Slashdot Mirror

After my company switched to Microsoft Office 365 I had to use an outside email server to access my email because Office365 was so broken. IMAP didn't work at all. 99% of the time I got authentication failures due to problems on their end both for sending and receiving email. This problem lasted for almost a year. I ended up setting up Office365 to forward my email because otherwise I just couldn't access it at all. Eventually my work set me up with a Google account in addition to the Office 365 one.

Office365 is better now, though I still frequently have problems with it and it is slow, though not as bad as it used to be. Running Outlook was not an option since it doesn't run on Linux and the web interface sucks to put it mildly and is incredibly slow (it takes several minutes just to log in to the web interface).

I understand that the State Department's email system was very antiquated and had a lot of problems since congress refused to give them a budget to upgrade their IT infrastructure. I wouldn't be surprised either if Clinton's email server was more secure than the State Department's server which has been known to be hacked.

Uh, is that $1.4 billion for Phantom's first 28 days, or it's entire run?
Force Awakens made $1 billion in just 28 days, and it damn-well hasn't even begun. The only question is whether Awakens is good enough for anyone to want to see more than once, and push it into hyper-money.
  OTOH, once was more than enough for Phantom - I think it sold so many tickets because people wouldn't believe the stories of how bad it was. But nobody would pay to sit through that twice. Maybe catch it on cable, just to see if they maybe missed something interesting... (nope, nothing).

I made no comment about it being good or bad (which is subjective).
However, looking at sales, and most critics, it's not a failure. Though again that's subjective.

Are you implying Lucas would have done better? The prequels and updated original trilogy is, for the most part, disliked in favor of the originals (where Lucas did not have as much involvement).
Also the notion that "X doing thing is bad, therefore Y would have been better" is the same fallacy thought that happens in the US every time $president does something ("oh if only $otherCandidate won! everything would be better!")

Prob is, he signed off on it to get other shit done and didn't think about the repercussions.

Not quite. Citigroup was in technical violation of the Glass-Seagall Act when it bought Travelers Insurance. Not surprisingly, the Citigroup CEO was a campaign contributor to Bill Clinton. As well all know too well, money speaks loudly to the Clintons.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/12/investing/citigroup-john-reed-glass-steagall/

The TSA does not screen effectively, and never has. See http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/01/... and numerous other tests of TSA procedures.

They have no right to waste so many billions of American dollars, and so many hours out of so many people's lives, for such demonstrably poor results.

Marriage equality has won at the Supreme Court, but the fight over gay marriage is far from over. Now we enter the Republican temper tantrum phase.

Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling, several prominent Republicans had pledged to disobey any high court ruling in favor of marriage equality—and had called on their fellow Republican leaders to do the same.

For instance, Republican presidential candidates Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee have both signed a pledge that reads, “We will not honor any decision by the Supreme Court which will force us to violate a clear biblical understanding of marriage as solely the union of one man and one woman.”

Huckabee also challenged the authority of our nation’s highest court when he said, “The Supreme Court can’t overrule God.”

Republican Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Steve King also called for Congress and any future Republican president to flagrantly ignore such a Supreme Court ruling.

Let’s be clear: These are current and former officeholders, who have taken an oath to uphold the laws of our nation, literally pledging to violate those laws as interpreted by the Supreme Court.

In any reasonable political environment, this should be a disqualifier for elected office. Certainly, measures should be considered to charge those of them who hold office with violating their oath.

Apparently a large percentage of republican politicians and republican voters haven't got a clue either.

Your idea actually sounds somewhat like legislatures in my fine state They wanted to toss out what other college-bound kids learn and replace it with "sermons known as A Model of Christian Charity, another sermon called "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", Carnegie's "Gospel of Wealth", and some Bush / Reagen speeches. Luckily it never made it to the point of being challenged in court.

Or having billions, and dreaming of nuking Mars....

Oh, wow. That's a great idea just for the fun factor if nothing else. I doubt he's interested in terraforming Mars - he's figured out a way to get some nukes and set them off. Who wouldn't go for that?
We don't need Elon, though. Kickstarter all the way!

