Slashdot Mirror

Uber CEO Travis Kalanick will take a leave of absence from the world's most valuable privately held company

It is HIGHLY unlikely that any reasonable valuation of Uber exceeds that of Saudi Aramco which is the actual most valuable private company in the world.

Given that Uber lost something like $2.8 Billion last year, proclaiming it the most valuable private company in the world is just plain idiotic.

Didn't Trump actually lose the election in terms of the popular vote? To you foreigners who blame us for voting Trump in we didn't really. The electors did. Not us. We voted in our own version of Theresa May.

If the Russians or someone pretending to be them (maybe it was Aaron Swartz and a team of his undead minions) managed to succeed in altering the results of the election what does this imply about Hillary winning the popular vote by a significant margin but losing in electoral votes? Is it possible that the hackers actually wanted to try to make sure that the unusually extreme Trump would lose? After all most hackers with the skill to pull off something like this are very unlikely to be Trump supporters.

It is unusual for the popular vote to be so much higher than the electoral vote. I mean maybe some electors were bribed to vote Trump, but otoh maybe the popular vote was just the only vote that was hackable. It would be ironic if it turns out that an investigation uncovers that votes were actually hacked in the other direction. That would seem to then imply that it wasn't Russians after all, but rather someone framing them. North Korea maybe?

If I were investigating the first thing I would do is look into the finances of the electors who voted for trump even though the popular vote was against him. The second thing I would do would be to try to figure out how many popular votes were changed and which direction they were changed in. Maybe Trump lost popular votes because some Libertarian hacker altered them to vote for the Libertarian candidate (yay!).

The only difference here is that Trump isn't a normal politician and may have some racist or at least anti-Muslim views

According to this CNN link , the six countries on the travel ban were Sudan, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, and Syria. All of them have either extremely poor security situations with rampant domestic terrorism and active insurgencies, or in Iran's case an extremely antagonistic relationship with the US government and Israel (which has major lobbying power in the US). These countries are 10% of the world Muslim population. They are also some of the most dangerous and active conflict zones in the world today, and possess training environments for the radicalization of second-generation immigrants in Europe to turn into terrorists.

You know what countries AREN'T on Trump's travel ban? Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, Turkey, and Egypt. Combined they are home to 56.7% of the world's Muslims, and while some of them have security problems and active jihadi insurgencies, they also have more robust security apparatuses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

So is Trump really anti-Muslim, or simply enacting pre-emptive security measures and risk avoidance?

In comparison, his erstwhile opponent in the Presidential race voted in favor of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The collapse of security in Iraq in 2003 is STILL costing Muslim lives to this day due to ISIS, which even a conservative estimate would place in the high hundreds of thousands of fatalities 2003-2017. This is also the same woman who **LAUGHED** about the overthrow and extra-judicial lynching of a Muslim head of state (Qaddafi). https://youtu.be/UtH7iv4ip1U

So I'm just curious if you also consider Hillary Clinton to be a racist anti-Muslim? Or is it just Trump?

And this is only half of the story. Read this, this, and this...and you might begin to understand the breadth and the scope of what Russia is doing online. The Kremlin has built an entire industry manned by thousands, whose sole purpose is to get online and sew chaos, confusion, and doubt. They are why, when you discuss any issue that reflects poorly on Russia on any major website, you get marginalized and bombarded with talking points.

There are conservatives who mirror the Kremlin's message, but these buildings filled with thousands of paid trolls are the originals and the instigators. This is not a game, read the Times story above and you will see the real world consequences; Russia can create fake hysteria in America, made up disasters, and form political causes out of the ether which sway American policy in the direction they like. Russia, right this very second, and since 2014, and into the future--is at war with you, with me, with every Conservative and every Democrat and every Independent--and they don't care at all what you want. They care what 1 man wants, and what he wants is to say fuck you and your country.

You're wrong, because the groups you're not talking about are conservatives, bullies, warriors for Christ, "freedom fighters" and so on. They *do* those things. ACT-America, Christian Action Network, John Birch Society, Oath Keepers, Justice Foundation, Christian Exodus, Agenda21Today, AFN, GOOOH, NCAUNT, WTP, TURF, AOF...are all violent right-wing groups.

