story.…

You so totally win the day. There's a lot of asshattery in the thread above written either by vets and active duty personnel that don't know how to look up the rules they serve under, or by a bunch of Top Gun fans and other military wannabes whose closest contact with the reality of military service is Call of Duty.…

But go on. Be a dick and miss the point.

Epic win.

That's the point. It's not easily defeatable. But, yeah, IT security firms and their clients do like to hype these low probability threats. Yes, they do exist. But there's risk everywhere. And this is not as risky as, say, connecting to a network over unsecured wifi at a hotspot (which I am sure you've dealt with…

Dude here to say I've only once friendzoned a grrrrl. And yet there's a whole part of my town that's been zoned Low Density Friend, for me, by all the wimmins that I kinda took a fancy to in my younger days. And most of the time, my beard was largely food-free. Fortunately for me, the ladies I liked weren't users,…

How strong a possibility? Catching the common cold this year? Or getting struck by a meteor? I don't mean to seem too flippant, but at some point concerns about security morph into, frankly, paranoia. There are certainly risks in the world, but this is not one that makes me worry even slightly.

The eyes, they nearly pop out of his face.

They're going to do it when screen smudges become a problem. Oh, yes, those guys at Penn State totally hacked some Android phones. Yeah, using cameras, lighting, etc. Meh.

You can create a pattern where the smudges give no clues as to the order in which you swipe in one or another direction. I did on my Android phone. Even then, a quick wipe of the phone—or, unimaginably, playing angry birds or dialing a "phone call" (this offer not valid to Sprint customers)—will pretty much render…

And then, there's this, which suggests that this is indeed just bullshit: [www.newyorker.com]

You're making the initial assumption that this story is something more than what it is, which is straight up bullshit. And if Hong Kong's legal system still looks like the UK's, the libel settlement will be large indeed.

Nice headline. Bet it drove pageviews through the roof, eh? I guess a more salacious headline, like one that used the term "claimed by some sleazy tabloid" doesn't carry the sniff of official condemnation that "accused" has, right? Because, hey, no one would interpret this as being a legal charge, right? No, not in…

Next game, the Timbers lose after being overcome by the odor of unwashed bodies, weed, and patchouli.

+1. Any time you get the soccer stories, you get the mouthbreathers out. Or, the booger eaters, as Colin Cowherd calls 'em.

LMAO

+1 all the way. Relegate the Galaxy too. They lost to the Carolina Railhawks. Ha ha ha ha. Oh, but LA didn't have Beckham on game day. Oh, yeah, that was the difference right there.

Woah. Yes, at least two. At least Beaver College changed its whole name. [en.wikipedia.org]