Or having billions, and dreaming of nuking Mars....

To the person who marked this a "troll", it is not a troll because you can't comprehend content or context. Of course those benefiting from the lottery see this as an attack on their income stream.

It's interesting that Donald Trump was criticised for voicing his position on halting any new Muslims from coming to the country and yet apparently it's happening already with the current USA administration. I guess the difference is that... they are not promising to do it, they are just doing it. Of-course they are not stopping all new Muslims yet, but once you have the precedent of stopping some Muslims from even visiting the country who is to say that stopping all Muslims is the boundary that the government will not cross? Camel's nose under the tent (or was it his toe?)

I'd rather not be irradiated in the first place.

And please indicate where these are at all effective. Note that in the TSA's own tests they missed nearly all guns and explosives. What's the point of these body scanners, other than allowing the TSA to get the equivalent of nylon filtered pornography? It's obvious the scanners do fuck all for security.

Cassini.

This year there were something like 378 terrorist plots in France, of which 377 were successfully detected and disrupted.

Sure, there were. Since there were at least two success terrorist plots which weren't disrupted (remember the Charlie Hebdo shooting) and a third attempt which failed only because there happened to be right there combat-trained people willing to stop it. So right there, we know there were three terrorist plots which weren't detected and disrupted by the security apparatus this year.

Donald Trump thinks it's bullshit too. Just sayin'.

It's been tried, after this was done there was a rise in firearm thefts.

You are missing the point. Apple represented a transition point, a point where (1) the public began to think "I want a personal computer" and (2) Competitors (ex IBM) followed them into this emerging market.

I lived at that time and I know how it was, and it doesn't look so to me. Apple didn't represented any transition point at that time. Apple II was just one of many micro computer producers for few hobbyists, gamers and enthusiasts, too primitive for anything serious. IBM PC was the thing that moved computers from big business and research facilities to masses.

Again, you miss the point. I was there too. The Apple II was not my first computer. However it was the computer that various non-techie friends and family members were aware of, the machine in their mind when they recognized the concept of a personal computer. A machine that could be theirs, not in some room behind large windows. The fact that the first computer that they eventually purchased was not an Apple II does not change the fact that the Apple II is where they made the conceptual leap. Nor does it change the fact that Apple's success with "average" people -- not the scientists, engineers and priestly class permitted behind those large windows -- is what made the marketing folks at companies like IBM realize the market opportunity.

Oh, and by the way, you are also wrong about the IBM PC being the computer of the masses. Commodore and Atari were there before IBM. IBM was merely a business product for many years.

Tesla seems to have sparked a similar interest in all-electric in the public's mind. Competitors like Porsche are following, http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/1....

It sounds like some wrapped reality to me. Yes, Tesla generated a lot of hype, but electric battery cars were well known before Model S (e.g. Nissan Leaf, EV1) and who cares about public's mind really?

The executives at Porsche, much like the executives at IBM with respect to computers. Something has to disrupt their established way of thinking. That disruption was once Apple, not it is Tesla.

You are missing the point. Apple represented a transition point, a point where (1) the public began to think "I want a personal computer" and (2) Competitors (ex IBM) followed them into this emerging market.

I lived at that time and I know how it was, and it doesn't look so to me. Apple didn't represented any transition point at that time. Apple II was just one of many micro computer producers for few hobbyists, gamers and enthusiasts, too primitive for anything serious. IBM PC was the thing that moved computers from big business and research facilities to masses.

Tesla seems to have sparked a similar interest in all-electric in the public's mind. Competitors like Porsche are following, http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/1....

It sounds like some wrapped reality to me. Yes, Tesla generated a lot of hype, but electric battery cars were well known before Model S (e.g. Nissan Leaf, EV1) and who cares about public's mind really? It is not a new optional toy, but transportation. Everybody already uses transportation and knows it is needed. When you have technology and can make competitive mass-market product, any automaker would just do it and public will buy it after some advertising. When you don't have technology suitable for mass market, you can generate huge hype, promise any vaporware, even produce some niche vehicles for rich enthusiasts using taxpayer money, promise greater future that the messiah will lead you to, whatever. It is not really what changes the world. Public enthusiasm doesn't create technology, people in labs do, and they are typically a bit more balanced and persons capable of critical thinking.

