Y2HH

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 01:02 PM) What are the space limitations? All Google/Gmail accounts automatically get 15gigs of storage, but if you select the "High Quality" option instead of the "Original Quality", it sets everything to 16MP (for photos) or 1080p (for video), and that's unlimited storage.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:59 AM) What you are saying in no way contradicts what I am saying. The man will literally say anything to get elected. On no planet do I want a person like that as President, whether it is Trump, Hillary, or whoever. Ok, well, one of you gets it then. In anything he's involved in, be it an election, a contest, or a negotiation, he does this. He will say ANYTHING, including things he KNOWS he cannot do or actually believes.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:52 AM) They may not have secular origins, but at the very least they have been co-opted as secular symbols now. I'd allow this argument if this was my court.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:47 AM) What have we been "played" into? Read through this thread and you'll see.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 11:43 AM) To me, Christmas and weddings are pretty similar arguments. Christmas has a religious component (the nativity scene, etc.), and a secular component (basically anything involving Santa and the tree). Just like there is the religious sacrament of matrimony and there's the secular government's recognition of marriage. If I had a kid in school, I'd have no issue with the secular presentation of Christmas, nor of the secular presentation of Hanukah. But I'd have a pretty hard time with the manger scene and other depictions of the baby Jesus... Neither of those are secular. The first christmas trees were created by devout Christians in Germany, and Santa Clause is a legend created off of St. Nicholas...saints are usually connected to religion quite closely.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 10:43 AM) lol, OK. Yes clearly none of us know he's doing it to get attention. And by none of us you mean almost all of us. Also, people like that get into a feedback loop. They start believing their own act and become cartoons without realizing it. And yeah, he does believe some of it, he just won't filter it. There's nothing about the guy that people here are missing. No one in this forum has been played. No, no one on this forum wants to believe that they've been played, but they (and you) have been.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 10:19 AM) No back-ups, unfortunately. Lesson learned. But we/she didn't format anything, that's what's messed up. And the fact that you can't take a picture and save it leads me to believe it's a software problem somewhere. Could be flash memory corruption since it's not allowing you to write to the partition...should ask her what apps she was using to do photos...even on my iPhone I use Google Photos...because I take a photo with my iPhone and Google Photos automatically backs it up to the cloud, for free.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 10:30 AM) I'm fine with calling anyone who openly espouses fascism and racism, whether or not they "actually mean any of it," a dumb ass, especially if they're doing it as the front-runner for nomination for President of a major political party. He's also an old white dude saying ridiculous s*** that at least some small but significant percentage of his supporters fully embrace. I see no reason to assume that Trump doesn't genuinely believe the s***ty things he's saying. So, like I said, he's played you.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 10:17 AM) care to elaborate? He's a life long reality tv media whore, so much so he was doing it before reality tv even existed. Throughout the 80's, Trump and his crazy marriage in the media was basically the entire Kanye/Kim storyline BEFORE Kanye/Kim. He says outlandish things because it makes people notice him, not because he actually means any of it...and people keep falling for it over and over. This presidential race is nothing but more reality tv to him, and unlike his opponents, he doesn't have to spend a dime. Nearly all of the things Trump is saying CANNOT EVEN BE DONE, and he KNOWS THAT. He's NOT the dumbass people try to make him out to be.

Trump has played every last one of you.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 09:44 AM) Anyone an Android expert out there? My wife and I have Galaxy Note 3's. Her phone has always had some weird issues with certain apps not working properly, but 99% of the time it worked just fine. Last week she started getting these error messages that force closed any app that was running, even google services and samsung specific apps. I reset it, then started it in safe mode and reset it, cleared the cache, force stopped/cleared the cache of all the apps that were coming up with error messages, and even did the "wipe cache partition" feature. Nothing worked. Everyone online suggested a factory reset. Preparing to do that, I started to back-up her files (all internal memory, no SD card....big mistake), and found that ALL of her photos/videos/everything were gone. I never deleted them, but apparently the system can't find them anywhere. If you go to settings - data, the only "user data" that shows up is app data. But what's weird is that under the "misc data" area, there are 18gb's. And you can't drill down at all to see what those 18gb's are...there is no list of files like on my phone. Similarly, the "My Files" app lists 0 music, photo or video files. The thing won't even save images she previously sent through her messaging app, nor will it save photos that you have just taken on the phone. So I call Samsung and spent 45 minutes talking to some guy from India walk me through all of the steps I just tried. He also had me try and connect the phone to the computer via their back-up software but the software won't connect to the phone (windows recognizes the phone is plugged in, but not folders show up when you try to explore it). I called up AT&T (our provider) and spent 45 minutes with basically the same troubleshooting. Over the weekend i took it to the Samsung techs at Best Buy and they seemed just as puzzled. They reinstalled the operating system on the phone but it didn't clear the force app error messages, and it didn't "find" any of her photos/video either. All of the data settings say there are no files. They also couldn't get the phone to connect to any software to run a back-up. They concluded the photos were gone. I said it's really odd that there is this 18gb of misc data on there (that's usually for app related data, but she doesn't have any games or anything on her phone. It's all shopping apps and pinterest type apps, how much data do those apps really require?) and they told me that photos don't save to that folder, so they can't be photos. As a last resort they said I could call Samsung and ship the phone to them but it could cost hundreds of dollars, take several weeks and they still might not find anything. My wife is resigned to the fact that she's lost 2 years of photos/video. I'm still not buying that the data isn't there. It just needs to be found. She said she was browsing through photos the night before they all went missing and neither one of us did any sort of delete or resest on the phone. It seems to me there is some kind of software bug that is just refusing to index the files and recognize them as photos/video. Anyone have any ideas? Sending it to Samsung isn't a realistic option (she'd be without a phone for weeks). But if there's something else to try, I'd really like to do that if at all possible. edit: oh, and the other problem is that the phone won't connect to the internet at all. Either through wi-fi or cell service. So I can't download any apps. I guess I could maybe download an app onto an SD card, install that into her phone and try to boot the program from there. Depends on what she was using for photos...did she have her photos backed up to Google Photos or Google Drive? If so, they're safe. If she was simply storing them on her phone and formatted it...not sure there is much you can do.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:40 AM) Didn't expect this to turn into the war on christmas thread. Then stop waging war on Christmas.

