lukeadams

Also supports tab completion!

Precisely.

I agree with you that unchecked enforcement of rules by the government is a negative. But perhaps you would agree with me that net neutrality, and perhaps more broadly the FCC, are not in an "unchecked" state.

Like I said in my original comment though: I don't disagree with you entirely; I understand that the free market in most cases does correct itself. It just seems that there is a certain balance required for free-market correction, which if upset, allows for unchecked behavior by private companies.

I suppose a better articulation is as follows: the free market, when working correctly, allows me to choose with my wallet. I literally can't do that in my city, unless you mean to say that spending thousands to millions to construct my own ISP is a reasonable alternative to true competition. At least from a consumer perspective? My point was that net neutrality would solve this specific issue in a top down manner, removing the need for people in cities across the country to "take matters into their own hands".

It seems that you are suggesting that free market forces are capable of correcting all imbalances? (not 100% sure your position)

I'm not in the industry, so keep that in mind.

While this document comes across as a decent primer on the general theory behind encryption, I wish it covered the security implications of historical policy proposals (key escrow and DRM come to mind).

It seems important to make sure that policymakers are not only educated on encryption, but on the pitfalls or "fallacies" that come about when, well, trying to write policy regarding it. Such misconceptions, I think, are more dangerous than a fundamental misunderstanding of the system as a whole as they allow for crippling crypto by law (picking and choosing implementation details), instead of simply misinformed blanket laws.

I understand the sentiment, but doesn't it sound much more reasonable to have strictly enforced net neutrality (or consumer protection policy X), than it does to assume the "free market will take care of it someday"? These megacorps have a stranglehold on large swaths of the States – they won't allow challengers without a fight.

I second Chocolatey. There's also a (supported by Choco) puppet plugin which makes client installations as simple as

  package { 'notepadplusplus':
    ensure            => '6.7.5',
    provider          => 'chocolatey',
  }

I've used it on a few client machines with no issues.

OP used uBlock Origin to create a rule that hides the popup.

Yeah that issue was when I was using the ISP-provided gateway combo. I'm running a PF box right now and it hasn't been reassigned in months. But yeah assigning a static ip would fix it. It's just annoying when its a family member who doesn't know that can be done.

I find that Windows machines wont "discover" my Canon printer like OSX+Bonjour does, so if the IP address changes you have to delete and reinstall it. :/ Might be OP's problem?

I would assume it comes into contact with it more..? The technology industry is behind telecom infrastructure, consumer facing communications, etc; all of which seem like better targets than banks or the financial industry.