Slashdot Mirror

Where I live it is those little grey terrorists that are the most dangerous threat to the grid. A few of them get BBQed by pole pigs every year in my city and someone looses power.

Sure, but you can survive that for a short period of time likely. If i can survive a minute or two at 115 and have no ill effects.

The BBC quotes some Finnish Sauna Society person saying that even up to 160C is "enjoyable" for some individuals, although i'm fairly skeptical of that claim

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazi...

It was Bill Clinton, A FUCKING DEMOCRAT that federally deregulated the banks and federally instituted the racist 3-strikes law.

We were told that this sort of stuff would have been a Republican wet dream. THE DEMOCRATS DID IT

And the Dems wonder why they can't win elections.

Because Rockoon is such a demented liar that he states easily disproven falsehoods?

Yeah, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act was totally named after 3 Democratic Congressmen. Wait. Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia). Hmm. Of course, we could just forget the Bush administration, because obviously they weren't capable of doing anything, so it's unfair to hold them responsible for running the country.

As for three strikes, the flaws of it were pointed out in 1995. Republicans? They've had 22 years. They've done what now?

At least Clinton has the grace to admit his mistakes. The new Sheriff is committed to ignoring that.

If you want to say that Democrats don't win elections because America is infected with such a fanatical zealotry of lying GOP stalwarts that substitute their own reality, I guess that's an idea. Anything else? You're just being as much a liar as Rockoon.

The real story with elections, of course, is that the game is rigged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...

The tax software's update mechanism got compromised.

Mikko Hypponen, a security expert at F-Secure, is saying - "If you do business in Ukraine, the software (MEDoc) appears to be de facto,"

Microsoft is saying : "Active infections of the ransomware initially started from the legitimate MEDoc update process,"

As for Crimea, it was the people who were living in Crimea

Crimeans didn't decide anything. In spite of overwhelming Russian propaganda, polls before Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea showed that Crimeans preferred to stay with Ukraine. First of all, Russia's referendum pantomime was done in breach of numerous international laws, norms, and treaties, and under Russian military occupation. Second, the referendum did not have a "status quo" option. Third, as the Kremlin's Human Rights Council confirmed that the Crimea "referendum" results were totally fabricated. Russia took away Crimeans' ability to determine their own fate.

the anti-Russia government that took power in Ukraine after the coup?

When a certain country attacks you, you tend to become anti- that country. But let's get the chronology straight - Russia started its Crimea invasion in early February 2014, while Yanukovych was still in office. One of the Russian officers coordinating the Crimea invasion, was Igor Girkin, who immediately went on to lead Russia's invasion of Ukraine's Donbas region. So your rationalization of Russia's Crimea invasion is absurd.

so anti-Russians it even tried to forbid the Russian language.

That's a flat out lie. A motion was proposed in the Rada to take away the privileged status of the Russian language, but Ukraine's acting president, Turchynov, said that he wold veto any such proposal, and that was the end of it. How dumb do you have to be to believe that a country could "forbid" a language that's spoken by the majority of that country?

can you explain to me why the US government immediately accepted the result of the coup instead of demanding the respect of democracy

As mentioned above, Yanukovych tried to subvert democracy in Ukraine - he would've turned Ukraine into a Russia-style dictatorship. The revolution ensured that democracy was not thwarted. After three months of Turchynov's provisional government, Poroshenko was elected in accordance with Ukrainian law.

Considering the difference of military power, if one day Russia decided to invade Ukraine, it would be even easier for them than when the US invaded Iraq.

More Russian propaganda. Here's a translation of a Novaya Gazeta article, in which a Buryat (Russian Mongol) soldier openly talks about his tank unit invading Donbas. Since the article has been published, his mother has been complaining that the Russian military refuses to give him his military pension or to provide other services due to him as an injured soldier. Ukrainian POW Savchenko was traded to Russia for two Spetsnaz who were captured in Donbas. Just yesterday, a Russian soldier was captured in East Ukraine. You can download the Nemtsov Report, which Boris Nemtsov was compiling before the Kremlin's lackeys murdered him -

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech No it can't as told you now several times. The government has no influence on judges and police.

Wrong again. Yes it can, as I've told you many times now. Need yet another example of out of control "hate speech" laws being used for political censorship? Well look no further than the recent case of the 62 year old German woman fined 1,000 Euros for a meme, a harmless joke on Facebook:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/04/62-year-old-german-woman-fined-1000-euros-sharing-anti-migrant-joke-online/

http://www.snopes.com/german-woman-fined-facebook-meme-refugees/

And by the way, Judges and the Police are actually government entities, so of course the government has influence over them. In Rotherham, England the Police knew for at least 10 years of the mass, organized, systematic raping of children by Pakistanis and Afghans but refused to stop it because they were under government pressure to avoid the perception of being racist. So the government's policy of political correctness won over protecting children. Any country that makes that choice has no future, nor deserves one.

There is nothing happening in that regard. There are not even protests against her politics. 90% of the germans stand fully behind it.