But you'll never speak of them, will you? You'll claim that it's a "purely" left-wing thing, you'll wave your hands over the KKK, but wait a second, they're not the only group, now are they? (The Right-wing isn't stupid, they know the KKK brand is tainted, so they stick on a new label.)

In fact, you'll go into hysterics when their conduct is documented and reported.

And it isn't even limited to the US.

Yet you are entirely and utterly silent.

No word at all from you.

Oh, and one of your video was a fake.

But hey, I'm sure you can rant over a cake.

Oh boo hoo hoo, milo yogurt and ann coulter couldn't speak on a college campus because of protests. A republican student murdered another student for being black. If you're upset about liberals shutting down free speech but not the massive rise in right-wing hate crimes across the country, are you even fooling yourself? You hate liberals, you don't have a fucking reason other than they're not like you.

During the Milo riots, leftist rioters beat Milo attendees with flagpoles and fists. [MMA fighter] Jake Shields pulled a victim from a crowd of beaters and protected him from harm. When asked, the victim had no idea why he was being beaten. Some of the rioters had simply started calling him [the victim] a nazi, for apparently no reason, and the beatings began from there.

This is why the left keeps saying things about the right that aren't true. They say it because once you've established that someone is a nazi, or islamaphobe, or racist, or so on... once you've established that they are despicable then it's OK to attempt to murder them.

I suppose it's a form of virtue signalling, in the manner of "she's a witch! Burn her!" You are such a good and virtuous person that you actively stamp out evil. It starts by labelling the other person as something despicable.

I've *never* seen the right do that to the extent that the left has done, in the last several months. Apparently holding the bloody, severed head of the president is OK, knifing him to death as part of "Shakespeare in the park" is OK, and putting up disgusting nude statues of him in cities across the nation is considered OK.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true, for a reason: it's to justify breaking laws and trampling rights. They want to get their way in any manner possible, and the ends justify any means.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true.

Don't believe them.

Oh boo hoo hoo, milo yogurt and ann coulter couldn't speak on a college campus because of protests. A republican student murdered another student for being black. If you're upset about liberals shutting down free speech but not the massive rise in right-wing hate crimes across the country, are you even fooling yourself? You hate liberals, you don't have a fucking reason other than they're not like you.

There's lots of meticulously researched and sourced articles out there. Just because you can't use google doesn't mean there isn't any evidence.

There's no way for someone to prove that they're not racist when denial is proof. They're supporting and accepting a gay man and you're making it into a bad thing.

Given that math is racist nowadays, you have to realize what a hateful scumbag you are for helping trivialize real hatred by using blanket accusations as a weapon.

Citations:

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2... http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/2...

CNN, "Dershowitz: Most serious charge ever against a sitting US president" , Dershowitz said that is more serious charge that the Washington Post has ever charged a sitting US president" , see the difference, one makes say Dershowitz said it, which is exactly what he didn't say and wasn't trying to say. http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/...
CNN Comey's testimony will contradiction Trump's assertions that he was told 3 times he wasn't under investigation, they published a correction but no retraction. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/...
CNN Cooper couldn't understand why legally the President cannot be charged with obstruction , nor could Toobin at CNN couldn't see the difference between Nixon and Trump. Nixon , guy's got caught breaking into the DNC, Crime had been committed, Nixon ORDER to break the law afterwards to cover it up. Trump , well no crime has ever been committed to even start, just the FBI is on investigation, aka fishing expedition to cover up the FBI's illegal survellience of the Trump campagin that was started on the Trump Dossier , alone, yep that is it.

Not only that CNN repeated just today , well if Trump wasn't under investigation , we confirmed today Trump is under investigation now based on what Toobin thinks.