It's easy to make a lot of money if you don't pay the proper taxes.

Sounds like a great reason to lower taxes then. I'd rather make a lot of money for a lot of people, than pay "proper" taxes.

Well yes, you are right. And tax rates would go lower if it wasn't possible to offshore money to evade the taxes. Well ,at least for most of us. Obviously the 0% rate some outfits are seeing now would go up.

But whatchya think? Some of these good folk like to make certain they don't pay taxes:

http://www.world-psi.org/en/go...

While at the same time:

http://consumerist.com/2013/10...

http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/2...

Giving them helpful hints about suckling at the government's teat.

It's a completely unsustainable ecosystem we are setting up, as the combined efforts of salary reduction for most of us are combined with tax avoidance plus directing folks to line up at the government trough so we can pay them as little as possible.

Basic math, no ologys or isms required.

You are missing the point. Apple represented a transition point, a point where (1) the public began to think "I want a personal computer" and (2) Competitors (ex IBM) followed them into this emerging market.

Tesla seems to have sparked a similar interest in all-electric in the public's mind. Competitors like Porsche are following, http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/1....

Why is everyone focusing on trump, who hasn't actually done anything yet, while Obama and Bush have torn so many freedoms away from the American public? Obama is in power RIGHT NOW, and look at the totalitarian shit that is going down under your very noses. Slipped in through another corrupt omnibus bill, of course.

These guys are the scum bags you are refusing to deal with, and are instead being distracted by the media to argue over irrelevant garbage.

YES it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

So is Obama trying to take away guns. True tyrants don't let a little thing like the constitution get in the way of a good campaign.

The point is that human drivers are idiots and drive in all sorts of unpredictable ways.

Is it any wonder, when you have people like those in this news clip on the roads?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/...

(watch the brief video. and remember these people are allowed to breed.)

You have yet to give a Trump example of that so I don't see the need.

Here you go.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

And for "balance",

http://www.theblaze.com/storie...

Don't think for a moment that this will be something happening in Brazil alone. Now authorities in France are pointing the finger at both WhatsApp and Telegram as providing a means for the attackers there to communicate.

[sarcasm]If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.[/sarcasm]

even the best planned network is going to go down if you hit it hard enough.

That's the rub. Hitting it hard enough. As of five years ago, Amazon was beyond reach of these little babies.

Really? What militant group was formed in response to Trump's rhetoric?

http://www.thewrap.com/donald-...

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/1...

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/22/...

Could you cite the particular examples of fascist statements made by Donald Trump — and explain, why you feel so about them?

OK, let's start with the most recent.

""We're losing a lot of people because of the Internet. We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people."

The verification of that quote is in this video:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/0...

And here is the definition of Fasicism, from history Professor Emeritus Robert O. Paxton of Columbia University:

“Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a massed-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

My explanation as to why I "feel" this statement is Fascism is not required. My feelings on the subject don't matter because this (and many other) statements from Donald Trump and the behavior of his followers perfectly fit the definition.

What else would you expect from the Corporate Party?

While it's very true that the Republican party in its current incarnation is absolutely a corporate party it implies that other parties are not. The last 8 years could be dubbed the Goldman Sachs presidency as described here: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITI... or http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Not convinced yet? How about Obama pushing TPP as hard as he can? That's as corporate as it gets. Hillary is bought and paid for which is why the media is working its level best to feed us only smiling pics of her. Only Bernie, an independent who seeks the Democratic party nomination, could be described as anti corporate.

He hasn't started killing anyone yet himself, but he did defend some people at one of his rallies who beat up a counter-protester by saying that the person deserved to be roughed up. Add in his inflammatory rhetoric that stops just shy of saying "hey everyone, go out and assault GROUP_THAT_IS_DIFFERENT_FROM_US" and he's heading into dangerous waters - especially for a presidential candidate.