It only seems that way because the German news media has been in full pro-migrant propaganda mode for years now and most Germans are too afraid to say how they really feel, lest they end up fired from their jobs, "interviewed" by the police, fined, arrested or have their homes raided. So go on and live in that 90% fantasy world of yours

You would not be arrested, why would you? Are you really that stupid? What you say is wrong, but who cares? You would be arrested after you had hunted them down. Here, and in your country. And then convicted. Here and in your country.

Are you really that stupid? If a 15 yr old can be arrested in Europe for an offensive tweet aimed at a football player who scored a goal against his favorite team, anything goes. No violence threatened, just offensive. And as for the theoretical American AR15 armed Father, he's likely thought out the consequences and found them worth taking for his hunting expedition since neither the police nor the justice system will protect his children. Furthermore, he's likely to find a sympathetic ear or two on an American jury for his temporary rage driven insanity, not necessarily convicted at all.

Can't be so hard to grasp what "hate speech" is ... your examples are none.

Again, "hate speech" is whatever the government and prevailing political correctness/thought police culture wants it to be. I've provided numerous examples and could provide many more. The example of the 62 yr old German woman makes it clear. Why is it so hard for you to grasp that "hate speech" is whatever the German/English/Swedish..government wants it to be?

So: you have hate speech "case law".

Regarding the First Amendment all State and Federal law is subject to the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation which requires "imminent lawless action" which means it is both imminent action (right now) and likely to actually happen, in order to restrict speech. Anything else goes including advocating that at some point in the future it would be a good idea for some people to take some illegal action, even if that "good idea" is violent. Any attempt to suppress that speech w

Yes, any terrestrial species that want its descendants to survive more than another 700 million years or so must expand its territory beyond Earth

No earth species survive for 700 mil years, or do you assume our ancestor Saccorhytus to be human?
Best scenario for Homo Sapiens is probably 50 000 years, realistic two orders less. Our best hope to become space species is ... artificial inteligence successors. If we manage to create many forms of AI creatures so that we can indduce "AI evolution" (evolution is so far the only known working principle for long-time survival, reproduction and useful modifications of any complex and intrinsicly unstable structures - otherwise known as life), our successors can become true space species. Think about it: Harsh space environment? No problem for robotic life. Light speed limit inconvenience for travel? For species living 10 000 years is a hop betwee the neighbour stars like transatlantic flight for human. If we dont do that, we will be dead in a few hundred years without successors.
I understand that it is a natural sentiment to be attached to its own and close species (with comon genes - Dawkins The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype) and that artificial life seems "unnatural and sick" concept to people (with slow evolution we have developped an instinct than any big change - eg big mutation - usually indicates "something gone wrong" with life-threatening potential) but this is the only chance our "children" will take over the space and maybe even galaxy. Otherwise we are dead in several hundred years with no successors.

This actually is scary. I am mentally moving WW3 as the end of humanity to the second place. As far as odds of winning anything against computers, we have about zero

And no charges were laid, the police investigated and found nothing worthwhile. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-13218522

you mean like obstruction of justice? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The US has seen a massive decline in violent crime in general, along with a decline in teen pregnancies. There is no correlation between increased gun-ownership, increased conceal-and-carry, and increased violent crime.

While it's only a theory and correlation does not strictly imply causation, I cautiously subscribe to the lead-crime hypothesis:

"Second, this correlation holds true with no exceptions. Every country studied has shown this same strong correlation between leaded gasoline and violent crime rates. Within the United States, you can see the data at the state level. Where lead concentrations declined quickly, crime declined quickly. Where it declined slowly, crime declined slowly. The data even holds true at the neighborhood level - high lead concentrations correlate so well that you can overlay maps of crime rates over maps of lead concentrations and get an almost perfect fit.

Third, and probably most important, the data goes beyond just these models. As Drum himself points out, "if econometric studies were all there were to the story of lead, you'd be justified in remaining skeptical no matter how good the statistics look." But the chemistry and neuroscience of lead gives us good reason to believe the connection. Decades of research has shown that lead poisoning causes significant and probably irreversible damage to the brain. Not only does lead degrade cognitive abilities and lower intelligence, it also degrades a person's ability to make decisions by damaging areas of the brain responsible for "emotional regulation, impulse control, attention, verbal reasoning, and mental flexibility."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/a...
http://www.motherjones.com/env...
  http://www.bbc.com/news/magazi...

Doesn't look very down to me friend. Do you have some alternate facts I don't know about?

Think in the other direction, instead of keeping the machines cool, how about dissipating/transferring the heat. Such as heating a room or such. Heating Buildings Using Computers

Yes they did.

http://www.bbc.com/news/electi...

Add up the seats. The parties aligned with exiting the Euro still won. Due to the multi party system, getting to even 50% is a huge hurdle most akin to the US super majority. They did not reach that level, however, they clearly still have the largest support.

I personally would probably be voting Sinn Fein, but that has nothing to do with just adding up the seats and seeing anti-euro won.