CNN, "Dershowitz: Most serious charge ever against a sitting US president" , Dershowitz said that is more serious charge that the Washington Post has ever charged a sitting US president" , see the difference, one makes say Dershowitz said it, which is exactly what he didn't say and wasn't trying to say. http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/...
CNN Comey's testimony will contradiction Trump's assertions that he was told 3 times he wasn't under investigation, they published a correction but no retraction. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/...
CNN Cooper couldn't understand why legally the President cannot be charged with obstruction , nor could Toobin at CNN couldn't see the difference between Nixon and Trump. Nixon , guy's got caught breaking into the DNC, Crime had been committed, Nixon ORDER to break the law afterwards to cover it up. Trump , well no crime has ever been committed to even start, just the FBI is on investigation, aka fishing expedition to cover up the FBI's illegal survellience of the Trump campagin that was started on the Trump Dossier , alone, yep that is it.

Not only that CNN repeated just today , well if Trump wasn't under investigation , we confirmed today Trump is under investigation now based on what Toobin thinks.

It's a little late for that. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/...

Jeff Sessions rolled back the Obama-era drug sentencing guidelines, resulting in the harshest possible sentences for drug offenders... which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

Yep, almost no media outlet noticed.

DAYS before an election, SOMEBODY using a (presumably non-spoofed) Russian IP address phished some campaign officials????

REALLY?

Um, voter materials are mailed out WEEKS or even MONTHS before an election. Any last minute tampering of the voter rolls (and there's NO EVIDENCE that any even happened) would have NO FLIPPING EFFECT! In fact, last year Obama himself ridiculed the very IDEA of hacking an American election given that each state runs its own and none are connected to the net, all use their own systems and schemes for verifying voters and doing re-counts etc. Obama himself (who was apparently an infallible demigod up until 8 months ago) pointed out that all the dissimilarities and non-connected nature of allthis made hacking an election IMPOSSIBLE.

Now somebody claims that somebody in Russia tried the same sort of attack on some local voting officials that Gizmodo recently tried on members of the Trump administration, and we are supposed to freak-out and believe that the election was obviosly HACKED.

I keep thinking that the Obama-Clinton supporters' mass fever will break and they will return to the normal behavior of civilized people whose candidate loses an election - getting on with their lives, grumbling a little, and looking for a better candidate for next time. Instead, they seem to be in the death-grip of a political form of Ebola which has them bleeding from every orifice and from which they may never recover. They would be insane with outrage if their opponents had ever treated Obama and his family, staff and supporters, HALF as badly.

It was only a few months ago that Hillary Clinton got cheers from her supporters and the press and pundits when she ranted that Trump would be a "threat to our democracy" if he did not accept the election results. I guess it was all different when everybody was certain she would win...

This is the kind of article going around in my circle of people with anaphylaxis prone children. Seriously. Citizens of our once great nation are buying YEARS expired medication, second-hand, so their kids won't die.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/08/...

One family I know personally had to budget for a YEAR in advance in order to replace an expired pen... and by the way, you need 2 in order to be sure to not die.

So yeah if you are lucky enough to have insurance that actually covers the epi-pen... when yours expires, you can sell it for $100 or more.

They raised her to become a person who'd, though only 9 or 10 when 9.11. happened, pick up Pashto, Farsi and Dari languages and join US Air Force as a linguist, where she served for 6 years.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06...

Not to mention the whole thing where they raised her to speak out about issues of public interest.
Such as evidence of attacks on the USA by a foreign government, while said attacks are denied by both the said foreign government - and the current USA administration which has landed the job in part thanks to said attacks.
At the expense of own liberty, job, future...

Some people really take that oath thing about "support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic" seriously.

Well, members of our intelligence community don't want that. Say what you want, but I'm willing to trust people who have been working in the surveillance community when it comes to what's good for communication and national security.

Now, I don't know a ton but I do know back channels are relatively normal for certain types of communication. What's indefensible, as a U.S. citizen, is using that strictly to avoid FBI surveillance. Maybe it's innocent, but it sure as heck looks shady. The attempted cover-up once this starting making headlines sure doesn't paint a pretty picture. But, hey, I thought all those e-mail and Benghazi people would understand that type of thinking.