Oh, and I love Christmas despite my modern beliefs...because it's pretty...and makes s***ty drab winters look and feel a lot better...and I like being nice to people and buying them things, and it gives me a great excuse to do so.

I'm not a big follower of written religion anymore, by personal choice, and I really don't care what you follow or celebrate...if you're giving me free food and drinks, I'll still show up...regardless of the lies religion you choose to believe in.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 10:13 AM) The first poll section would have been great to have a split. The originals (Ep 4, 5, 6) I liked a lot, still do. The prequels (Ep 1, 2, 3) were 95% steaming piles of garbage. I saw all but the original (A New Hope) at the theater... Ep 4 is somewhat boring, but still better than the prequels. Ep 5 is amazing. Ep 6 is amazing, despite the Ewoks...and let's be real here, at the time I was a kid and the Ewoks were awesome. Episodes 1-3 have a few parts that were good (such as Darth Maul), but for the most part they were steaming piles of Darth Dookie. Also of note...the two best -- Empire and Return -- were the only two that weren't directed by George Lucas...which is why they're so much better than the rest. Emphasis is mine...because it's true.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 08:04 PM) OK, so cops telling a different story to what actually happened after the shooting doesn't constitute an attempt at a cover up...alrighty then. Anyways, the point I wanted to make is just imagine how many times something like that has happened before when witnesses tell a different version of the events than what the police say. Without video evidence, Van Dyke would have gotten away with this, no doubt about it. As with most eye witness accounts, they (the officers at the scene) may truly believe they saw what they claim to have saw in their reports...the question is, did they? It's very possible they collaborated and made up this story together, but it's also possible they didn't. Do they really believe the story they told, DESPITE video evidence on the contrary? These are important questions. With all the money the city seems to have to pay off families for things like this, maybe they should start spending that money on better dash cameras, body cameras, and a taser for every officer on the street...and these situations would instantly be brought to an absolute minimum and we wouldn't have to be asking these questions. Point is, I'm not sure there is some grand conspiracy from the officers at the scene to help cover this up...but they key words there is "I'm not sure". If it can be proven they made up this story together, I'd have NO issues going after all of them...but I do have an issue with speculating they did and witch hunting them just because they're the police. I bet some of these officers at the scene didn't even like this Van Dyke guy.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 05:08 PM) You don't think there is intense pressure from city officials that work with CPD to prevent stuff like this from coming out to "protect morale"? See: http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/71/1147...pd-another-blow It wouldn't ultimately be their decision though. I'm sure they wouldn't want it released, but they're not the ones that decide. This is Emmanuel trying to cover his own ass at this point...he's in full damage control mode.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 01:57 PM) What are you talking about? This is not how it works. The CPD collects all relevant evidence. It keeps said evidence until the states attorney's office decides it's going to indict and charge someone. At some point, the file and evidence is handed over so the SA can prosecute the case. There is no 3rd party that "handles" the case. In certain situations other state/federal agencies may get involved and want to view/test/look over evidence, but generally the police department that has jurisdiction over the crime scene handles the evidence and the "case" up until the time it's handed over to the SA. edit: internal affairs is a subset of CPD. If there's some mass coverup, they'd be in on it too. And they just interview people and review reports. They don't handle evidence. Sorry I went back and altered my post, I left out some info, and you are correct based on what I had written.