The conservatives won. With the UDP the math is really simple.
Conservative parties know how to look after the people who voted for them and the UK conservatives have a long history of looking after voters.
"May to form 'government of certainty' with DUP backing"
http://www.bbc.com/news/electi...
"... join with her DUP "friends" to "get to work" on Brexit."
"... strong relationship" she had with the DUP"
"Our two parties have enjoyed a strong relationship over many years .." "confidence and supply"

SNP and Lib Dems have already said they're not going to form a coalition government which means the only option left is for Conservative to form a minority government

The likeliest outcome is a coalition with the DUP (ten seats), which will seek a "seamless and frictionless" Irish border. That will get the Conservatives a slim majority.

I still don't know what you mean by tyranny of the weak. I gave it my best shot, and missed. Could you explain further?

Seriously? Okay. Let us speak of the concept of banning words "Ban Bossy". http://banbossy.com/ This project has the very bizzare concept of presumable leaders of people (just females) of being devastated and rendered impotent when people call them bossy. The irony is that teh women promoting this fit the 'bossy" moniker to a T. In my own experience, people have called my wife "Bossy" her reply is "Right, that's why I'm the boss!" Because that is the inherent nature of being a boss. Being too weak to withstand such a word means you are too weak to be a boss. And banning the word will not make a weak preson one bit stronger, merely show that they cannot withstand simple words. Tyranny of the weak. I was listening to an NPR story this afternoon with a younf lady who wants those who utter the word "Retarded" prosecuted for Hate speech. It's rude, but a hate crime? If that were enacted, it would show how people are devastated by the very word, and must be proteced from it. Tyranny of the weak.

But that is merely a proposal, I only offer it as an example of the mindset.

However, Let us speak of the town in England where a man can be prosecuted and convicted of a hate crime, the wording so vague that the mere act of saying hello to a woman can get you arrested. Quoting Winston Churchill gets you arrested for a hate crime. https://www.thenewamerican.com...

A woman was arrested for swearing in front of her children. http://www.mommyish.com/2014/0... Low life lady and no doubt, but apparently it completely destroys children to hear the word fuck, and must be punished to the maximum extent of the law. We need a street harassment law. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfo...

Anther place in England is turning "Misogyny" into ahate crime. Even when no crime is committed, you can be investigated. Not certain how "investigations" go across the pond. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng... The wording of the law is:

The crime of misogyny is defined as “any incidents against women that are motivated by an attitude of a man towards a woman, and includes behaviour targeted towards a woman by men simply because they are a woman.”

Other parts of the law are:

Unwanted or uninvited sexual advances, Physical or verbal assault, Unwanted or uninvited physical or verbal contact or engagement, Use of mobile phones to send unwanted or uninvited messages, Take photographs without consent"

Yes David Thornley, you can go to jail for saying "hello" to a a woman. There are some other issues with the law. Unwanted sexual advances - of course. Tell the guy to shut it down and he needs to shut it down. But "uninvited"? That means that no man had better ever tell a woman that he thinks she is cute or attempts to hold her hand (religious in the US consider hand holding as a gateway to sex)

Assault - of course. phones? if you send a message disagreeing with her, welcome to the UK prison system.

Photographs without consent? SRSLY? In the UK, the home of massive surveillance? Take all those cameras down

Now between you and me and the capybaras in the back yard, almost all women don't give a rats putout about most of this weakling stuff. My wife is dare I say, pretty fetching, and gets catcalls on occasion. and she gets called bossy (all by women) and she gets comments about her weight - turn

Which brings it full circle, but also to a point that I failed to add originally.

That is, they don't have Control Orders anymore, not since 2011. They were scrapped and replaced by T-Pims (Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures), which was claimed to be "more flexible" but in practice was heavily watered down.

Guess whose idea that was? Then-Home Secretary Theresa May.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-122...

If Comey had just told the truth to the American people earlier he would still have his job

President Trump was essentially the instigator of the "Birther" movement but later claimed it was Hillary Clinton. And you are concerned about Comey telling the truth?

Then there are days, usually in winter, when the island has the opposite problem: it creates more energy than it can use or store. Just as Eigg Electric has to manage its deficiencies itself, it has to manage its surpluses. Fortunately, it has a system for that too: when there is a surplus of power, electric heaters in the community hall, pier lobby and two churches automatically turn on. This keeps these shared spaces warm all through the winter and requires “virtually no central heating in the system at all,” says Booth. “We don’t charge for it because the whole community benefits.”

Not so vague:

The security source said both bans were not the result of a single specific incident but a combination of factors.

One of those, according to the source, was the discovery of a plot to bring down a plane with explosives hidden in a fake iPad that appeared as good as the real thing. Other details of the plot, such as the date, the country involved and the group behind it, remain secret.

Discovery of the plot confirmed the fears of the intelligence agencies that Islamist groups had found a novel way to smuggle explosives into the cabin area in carry-on luggage after failed attempts with shoe bombs and explosives hidden in underwear. An explosion in a cabin (where a terrorist can position the explosive against a door or window) can have much more impact than one in the hold (where the terrorist has no control over the position of the explosive, which could be in the middle of luggage, away from the skin of the aircraft), given passengers and crew could be sucked out of any subsequent hole. - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/26/plot-explosives-ipad-us-uk-laptop-ban

And not theoretical:

Somali authorities have released a video they say shows a laptop being given to the passenger after he has passed through the security checkpoint.