I've been reading https://theintercept.com/2017/... for about a half an hour. There still is no "raw data". It's still, "Trust Us, We wouldn’t reach conclusions without real evidence!" I'm suspicious about the whole thing.

The Intercept (not Greenwald) did such a good job of protecting their source that she was busted _before_ the document was published? She is Reality Leigh Winner, 25. This idealistic kid wants to protect Hillary and the MSM? She works for Pluribus International Corporation in Georgia http://www.pluribusinternation... , yet she didn't cover her emails to the Intercept? She also didn't cover the act of "copying" the document? http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/05/...

This is nothing more than the swamp's latest salvo.

Trump fires [Attourney General] Yates after she refuses to enforce his immigration ban[, which was later found to be illegal by the Supreme Court] (NYT, Jan. 30, 2017).

FTFY

I'm surprised you got this comment in before the Russian trolls started, nice.

But you did miss these from the same citation:

April or May
The FBI focuses on Kushner as a person of interest in their investigation as that effort intensifies. (WP, May 25, 2017).

May 10
Trump fires Comey, citing the recommendation of Sessions (WP, May 10, 2017). In the letter firing Comey, Trump includes a line saying that he appreciates Comey telling him “on three separate occasions” that he is not under investigation (May 10, 2017). The president later tells NBC’s Lester Holt that the firing was because “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story” (CNN, May 12, 2017). Sources indicate that Kushner was a prominent voice behind the firing (CBS, May 17, 2017).

May 11
In a private meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump reveals classified information shared with the United States by an ally, later reported to be Israel (WP, May 15, 2017). He also reportedly disparages Comey as a “nut job” to Lavrov and Kislyak and says that he “faced great pressure because of Russia,” which was now “taken off” with the firing of Comey (NYT, May 19, 2017).

May 12
Lawyers representing Trump release a statement indicating that the president’s tax returns don’t show income from Russian sources, with a few exceptions (NYT, May 12, 2017).

May 17
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the Russia investigation

And to Anon Ivan's complaint that many of these come from the Post, the answer is that you can find the same information elsewhere too.

The data was given to the US media by a US insider. This was another domestic event with a trusted insider walking out like with the Pentagon Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Julian Assange: 'A lot more material' coming on US elections" (July 27, 2016)
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07...
""Perhaps one day the source or sources will step forward and that might be an interesting moment some people may have egg on their faces."
"... they were handed over to him at a D.C. park by an intermediary for 'disgusted' Democratic whistleblowers" (15 December 2016)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

Staff do not later resign over fake files created by another nation.

You know what the difference between today and the 1980's were? That the attack in San Bernardino and Pulse Nightclub both could have been stopped. What happened?

Omar got reported, and yet the authorities ended up doing nothing.

But then, the same goes for others.

I suppose we could live in the Draconian Police State you want, but I suspect you'd hate that.

And how about more in the UK, with those girls raped and being sold as sex slaves(just a fyi it's happening in the US too).

Yes, yes, West Texas is full of it.

And the muslims trying to take over schools to turn them into extremist breeding grounds(see trojan horse scandal).

No, that's Christians.

Well what do you know? In those dozens of cases it was all the same thing too.

I think we've got a problem. You know what it is? People are too politically correct and afraid of being labeled racist/islamophobe/etc.

Nope, it's the other way around. People are obsessively racist, islamophobic, and otherwise unable to see the problems are all over.

So afraid that they'll turn a blind eye to people preparing to carry out a terrorist attack. Until that changes this isn't going to change either. We could, avoid the whole "implement internet agenda thing." The answer is in this paragraph. And you know as well as I do that the left has a very long history the last decade of going after people for daring to say "that muslim looks like they're going to blow people up."

Yeah, that's because you say it so much, then you attack some Sikhs.

After all, that's what happened in Rotterdam and why 1000+ girls were raped and used as sex toys after all....for over a decade.

Clean your own closet first.

You don't really care though, that's why you won't even bat an eye at the stuff in your own backyard.

You'll do nothing but scream and pout in a tantrum.

Apparently you are, not only that you're an idiot to boot. The "line that I'm pushing" is people are afraid of doing something and being labeled racist for doing it.