Apparently Rahm is suddenly willing to release another video like this one. As I was saying...none of these were the CPD covering them up...it was the city itself. The police aren't the ones that get to decide what gets released and what gets buried. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/b...1203-story.html

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 04:11 PM) That type of cover up isn't necessary in a police shooting. People are saying its a cover up because the other police there, the head of the fraternal order of police, and the officer all claimed the officer was in danger and was being lunged at when he was not. The other officers took no witnesses when there were. They may have deleted video evidence and tampered with audio. All of that is while they were gathering said evidence, not changing it after the fact. All it took was for people to see a cop acted over the line, and they all worked to protect him because they think it's protecting themselves. Shortterm it is, long-term it's not. Obviously that kind of coverup is necessary or we wouldn't be where we are right now. 1) Is it true no witnesses were interviewed at any point? Source please, because I'm curious to know if this is true. 2) The FBI has apparently debunked the Burger King thing. Also, the cops on the scene wouldn't be the cops investigating it...detectives are called in for that. My point is this: the CPD (as a whole) didn't try to cover this up...people in power above the CPD did. IMO, Rahm had a hand in this, and is now in the process of trying to throw the CPD under the bus. The fact this happened right before the election points to Rahm and others in power far above the CPD. A few cops on the scene aren't going to be enough to cover this up...and as we can see, IF they tried, they failed in spectacular fashion.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 03:56 PM) This runs counter to my experiences (in another state admittedly) as well. We had an evidence room, with a tagging system, regular cleanouts, access controls, etc. We only sent evidence out the door if it needed specific testing (which was only for a very small percentage of it) or for legally allowed destruction (which was done periodically). Right, but this is where the confusion lies...I attempted to clear this up a bit in my previous post. Of course not everything is sent away...but it's all collected and LOCKED UP in a room with strict controls...and anyone that tampered with any of it would be caught...this isn't the 1950's where any random cop could walk into evidence lockup and mess with things... The person I originally replied too basically said the CPD tried to cover this up...and it wasn't the CPD. No run of the mill cop could cover this up with the protocols they have in place now.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 01:55 PM) I would say the cops that walked into Burger King and deleted the video tried to cover this up http://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago-politi...n-mcdonald-case Other than the fact that didn't happen, sure.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Dec 3, 2015 -> 11:00 AM) All these recent incidents of cops shooting civilians under at best iffy circumstances have largely come about since everyone nowadays are walking around with video cameras so scrutiny of the police at work has intensified like never before and it has shown some very ugly results. The Chicago PD tried to cover this up, unfortunately for them, there was irrefutable evidence that Van Dyke shot a stoned out of his mind kid that posed very little threat to the cops and he easily could've been dealt with in a different manner without resorting to lethal force. Kind of makes you wonder how many times something similar like this has happened before. How many times have we heard the classic cop excuse "he lunged at me" while witnesses tell a different story? Only difference was there was no video to clearly contradict the cop's version of the incident. No, the Chicago PD did not try to cover this up...that's not how such investigations work. This is what Rahm wants people to believe, however. But when evidence is collected, including internal investigations, it's handed off to a 3rd party and/or locked up/tagged so that the CPD has no control over, or extremely restricted access too. Rahm is trying to use the CPD (and it's chief) as a scapegoat for a coverup he himself had a hand in architecting because this shooting occurred right before his re-election...and had this come out then, he'd have lost to Garcia.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 20, 2015 -> 12:48 PM) I prefer Dropbox for the integration with Windows Google Drive integrates the same.

I'll do my best to explain this. 1) The 800 number on the back of your card can be used to verify and/or answer any questions you may have. 2) The yearly deductible is what you will pay BEFORE insurance kicks in unless otherwise superseded by a listed co-pay. For example, if you have a 500$ deductible, but a 30$ co-pay for a office visit, for regular office visits you will pay the 30$, NOT the deductible. 3) The maximum out of pocket is what kicks in AFTER you've paid your yearly deductible, after this is reached, you are 100% covered for the remainder of the year. 4) This is where hospital charges or in/outpatient charges start kicking in. For example, if you were to break your arm, and the bill is $3500, you are responsible for 1) the deductible, which is $500. This leaves 3000$ remaining. Your insurance will then list a % you are responsible for, for example, 20%. So of that remaining 3000$, you are responsible for an additional 20% UP TO THE YEARLY MAXIMUM. Charges are often separated by a in-network/out-of-network cost. You may see something similar to this: in-network/out-of-network office visit: 25$/40$. In this example, an office visit in-network is 25$, and that same visit to an out-of-network doctor would be 40$. The same goes for non-specialist/specialist: 50$/100$. In that example, a non-specialist would cost you 50$, whereas a specialist is 100$. What is a specialist? A dermatologist is a specialist for skin conditions, where as a general practitioner is just a regular doctor. *** Keep in mind that ONLY FDA approved procedures and tests are covered. If there is an experimental test your doctor recommends, they SHOULD be telling you that insurance MAY NOT cover these charges, as they are not obligated to do so. That doesn't mean they won't, but they don't have to do so. If you have an HMO, ANYTHING your PCP (Primary Care Physician) requests will be covered. Period. If you have a PPO, you will be on the hook for anything uncovered (such as non FDA approved procedures). If you disagree with a charge AFTER fighting it, and still do not agree with the insurance companies assessment, you can ALWAYS request the case go to arbitration. Last but not least, keep in mind that if/when you cannot pay a bill, you CAN negotiate...and if they refuse to do so (they can), you can agree to make monthly payments and these "loans" CAN NEVER BE CHARGED INTEREST. If you owe 2000$, tell the hospital all you can afford to pay is $50 a month...they WILL let you interest free. If you have any questions let me know.