A man in an orange hi-vis vest is shown walking with a man in a blue shirt holding what looks like a laptop. Another man in a hat approaches them and it is alleged that the laptop is handed over.
- http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35521646

But sure... keep complaining.

The original threat was an iPad, so anything roughly that size that could have explosives placed in there would probably be the limit.

Phablets? Maybe... Tablets and laptops, almost certainly.

See also: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-35521646

but seeing as how we're not really a democracy I don't see how it matters. Wake me up when we've switched to a parliamentary system with no voter registration process and an executive elected by popular vote.

Well let's see. I guess you never got the memo that they found WMDs in Iraq. https://www.usnews.com/opinion... . Not surprising, the US put them there. So to deny they were there is just pure ignorance, set out by the dishonest press. Even after it was pointed out to them many times that the US put them there, so they're there. Hard to fix stupid.

AGW - Things are warming, not due to man. They used to walk an elephant onto the Thames - http://www.bbc.com/news/magazi... up to 200 years ago. It was already warming by then, which is pre-industrial revolution, meaning it's not CO2, meaning it's not man. CO2 is a symptom, not the cause. BTW, they used to grow grapes in the UK about 2000 years ago during the Roman times - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci... . So we're really returning to where it was. No need to pay a bunch of money to a few leftists that won't do anything with the money other than take it. That's what the Paris accord was about by the way. It didn't do anything by design.

Voodoo economics, that was a campaign comment. Not true. The US saw the largest expansion of economic wealth the world had ever seen during Reagan's term. It wasn't "trickle down", it was trickle everywhere economics. Everyone benefited from those policies.

Then you just get silly. Including your comment on guns. We all know that more guns leads to less crime. More gun control the more crime. It's very definitive.

There's your lesson for the day.

Remember, a prison is supposed to be about rehab, not outright punishment.

Prisons have multiple functions: they protect society by physically separating criminals, they serve as punishment, they serve as deterrent, and they may also rehabilitate. If you say that their purpose ought to be only rehabilitation, well, you're probably largely on your own.

The Nordic countries do it right.

That's your opinion, not a fact. Many people are offended by Breivik's conditions of imprisonment for example.

Furthermore, it's not like the US isn't trying. The US has prisons similar to Norway's and we imprison and rehabilitate low risk prisoners there. However, the US has a much more diverse population, and hence we have a much larger number of people who are difficult to rehabilitate.

Fracking doesn't decrease CO2 emissions... http://www.bbc.com/news/scienc...

The BBC and the New York Times, to name just a few reputable sources, disagree with your assessment that Greece used rules accepted at the time and were only changed 4 years later:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09...

Practically no country in Europe has maintained the 3% deficit rule all the time. But I think it is not hypocritical to demand this of new applicants, it's just common sense. After all, if you can't even follow the rules at the beginning at least, as a special effort in order to join the bloc, what does this spell for the future?
It's the same logic as a job interview. You will go nicely dressed, shaved with clean shoes and fresh breaths, this doesn't mean you will go like this to work every day, but at least upon joining you should be at your best, no?
Not to mention that Germany had to go through the extra effort of assimilating former east block GDR. Suddenly one third of Germany was a developing country. Greece didn't have this special circumstances.

About the forced WW2 loan. First of all, you are mixing topics, I guess in an effort to show how unfairly Greece is being treated, since this has nothing to do with corruption levels or faking of statistics. And second, I don't know where you got that argument about today's Germany not being united. The real reason for Germany refusing to pay that I'm aware of is explained in this BBC article:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...

Berlin paid 115m Deutschmarks to Athens in 1960 in compensation. It was a fraction of the Greek demand but was made with the agreement there would be no more claims.

The BBC and the New York Times, to name just a few reputable sources, disagree with your assessment that Greece used rules accepted at the time and were only changed 4 years later:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09...

Practically no country in Europe has maintained the 3% deficit rule all the time. But I think it is not hypocritical to demand this of new applicants, it's just common sense. After all, if you can't even follow the rules at the beginning at least, as a special effort in order to join the bloc, what does this spell for the future?
It's the same logic as a job interview. You will go nicely dressed, shaved with clean shoes and fresh breaths, this doesn't mean you will go like this to work every day, but at least upon joining you should be at your best, no?
Not to mention that Germany had to go through the extra effort of assimilating former east block GDR. Suddenly one third of Germany was a developing country. Greece didn't have this special circumstances.

About the forced WW2 loan. First of all, you are mixing topics, I guess in an effort to show how unfairly Greece is being treated, since this has nothing to do with corruption levels or faking of statistics. And second, I don't know where you got that argument about today's Germany not being united. The real reason for Germany refusing to pay that I'm aware of is explained in this BBC article:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...

Berlin paid 115m Deutschmarks to Athens in 1960 in compensation. It was a fraction of the Greek demand but was made with the agreement there would be no more claims.

I'm not sure I would go THAT far and make that judgement -- but it certainly seems to fit with people being blissfully unaware of how the companies are data mining the shit out of them and profiting off that very information that people _willingly_ give to the companies in the first place!