To make it very simple for you: They're willing to look the other way because of fear, and they're willing to look so hard in the other direction that people are dying because of it.

Yes, the FBI is unable to investigate right-wing terrorism because of that attitude.

Some of

You know what the difference between today and the 1980's were? That the attack in San Bernardino and Pulse Nightclub both could have been stopped. What happened?

Omar got reported, and yet the authorities ended up doing nothing.

But then, the same goes for others.

I suppose we could live in the Draconian Police State you want, but I suspect you'd hate that.

And how about more in the UK, with those girls raped and being sold as sex slaves(just a fyi it's happening in the US too).

Yes, yes, West Texas is full of it.

And the muslims trying to take over schools to turn them into extremist breeding grounds(see trojan horse scandal).

No, that's Christians.

Well what do you know? In those dozens of cases it was all the same thing too.

I think we've got a problem. You know what it is? People are too politically correct and afraid of being labeled racist/islamophobe/etc.

Nope, it's the other way around. People are obsessively racist, islamophobic, and otherwise unable to see the problems are all over.

So afraid that they'll turn a blind eye to people preparing to carry out a terrorist attack. Until that changes this isn't going to change either. We could, avoid the whole "implement internet agenda thing." The answer is in this paragraph. And you know as well as I do that the left has a very long history the last decade of going after people for daring to say "that muslim looks like they're going to blow people up."

Yeah, that's because you say it so much, then you attack some Sikhs.

After all, that's what happened in Rotterdam and why 1000+ girls were raped and used as sex toys after all....for over a decade.

Clean your own closet first.

You don't really care though, that's why you won't even bat an eye at the stuff in your own backyard.

You'll do nothing but scream and pout in a tantrum.

Apparently you are, not only that you're an idiot to boot. The "line that I'm pushing" is people are afraid of doing something and being labeled racist for doing it.

To make it very simple for you: They're willing to look the other way because of fear, and they're willing to look so hard in the other direction that people are dying because of it.

Yes, the FBI is unable to investigate right-wing terrorism because of that attitude.

Some of

Maybe Obama just misunderstood the TPP.

Hillary was at times proud of her work on TPP, at other times was dismissive of it, and even occasionally forgot she worked on it...

Your delusion about rich people managing to avoid paying taxes doesn't hold up to reality. At all.

You are the one who is being deluded, I'm afraid, since your long-winded and rather pointless example makes one fatal error - it assumes that everybody making that sort of money will actually honestly declare all of their earnings. You missed the part where the money gets shuffled off to a tax haven. Or siphoned off through one of many industry- and occupation-specific loopholes that in exist in various tax codes. Not to mention using "regulatory arbitrage" (find a way to declare your income as the least-taxable item and/or to declare it in a jurisdiction that has the lowest tax rate).

We're talking about, for example, 18.5 trillion dollars hidden away in tax havens by wealthy individuals (not corporations hiding profits). We're talking about even Buffet, for whom we can I suppose presume that he is doing all things legally (i.e. not illegally hiding his wealth in Liechtenstein or the British Virgin Islands), saying that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Yes, you indeed get to avoid paying taxes by being rich - if you want to, of course. There are tons of rich people who are perfectly honest. The bad apples however, are significant and a problem. You get to avoid it because you have the money to hire people that will squeeze every loophole in the tax code for you. You have the money to cover the transactional costs of setting up offshore tax shelters. And you have the money to buy political influence, making sure that you can get away with it all. In the end, all of this costs you less than paying the proper tax rate (otherwise you wouldn't do it all). Yes, that is how the world works, really.

(Not to mention that you just pulled some numbers out of a hat in your response, simply to make the numbers line up. Or that you think that for some reason, what happens in one case in the United States is somehow relevant for the entire Western world.)

The EPA was never told to stop doing their job, they were told "until further notice, any new regulation requires the cancellation of 2 old regulations".

That is in effect telling them to stop doing part of their job, actually, since part of their job is making new regulations. It's not eliminating regulations, and it should not be, either.