Every time I see a fearful reaction like this I think back to what I heard one newscaster said near the end of live broadcasts of 9/11. I can't remember the exact wording of the quote and I haven't been able to find it posted online anywhere, but the meaning of the message is still clear in my mind. He said that the goal of terrorists is to change the lives of the population. To undermine our freedom and our ways of life using fear. Violence, destruction and killing are not the goal but rather just tools to reach their goal via fear. He said that we should not change how we go about our lives due to fear. If we do the terrorists have won.

Every time I see a reaction such as this I know that we did not take his message to heart. The patriot act, the TSA, mass surveillance, locking down and closing schools, push for increase gun control, freedom-stripping legislation, threats and discrimination against particular races/religions creeping towards the levels of WWII with Jews (and others) by the Nazis and Japanese/Germans/Italians by the US, and so much more. Knee-jerk reactions to everything, and reduction of freedoms throughout all out of fear. If we don't start to realize what is happening and take back our lives then the terrorists have officially won.

It wasn't just the newscasters who predicted we'd overreact. It was in Bin Laden's playbook. "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in -- and the West in general -- into an unbearable hell and a choking life." http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/01/31/gen.binladen.interview/

The terrorists couldn't take down America. Only we could do that. And we did. Just as he predicted.

The government simply got used to being able to see everything at all times. Now that we can create blind spots, they are paranoid and lashing out.

Paranoid? " Lashing out "? I don't know how to break this to you, but it isn't really about you.

Paris massacre: At least 128 killed in gunfire and blasts, French officials say
ISIS claims responsibility for Paris massacre; attackers include Belgians, Frenchman, possible Syrian migrant

San Bernardino shooting: Farook tied to jihadist recruiter, officials say
The Evolving Extremist Threat - The Islamic State group’s plan to promote violence worldwide is bearing fruit.

Imam Says America, Europe Taking Muslim Refugees Will Only Help Spread Caliphate; Tells Muslim Refugees to Breed With Europeans
European Union predicts 3 million more migrants by end of next year

The government simply got used to being able to see everything at all times. Now that we can create blind spots, they are paranoid and lashing out.

Paranoid? " Lashing out "? I don't know how to break this to you, but it isn't really about you.

Paris massacre: At least 128 killed in gunfire and blasts, French officials say
ISIS claims responsibility for Paris massacre; attackers include Belgians, Frenchman, possible Syrian migrant

San Bernardino shooting: Farook tied to jihadist recruiter, officials say
The Evolving Extremist Threat - The Islamic State group’s plan to promote violence worldwide is bearing fruit.

Imam Says America, Europe Taking Muslim Refugees Will Only Help Spread Caliphate; Tells Muslim Refugees to Breed With Europeans
European Union predicts 3 million more migrants by end of next year

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/1...

they were so skilled they were snaped up because they were so talented:

http://www.dallasnews.com/busi...

That says absolutely nothing about "their Indian replacements were paid $50k". Without that, I'm forced to assume that the OP is full of crap.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/1...

they were so skilled they were snaped up because they were so talented:

http://www.dallasnews.com/busi...

not done.

Yes, the US Department of Homeland Security, famous for having given guns to drug smugglers that kill US people http://www.washingtontimes.com... and have been leering at naked pictures of US airport travelers http://www.wired.com/2012/05/b... can't even stop weapons from going onboard http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/01/... now want to give us advice on cyber[sic]-security.

I'd rather take security advice from the seventeen year old kid next door. He is probably more up to date, in better shape mentally and physically, less corrupt, hasn't let any terrorists cross the border, armed them, or allowed them into airports. And finally, I KNOW he's actually made it through high-school.