Technology is neither evil, nor good -- the exact same technology can be used for good, or abused just as equally.

The fundamental problem is people are NOT conscious of the choices they are making.

People have become "The Product" via "free" apps, don't understand how "Social Media" such as FecesBook track them, and the big 3 -- Apple / Google / Microsoft -- do not give a shit about your privacy -- because they are too busy making money hand over fist over providing a "convenient" service to you. They will only do the bare minimum to comply with the Law.

We have no legal guarantees that your own data will not be abused, or used against you.

The bigger moral question is, and should be:

Why are they collecting this information in the first place?

The scarier question is:

Why don't most people care? Why are they so blind to how potentially this is rife for abuse

Have we become that lazy as a species that we no longer cares who spys on us??? We just blindly accept whatever bullshit corporations and government tell us -- and when they get caught with their pants down absolutely nothing happens???

i.e.
WTF does a game even need access to your Contacts???
Why isn't there _fine_ grained control over what permissions I can give an app?

We have completely forgotten the wisdom of Abraham Lincoln

America will never be destroyed from the outside.
If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.

And Thomas Paine

It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.

But alas, those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Sure, but not "agreeing to it" is not the same as dis-owning it and walking away. Trump and Co. aren't "re-negotiating" like they say they will do with NAFTA; they're dis-owning years of negotiations carried out by the U.S., and offering nothing to replace it, leaving all the other parties wondering a big-fat what-the-fuck??? (some deal-maker this Trump is turning out to be). This leads to a perception, all-important in international trade-deals or anything where real money is transacted, that the U.S. is unreliable. And indeed, all indications from Trump's campaign promises is to play hard-ball tariffs, whereas so far the only action carried out by the T-administration is some kind words to China's leaders at a golf course.

That leaves a bunch of Pacific countries, appetites whetted for a lucrative Pacific trade deal, sitting around wondering what we do now. China, itching to get American power out of the China Sea, South Korea, and Taiwan, itching for more trade and influence in South America, itching to show off its new aircraft carriers (with with more to come), would be happy to fill that empty seat at the table with everything that its hard-working, highly-educated, smart-phone-making, super-productive but no freedom-of-speech or freedom-to-unionize workforce has to offer.

Like any clubhouse, once you're out, you're out - it's never easy to get back in. If this keeps up, you're witnessing the decline of the United States as a world power. Thanks, big T, and thanks to all the cock-sure he'll-never-win people who slacked off and let him squeak to victory.

This isn't about pollution. It's about the level of CO2 in the atmosphere - which is the primary acceleration factor for global warming.

The key point is this: human beings are dumping additional CO2 into the atmosphere above and beyond that produced naturally by the environment. This has to have an impact, and reduction of human contributions also has to lower or slow the rate of impact.

You can't escape the laws of physics. We have been accelerating the factor of greenhouse warming since the dawn of the industrial era, and therefore decreasing the time we have available to deal with the effects that are already impacting us. We can argue all day about the primary cause of the warming - increased output of the sun, etc...but you can't argue that what we are doing has no effect.

Some examples of related impacts that are accelerating and affecting human populations today:

The number of severe weather events has increased significantly and steadily year over year since the 1950s.

Sea level rise is real, and related subsidence of coastal areas is also real (e.g. Miami Florida, and Norfolk Virginia sea level impacts). Indications are this increase in speed of sea level rise is related to the thinning and breakup of the floating ice in Antarctica that serves to slow the march of land based glaciers into the Southern Ocean. Glaciers there are recorded as dropping 4 meters per year. And, Larsen B is getting ready to break off and form the largest iceberg in recorded history sometime very soon (June/July). A similar speedup of glacial movement and subsidence is also being measured in Greenland as well as other ice sheets around the world.

Water sheds are being impacted all over the world due to loss of glaciers, both in terms of availability of water in the event of drought, and in terms of record levels of melt water flooding - most recently seen in the Oroville California dam overflow and resultant damage to the aging infrastructure, and flooding this year in Peru.

Crops are already being impacted by heat and drought conditions, and some Northern areas are starting to consider using seeds normally reserved for more Southerly climates, while those in the South are looking into modifications to make their plants more hardy in drought stressed conditions.

Permafrost is not only melting more frequently and in larger areas across the world, but is also causing ground subsidence - with massive evidence of this in Siberia.

By doing nothing - we accept that the major human population centers will be faced with existential problems sooner rather than later.

Technically speaking, RT is based out of Moscow, and is a foreign corporation. The 1st Amendment rights of corporations is still a gray area, and Constitution protections for foreigners is still highly subjective and is still decided on a case-by-case basis. Even cases such as Citizens United really only touch on campaign contributions as a "form" of free speech, and contrary to popular belief, was pretty limited in the resultant decision. There have been many court cases that have decided that foreign nationals are not automatically covered under the Bill of Rights as these where meant for actual citizens of the US. Combining these factors together, this leads to the conclusion that RT would NOT be covered under any 1st Amendment rights.