They have not been told to stop prosecuting or even investigating current regulations.

Bull Shit.

Continued spewing of ignorant nonsense will be considered trolling. You do have a history of such, so I'm not surprised.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

Coming from you, that is the finest compliment I could be paid.

The big banks launder money all the time and usually if caught only get sanctioned or fined an affordable (for them) amount. Nobody goes to jail. This is just capitalism trying to clamp down on an increasingly popular alternative way of doing business. Links: https://www.int-comp.com/ict-v... http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/2... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... http://rense.com/general28/mon...

https://www.desmogblog.com/201...
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/1...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/0...

And Carl Icahn is just one of the many cronies that Trump put in positions of power. Only an imbecile (to borrow your own language) who never peeked out of his echo chamber could have missed all the stories that have been broken.

https://www.desmogblog.com/201...
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/1...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/0...

And Carl Icahn is just one of the many cronies that Trump put in positions of power. Only an imbecile (to borrow your own language) who never peeked out of his echo chamber could have missed all the stories that have been broken.

To be fair, Trump was pretty "Me, Me, Me" as well. In his acceptance speech, he said "Only I can do this, only I can do that, only I blah, blah, blah."

I think you mean Obama. He talked about himself 75 times during his farewell speech...

Meanwhile I cannot find any examples of what you are talking about in Trump's actual speech, which he spent almost entirely thanking other people.

It would be nice if you statist supporters would refrain from outright lying at least once... But I guess that is asking way too much of integrity you completely lack. What a shame that every single post from your kind has to be corrected lest the lies spread.

Basically, they went to the other side.
It was never really about small companies or costumers, it was just about themselves.
Nowadays Netflix is big enough to impose their own demands and prices on ISPs and whatnot, and they in fact have all the interest on stopping new players in the market.
It's f*cking shameless to come up and say something like that with all the defenses they made back in 2014, sure, but it's also partially true.
But yeah, here, for those who don't remember:
http://www.huffpostbrasil.com/...
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/2...

Consumers indeed deserve better, which is something Netflix apparently isn't willing to fight for anymore.

According to Sean Spicer, it wasn't a typo. “The president and a small group of people know exactly what he meant.”

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/...

The emoluments issue is stupid. The most you can gin up is that somehow foreign leaders will feel obligated to stay at his hotels.

And you apparently can't Google for shit.

"The seven Muslim-majority countries targeted in President Trump's executive order on immigration were initially identified as "countries of concern" under the Obama administration."

What this article also missed is that nearly 60% of all Americans don't have enough savings to cover a $500 - $1000 unplanned expense. This article is trying to make this a Millennial problem, but in truth it is just a reality of the majority of all US households.

If you exclude people with incomes below the poverty line from that 60%, you'll find that around 95% of the remaining people are Millennials.
Or put another way, out of all the people who could easily save up the money for unplanned expenses, most of the ones who don't, are the Millennial generation.

So yes, it's a larger problem that there are so many people who don't have any sort of buffer for emergency situations. But it's another, just as serious problem, that so many people who could have a safety net, don't have one. If the Millennial Generation could be convinced to lose the Entitlement Attitude, we could cut the number of people without a safety net nearly in half. That's low-hanging fruit, and as these are largely people who DO have the ability to be independent but CHOOSE not to be, something needs to be done about it before they become a huge drain on an already strained public support infrastructure.

What this article also missed is that nearly 60% of all Americans don't have enough savings to cover a $500 - $1000 unplanned expense. This article is trying to make this a Millennial problem, but in truth it is just a reality of the majority of all US households.

Disclaimer: I'm one of these terrible, no-good, lazy, overspending millennials. I have actually a pretty good job situation, but that doesn't mean I'm going to lie to myself that somehow I've done better because I'm somehow a better person. I've been very lucky, and a lot of millennials are being screwed over through no fault of their own at all.

Maybe not in my lifetime, but it will. Either that or we have some horrible social upheaval like the French Revolution and start from scratch.

An example.

