Just because some, or even most people find it objectionable should not be grounds for banning the content. Furthermore, finding an app on the app store for a 5 year old is probably more difficult than stumbling across pornography on a website or the tv. People should be able to access whatever they want on any device…

You do realize that the availability of porn on a device does not mean that porn will constantly be displayed on that device, right? Couldn't your argument apply to banning porn on computers?

I'm not sure, to be honest. Most kids I knew were well-off to extremely wealthy and all of us (besides some of the athletes) could afford the 56k a year, but I guess shitty beer just goes down better.

At my tiny liberal arts school no one ever wanted to spend ridiculous amounts of money on beer that would be consumed via chugging and shotgunning. Where'd you go, Bowdoin?

If you are so certain that our government would never abuse excessive powers, despite extensive evidence of this having happened many times in our past, then why do you think it is important to live in a democracy with a system of checks and balances?

I have no idea. It's not like any government in history has ever used massive surveillance programs supposedly created for the "safety" of its citizens to create a police state.

Just because the program doesn't "inconvenience" too many people right now doesn't mean that it isn't literally the definition of the sort of thing that anyone with bad intentions could use to turn this country into a complete police state tomorrow. To quote Kanye (maybe less tired?): "No one [government] should have…

Phones didn't exist in his time period, either. Still, that didn't stop the Supreme Court from ruling that warrants were required for phone taps. What, exactly, is your point?

Why wouldn't they? They advertise like crazy every time the FBI dupes some idiot into planting a fake bomb somewhere. That's how they maintain funding and justify their existence. Why wouldn't the NSA want to make it known that it actually does something useful, especially now that the program's existence is public…

"So point number one, if you’re a U.S. person, then NSA is not listening to your phone calls and it’s not targeting your emails unless it’s getting an individualized court order. That’s the existing rule."

He's an extremely self-conscious guy who loves appearing like he has everything. I think Kim adds to that. She loves publicity and this helps her. Seems like a win-win. Plus heterosexuality is important to his image and lyrics.

It's more of a publicity thing and I've heard numerous times from people who I think have pretty good info that he's gay. Doesn't really surprise me.

What do you mean? Obama has prosecuted leakers more aggressively than any other President in history.

And the only freedom that they truly want us to have!

Stopping criminals is not worth our government becoming criminals themselves. That is quite literally the price of living in a free society. Once the government decides that it must break the law itself in order to stop law-breakers, then we no longer live in a free society and the rule of law becomes null and void.…

I was angry then I calmed myself with the realization that you're a troll. Please, God, be a troll.

I'm sick of seeing arguments about whether or not Bush is more responsible for this than Obama. Who gives a shit? This is fucking terrifying regardless and stupid partisan debates only distract from the real issue at hand.

This.

Interesting. I thought you needed an external soundcard for cuing to work on apps like this.

DJ apps like this seem cool but they cut out the single-most important part DJing, which is the ability to cue up the next song that's about to be played and listen to it before anyone in the audience hears it, thus allowing the DJ to sync up the two songs so that they play together. An iPad only has one audio output…