As for the evidence of Russian involvement, there is proof. However, the actual "list" or whatever is currently still highly classified and not released into the general public yet. The real question is if the involvement was coordinated on the "state level", and was the Trump administration an active participant in said involvement or just a beneficiary. There is evidence of similar tampering in France; however Marcon's cyber team was prepared for this and may have actually done some preemptive "informational poisoning" to derail it.

People who can't see this trail are just keeping their heads buried in the sand; I blame it on something akin to the "beaten spouse syndrome". However, I don't think Clinton was a very good candidate either, and would have brought her own long list of issues with her. It's sad that out of 330 million people these two rose to "the top". We can do better than this; we MUST do better than this. Personally I advocate for replacing the House of Representatives with a proportional representation system to encourage the viability and formation of real third party choices. The US stands alone in having the meme "third party" due to the mathematical fact that our system only allows two sides due to our "winner take all" system. These sides often switch platforms, and absorb any emergent 3rd parties within a few election cycles.

Sources:
RT Network
Are foreign nationals covered under the Constitution?
Corporate personhood
First Amendment and “Foreign-Controlled” U.S. Corporations
Can US election hack be traced to Russia?
Putin: Patriotic Russians may be involved in hacking
The Macedonian Teens Who Mastered Fake News
Macedonia’s fake news industry sets sights on Europe
Russian Cyber Attack Repelled During French Elections
Proportional representation

Technically speaking, RT is based out of Moscow, and is a foreign corporation. The 1st Amendment rights of corporations is still a gray area, and Constitution protections for foreigners is still highly subjective and is still decided on a case-by-case basis. Even cases such as Citizens United really only touch on campaign contributions as a "form" of free speech, and contrary to popular belief, was pretty limited in the resultant decision. There have been many court cases that have decided that foreign nationals are not automatically covered under the Bill of Rights as these where meant for actual citizens of the US. Combining these factors together, this leads to the conclusion that RT would NOT be covered under any 1st Amendment rights.

As for the evidence of Russian involvement, there is proof. However, the actual "list" or whatever is currently still highly classified and not released into the general public yet. The real question is if the involvement was coordinated on the "state level", and was the Trump administration an active participant in said involvement or just a beneficiary. There is evidence of similar tampering in France; however Marcon's cyber team was prepared for this and may have actually done some preemptive "informational poisoning" to derail it.

People who can't see this trail are just keeping their heads buried in the sand; I blame it on something akin to the "beaten spouse syndrome". However, I don't think Clinton was a very good candidate either, and would have brought her own long list of issues with her. It's sad that out of 330 million people these two rose to "the top". We can do better than this; we MUST do better than this. Personally I advocate for replacing the House of Representatives with a proportional representation system to encourage the viability and formation of real third party choices. The US stands alone in having the meme "third party" due to the mathematical fact that our system only allows two sides due to our "winner take all" system. These sides often switch platforms, and absorb any emergent 3rd parties within a few election cycles.

Sources:
RT Network
Are foreign nationals covered under the Constitution?
Corporate personhood
First Amendment and “Foreign-Controlled” U.S. Corporations
Can US election hack be traced to Russia?
Putin: Patriotic Russians may be involved in hacking
The Macedonian Teens Who Mastered Fake News
Macedonia’s fake news industry sets sights on Europe
Russian Cyber Attack Repelled During French Elections
Proportional representation

I never said that US citizens are arrested for pushing LIKE.

That's good, because unlike Switzerland, we aren't. There are mountains of ambiguity in it, even if it weren't considered free speech. Who exactly pressed the "like" button? Are there degrees of like? To your idea that they are spreading the untruth, is laughing, upset, or even disliking emoticon still a punishable offense since by your definition, the crime is the repost. Even outside of the like buttons, If a person comments on the bad posting, be it agreement, commiserating, or disagreeing, they further spread the posting.

Can it be proven that the like button was pushed in earnest? I've seen accidental "likes" pretty often. Touchscreens or oversensitive touchpads can get you an accidental click here and there

This concept has holes big enough to drive a container ship through. Regardless, here among the savages, we don't arrest people who use a constitutionally protected right, and we have the higher court rulings to prove it.

European propensity to amp it up on these sort of things makes for interesting situations. Now that there are places in Great Britain where a male can be arrested, charged and convicted of a "Hate crime" - something we Neanderthals across the pond save for racial/religious murders and terrorist events - and his crime? Saying hello to a woman http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng... http://www.newsweek.com/uk-pol...

Unwanted communications, yikes! Note that I used an example a bit similar to my cite about the guy who violated a Protection from abuse order in a previous post.

When "hello" or a page like can now be a hate crime, and liking something is a crime, by gosh, I'm going to just sit back with my popcorn, maybe a shot of cheap tequila chased with lemonade, and watch as our superiors descend into whackyland.

And I'll call it "Thoughtcrime" too, because by jingo, I can do that! It isn't against the law here in the backwoods.

Considering that there was a huge stream of anti-NN comments, many of which came in the names of people who are actually dead, something is off. But hey, let's dismiss their claims without any investigation because we can study the text and provenance of those comments without even looking at a database dump. We're awesome like that!