Everybody like the new self-driving car craze? Google's car passed 300,000 miles without an incident, all that? Can't wait to have your car drive your drunk ass home from the bar, or have your car take your elderly mother to the store for you? Sounds 100% good doesn't it?

Check out these two links. Self driving truck delivers beer. There are 3.5 million truck drivers employed in the USA.

Now I ask you. When, and that's not if but when all 3.5 million of these people are unemployed...what are we going to do with them? It's going to happen and nobody is planning for it.

How about some others?

Robots could possibly wipe out 6 million retail jobs.
Agriculture set to lose 1 million jobs to robots
Coal industry set to lose half their workforce inside of 10 years

We're going to have to do something, and soon.

Story explaining how Zuckerberg will never have to pay taxes again. Also include a sentence about Buffett never paying taxes on his $50 billion.

Funny how those super rich who don't pay taxes are always the first to say the middle class need to be paying more.

To be fair (or cynical), Buffett has repeatedly said it is ridiculous that he pays less in taxes than his secretary and that the tax laws should be changed, but until they are it is in his best interest and prudent to use the existing law to reduce his tax burden as much as possible.

Story explaining how Zuckerberg will never have to pay taxes again. Also include a sentence about Buffett never paying taxes on his $50 billion.

Funny how those super rich who don't pay taxes are always the first to say the middle class need to be paying more.

Yeah, really chill down there...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/...

Just look at all the domestic spying that has been uncovered, admitted to, and simply resumed without anything being done about it.

You mean the domestic spying which got its real start when Bush forced telecom companies to install equipment which allowed the government to listen in on every phone call without a warrant? That he admitted to signing the executive orders and which were subsequently found to be illegal? Who then went and expanded the program?

You mean those hacks who kept saying over and over it's for our protection, that the right to privacy no longer exists?

Yes. It was two massive tax cuts with rebates. I know I got mine and while happy at the pittance of a check, was rather disappointed that we couldn't just let the budget balance.

The rest is just hyperbole. After 9/11 we spent ten trillion bailing out the banks and airlines and paying for an unfunded war. Consequently, All this ghost money was borrowed from SSI and will probably never paid back. And this was all before the collapse of 2008. This current 20 trillion dollar deficient could get fixed real quick if we give the banks the 11 T they were handed. Airlines another 2 or 3. Boeing a couple of hundred billion them selves. After all the corporate bailouts are paid back what's left of our deficit?

Food for thought. Flame on.
Here's some links for starters:
http://money.cnn.com/news/stor...
http://money.cnn.com/news/spec...
https://projects.propublica.or...

Yes. It was two massive tax cuts with rebates. I know I got mine and while happy at the pittance of a check, was rather disappointed that we couldn't just let the budget balance.

The rest is just hyperbole. After 9/11 we spent ten trillion bailing out the banks and airlines and paying for an unfunded war. Consequently, All this ghost money was borrowed from SSI and will probably never paid back. And this was all before the collapse of 2008. This current 20 trillion dollar deficient could get fixed real quick if we give the banks the 11 T they were handed. Airlines another 2 or 3. Boeing a couple of hundred billion them selves. After all the corporate bailouts are paid back what's left of our deficit?

Food for thought. Flame on.
Here's some links for starters:
http://money.cnn.com/news/stor...
http://money.cnn.com/news/spec...
https://projects.propublica.or...

They were specifically NOT invoking the President's name

You're right.

"And she mentioned Jared's new position in the White House. Though she did not reference President Trump by name, his photo appeared on a slide that listed the "key decision makers" on the EB-5 program."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/0...

The Trump administration has done nothing counter to Constitution.

That remains to be seen. There's this thing in the Constitution called the Emoluments clause that restricts members of the government from receiving gifts, emoluments, offices or titles from foreign states without the consent of the United States Congress. Trump maintains, through at least his family members and a paper-thin revocable trust, a LOT of property interests (hotels, resorts, golf courses, vacation homes) that rich foreigners can dump money into in return for a little kind attention from Herr Donald.

He still hasn't released his tax returns either (is he still being audited, not that that means anything), which might show substantial financial obligations to foreign stake-holders (there's a lot of borrowing that goes on in the real-estate business).

Then there's this little matter of involvement of a foreign power in the matter of an election, and obstruction of justice for trying to cover up any link to that foreign power.

Facebook already foils the social networks of people it considers subversive, by making their feeds mysteriously unavailable, their live video for some reason not play or not show up in notifications, making sharing their links be mysteriously unsuccessful, etc. They could easily also be failing to connect people they consider dangerously redpilled by failing to introduce them to each other in "people you might know", not suggesting groups they consider purveyors of "fake news", etc. There are likely more, less obvious things they can do, too, now that they've anointed themselves ministry of truth.

Here, I will explain it to you.

1) Corporate is always looking for ways to pay people less money/get more done with less expense, even when this results in terrible things happening (to other people.)

2) Corporate decides that IT "Just costs too damn much." Decides to do something about it.

3) Corporate notices that there is this potential way to replace those expensive local IT people with very inexpensive foreign IT people, but it has a caveat attached-- they have to try to fill any vacancies their firings create with local workers first.

4) They tell their HR people to create job descriptions that no sensible person would ever consider even close to being realistic, so as to purposefully exclude 100% of the local talent pool. This creates the "shortage!!" they need, so that they can use H1B workers at a fraction of the cost.

5) The country of choice to obtain these workers, India, is notorious(1) for its false academic certifications, and lack of academic ethics. An entire industry(2) springs up to satisfy Corporate America's insatiable desire for cheap replacements for its domestic tech workers. The "tech workers" produced via this process are often of terrible quality, and certainly DO NOT actually meet the absurd resume requirements demanded by HR-- but *DO* meet them on paper, because the certification bodies and subcontractor industries in India fake everything to make this so.

6) These "terrible more often than not" (3) replacements come on board, Corporate ALREADY KNOWS THEY ARE INCOMPETENT, and thus demands that the native workers that are being displaced train these A-holes-- Or they wont get severance pay.(4)

7) This is profoundly effective (In the short term) for Corporate, as they slash the operating budget of IT, which they view as a bloated cost center-- up until they get hacked, or something goes horribly wrong.

8) Meanwhile, the now displaced native workforce is effectively unhirable, because the base pay they need to even afford food and basic utilities, are forced to find new careers. They migrate to other segments of the workforce, taking their skills with them.

9) Morons like the analysts that created the linked article, improperly attribute this rise in general technical affinity in the general labor pool; Assume foolishly that it is because of young workers just being more competent with tech. Nevermind that being a 30-something is NOT old by any stretch, and that this generation is the generation most affected by the mass firings and replacement with H1B visa holders.

10) People like yourself are either disinterested, or listen to the garbage from Corporate America, and come away with very strange ideas of the actual pathology of this problem, and dont understand how "Really inferior H1B workers taking over" and "Very skilled people being systematically excluded" are not mutually exclusive.

1)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/20/...

2)
https://qz.com/965291/wipro-to...

3)
https://qz.com/965291/wipro-to...

4)
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/0...

I like how straightforward things are in your world. I'm afraid it bears little resemblance to our own. In the real world the immigration courts are already backlogged and underfunded. But hey, I guess you can just wave a little fairy dust on all this stuff and these people will all get rounded up and whisked away using no more resources than currently allocated. Brilliant. You should be President. Take a few more hits off that crack pipe and see if that will do it.

"Science" has two commonly used definitions: science as a tool, and science as an institution. You might add "science as a faith" too, but let's ignore that for now.

Science as a tool is just a tool, it doesn't take political sides. In that sense, of course you are right.
Science as an institution, on the other hand, is a bunch of people, and absolutely can take political sides, and does often enough that it's depressing. The author of the OP is referring to science as an institution. I guess for a lot of people in the march for science, it's kind of a religion, they even talk about belief and romance, I guess. Making it about romance turns it into kind of a clique.

But science as a tool doesn't care or not care. It is a finely honed point dispelling ignorance and error for anyone who will wield it.

Because Republicans don't investigate Republicans. Try to keep up....