In the US if a power company loses computer control of their portion of the grid they still get the joy of rolling trucks out to substations and other locations to maintain control. An interesting thing about the Russian hack of the Ukrainian grid is that the Russians also DoSed the call center to prevent the outages from being reported sooner. Like with any number of cyber attacks there were multiple ways that this should have been stopped but wasn't. One can read all about findings either here or here for good analysis of what happened. Besides if people think a cyber attack against the power grid is the greatest threat they should consider those bastard squirrels instead. If one really wanted to do some damage discharging a high powered rifle (think .30-06 deer rifle) into some of those large transformers at substations would be easier and cause a longer outage than a cyber attack as there just aren't many spares around.

That isn't to say don't worry about cyber attacks and don't mitigate things but there are a lot of other threats that are as damaging or more so that should also be prepared for.

Last I checked, Oxbridge was about 50% ex-private school

This is certainly not true for Cambridge. The year I went there (well over 20 years ago) was the first year that those of us from state schools were in the majority and it's now ~62% and there are 8 institutes with a higher percentage of private school intake than Cambridge. Even Oxford has been dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century and its intake is now over 50% from state schools.

So yes, private school gives you an advantage but it's the typical advantage of wealth: it makes things easier to achieve. So long as the advantage of wealth can be matched by additional hard work and effort on the part of those of us with less money then I've no problem with it. That certainly seems to be the case in the UK and Canada...and I say that as someone who went through a comprehensive state school and still managed to get into Cambridge and then academia.

No power related IT outages? What about this? http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...

Here you have the BBC report on the matter: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-400...

On BBC news front page: http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...
Just because China censors something doesn't mean it didn't happen.

We have no measurements at all on what any sort of fake news could of did. You cannot compare a nebulous quantity like this.

Hmm, I suspect that advertisers would disagree with you. They spent lots of money, they want results. You may not trust them, but they do have measurements.

While we have real studies on the likely number of illegals who voted. Studies that show the numbers are in the hundreds of thousands to millions.

Oh really, and you can cite these studies? Sean Spicer couldn't. And I can find other reports that say numbers such as you and Trump claim are bogus.

Sorry, but actual prosecutions are so low, that you have to ask, if your allegations were true, why isn't anybody being charged? You know that does include Trump voters.

I'll believe you care when you get that woman charged. Absent that, I'll believe you don't even care.

Meanwhile, half of the votes in the recounts we did, in Hillary majority districts, could not even be recounted because of problems.

And these problems were? How many Trump votes were included? You know what I noticed about Michigan though?

2,279,543(DT) 2,268,839(HC)
2,564,569(BO) 2,115,256(MR)
2,872,579(BO) 2,048,639(JM)
2,479,183(JK) 2,313,746(GWB)

Hmm. Something odd about how the vote dropped precipitously in 2016. Perhaps you should explain that, instead of chasing a dubious phantom that is ENTIRELY the responsibility of the Republican state government. Because they could have improved the voting systems if they wanted, they could have managed any errors. Mysteriously, they instead chose to gerrymander the state.

And while I suspect you don't want to admit it, if you believe there are indeed millions of unlawful voters, the you can't trust ANY election returns, there are no legally elected officials anywhere.

That means we have an illegitimate government. At all levels. Federal, state, and local.

Good luck calling for all of them to be removed.

I doubt you have the integrity to try.

That's not what "brick" means.

It's an article in "The Sun". They don't know what most words mean especially if they have more than one syllable. It has been shown that reading The Sun or other tabloids results in a worse vocabulary than not reading any newspaper and if you want to gauge their level have a look at their toughest words in the dictionary quiz. It is frankly rather sad that Slashdot is linking to such a wholly unreliable source.

Of course. That's why the US signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia. You gotta keep the military-industrial complex's snouts in the trough.

It's not legal either place for very good reasons because it isn't safe and cannot be made safe.

Then how do you rationalize why it is even legal to purchase such hardware? There are undoubtedly more firearms than 500+hp cars in America. Firearms are regulated extensively regulated for public safety. High-powered street cars are not. If they are such a public safety risk as you assert, why is this the case?

Spend 20 seconds on google if you need actual examples.

I already supplied multi-year traffic accident data for Japan and the US. That's a far larger data set than looking at individual examples on Google.

Considering that automation/robots/AI are making human labor obsolete...

Umm, what kind of bullshit are you talking about now? This has nothing to do with the topic at hand nor is it actually true.

I'm not sure if you are trolling or just plain ignorant, but I'm feeling generous enough to contribute to your enlightenment.
Japanese insurance firm replaces 34 staff with AI: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
IBM's Watson edits an entire magazine on its own: https://futurism.com/will-ibms...
Automation arrives at restaurants: http://www.computerworld.com/a...
"The result of their agitation will be more jobs for machines and fewer for the least skilled workers," it wrote.
Foxconn replaces 60,000 factory workers with robots: http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...
Chinese factory replaces 90% of humans with robots, production soars: http://www.techrepublic.com/ar...

Now, here's why all of that is relevant. What are we supposed to do with potentially billions of low-skill or even medium-skill human beings whose labor is no longer a cost-effective means of production? They will still consume resources and produce pollution, just by existing. Your posts indicate that protecting the environment is a priority for you, yet you have a myopic focus on high-powered passenger vehicles while ignoring the elephant in the room of unchecked global population growth. Hence why I countered that cutting the population in half would leave us still able to sustain (if not improve) our First-World living standards across the board, AND do the environment a big favor. We can have 800HP cars and pristine national parks if we just had 4 billion fewer people, who we won't need to manufacture said 800HP cars in the near-future anyway, so no loss there......Are you finally picking up what I'm putting down now?

Holy off topic batman. I think we are done here.

Well, I've laid out my thoughts in a clear manner with numerous references, and you've only contributed vapid one-liners, so I have no qualms about accepting your concession in this debate.

It's not legal either place for very good reasons because it isn't safe and cannot be made safe.

Then how do you rationalize why it is even legal to purchase such hardware? There are undoubtedly more firearms than 500+hp cars in America. Firearms are regulated extensively regulated for public safety. High-powered street cars are not. If they are such a public safety risk as you assert, why is this the case?

Spend 20 seconds on google if you need actual examples.

I already supplied multi-year traffic accident data for Japan and the US. That's a far larger data set than looking at individual examples on Google.

Considering that automation/robots/AI are making human labor obsolete...

Umm, what kind of bullshit are you talking about now? This has nothing to do with the topic at hand nor is it actually true.

I'm not sure if you are trolling or just plain ignorant, but I'm feeling generous enough to contribute to your enlightenment.
Japanese insurance firm replaces 34 staff with AI: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
IBM's Watson edits an entire magazine on its own: https://futurism.com/will-ibms...
Automation arrives at restaurants: http://www.computerworld.com/a...
"The result of their agitation will be more jobs for machines and fewer for the least skilled workers," it wrote.
Foxconn replaces 60,000 factory workers with robots: http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...
Chinese factory replaces 90% of humans with robots, production soars: http://www.techrepublic.com/ar...

Now, here's why all of that is relevant. What are we supposed to do with potentially billions of low-skill or even medium-skill human beings whose labor is no longer a cost-effective means of production? They will still consume resources and produce pollution, just by existing. Your posts indicate that protecting the environment is a priority for you, yet you have a myopic focus on high-powered passenger vehicles while ignoring the elephant in the room of unchecked global population growth. Hence why I countered that cutting the population in half would leave us still able to sustain (if not improve) our First-World living standards across the board, AND do the environment a big favor. We can have 800HP cars and pristine national parks if we just had 4 billion fewer people, who we won't need to manufacture said 800HP cars in the near-future anyway, so no loss there......Are you finally picking up what I'm putting down now?

Holy off topic batman. I think we are done here.

Well, I've laid out my thoughts in a clear manner with numerous references, and you've only contributed vapid one-liners, so I have no qualms about accepting your concession in this debate.

I believe bitcoin has value when someone actually expends the effort to find that legendary harddrive with a cache of 7500 bitcoins that got thrown out by accident.

Literally mining a pile of garbage to recover old-growth, early sequence bitcoins.

Your nostalgia is showing. All of those things you listed were as bad if not considerably worse then than now, except for there being more wildlife and fewer humans. The problems you attribute to modern society are all things that were taken for granted or ignored back then, you just didn't hear about them as much because there wasn't a cheap means of nigh-instantaneous global communication to bring those problems to society's collective attention.

On the whole the food was worse for you because there weren't as many regulations preventing you from being poisoned by unsafe preparation techniques, and you had no idea what you were actually eating because nutrition labels weren't even a thing until 1990; everyone hated their jobs just as much then as now (if not more, if you count black people and women, who were still actively being discriminated against); rich assholes were less insanely rich but still the same assholes; Americans on the whole had much worse educations then as now (viz., literacy rates over time, if nothing else); confirmed traitor Richard Nixon was president over several of those years; and the only reason you trusted anyone for the news back then was because you effectively only had one source of information.

On top of all that, you still had much higher violent crime rates due to the leaded gasoline fumes that everyone was still inhaling, higher rates of death to smoking, deaths due to conditions/diseases that are now preventable and/or entirely treatable, a smog problem in every major city that only Beijing rivals now, and all kinds of other problems that would take too long to list.

Oh yeah, and Vietnam.

Face it, man, unless you were on something, the 70s sucked.

There are no Russian soldiers in Ukraine.

No, of course not. All those freshly dug graves of Russian soldiers suddenly appearing and reporters being attacked investigating the sudden increase in dead Russian soldiers mean absolutely nothing.

Don't forget the Russian special forces soldiers captured in Ukraine, the Russian officer captured while transporting ammunition and supplies, the Russian soldiers who have dropped the pretense they're not fighting in Ukraine while others have quit the army because they don't want to fight in Ukraine like their comrades. Then there are the terrorists themselves who fully admit Russian soldiers have been fighting for them.

So yeah, no evidence whatsoever of Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine.

There's a new trade agreement that allows China to open banks in the US. That completely changes the landscape for Chinese investment in the US.

Well, given that this affects non-single payer nations too... no.

http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...