Ehud

Unarmed black people are more likely to get shot by police than unarmed people of other races. And racism is experienced in all kind of ways. Here's a good article. I was actually looking to cite some of the more famous experiments when I found it. http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/... Reducing black on black violence and reducing institutionalized racism are both noble goals. The Black Lives Matter folks have focused on the latter probably because they feel that they have better odds. The idea that somebody has to try to solve *every* problem in order to be entitled to trying to solve *one* problem is ridiculous. Even computer programmers don't care about computer programmers. They go contributing their efforts for free to open source projects when they could be volunteering in a soup kitchen feeding those put out of work by H1-B workers. That's really just another formulation of what you are saying. This might not even seem terrible at first if you think of one group. But the unemployed programmers may or may not be the ones contributing to open source. So it's entirely possible that you've just pitted one subgroup against another only to condemn the larger group. By your logic we could condemn all people who work on any problem other than the one you deem most important.

even thou medicare pays more then private insurance.

I have never heard anyone say medicare pays more than private insurance, not even proponents of medicare. They may claim Medicare is more efficient, but from everything I have read or heard what you said above is simply false. Medicare seems to pay about 80% of what private insurance pays.

Medical records are sheer gold for identity fraud http://www.wsj.com/articles/ho...

Stolen medical records can be used for medical insurance fraud and taking out loans in your name. If you don't pay up, they send debt collectors after you. They are paid by commission so don't care if they debt is legit. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem... http://www.philly.com/philly/b... http://www.startribune.com/cri... http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news...

What to do if they send a debt collector after you http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...

Shit IT security by health providers is a big problem http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/1... http://www.wsj.com/articles/an... http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/17...

So is doctors collecting information about you they don't need like your SSN which staff can sell to identity thieves http://www.forbes.com/sites/la...

Please cite a situation, which was not caused by legislation, that has been permanently improved by legislation and where the unintended consequences have not made the situation worse overall..

Well, I certainly enjoy living in a society where people can't legally grab me on the street and steal my wallet.

Says you. What about this sort of thing? Asset forfeiture

>> I'm sure she'll be getting a nice parachute as well

CNN calculated her current parachute could be $110M if Yahoo sells itself (which they are positioning themselves to do by shedding crap like Yahoo) or "just" $25.8 million if the board makes her redundant.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/0...

Gun control is about stopping that up-until-now-a-"Good Guy with a gun" from flipping out about the bad news at work or his wife's infidelity and shooting a bunch of innocent people.

If you look back at my original comment, you would notice that I said the real solution would be to find the societal issue that would make someone flip out and shoot a bunch of innocent people. In your example, there are clearly mental health issues at play. In countries with gun control, this stuff still happens. See the London tube stabbings from a few days ago as an example. Dealing with the mental health, income inequality, and racism issues in this country would be a far better use of time and money and would decrease instances of violence overall far more than any gun control legislation ever would. It would have the added benefit of not taking away other peoples freedoms/rights.
 

It's also about making it far more inconvenient and expensive for a premeditated crime (robbery, assault, whatever) to rely on one.

As far as the premeditated stuff goes, criminals are already breaking the law. They aren't going to be bothered by the fact that by using a firearm they are breaking another law. I also seriously doubt most criminals who intend to use a firearm in their premeditated crime are obtaining them legally. They are far too easy to track.
 

The fact you don't seem to understand why gun control exists and how it works doesn't reflect too well on you. You are arguing against something you clearly don't understand. Weird.

The fact that you are willing to resort to personal attacks instead of facts doesn't help your argument in any way. It is obvious that you have a very limited world view (guns=bad) and aren't willing to approach the overall issue of violence with an open mind.

He's berated and belittled reporters who painted him in an unflattering light. He's insinuated that a black protester at one of his rallies deserved being roughed up because he dared to protest at the rally. This isn't a man who can take an opposing side, discuss differences, and reach an equitable arrangement. This is a man who sits down with you, tells you the terms, and expects you to capitulate on everything. That isn't negotiation and won't fly if he's sitting down with Russia or China.

Screw them....I have noticed that you don't see any many terrorists trying shit in the southern states like TX, LA, MS, AL.....

Then you haven't been paying attention.

I think its because most every one is loaded up to the teeth. Most folks I know carry loaded firearms (at least one) in their cars with them wherever they go. If Achmed trys some shit...he'd likely be getting caught in a hail of return fire LONG before the cops show up.

If I recall correctly, the only thing that stopped Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi was an incredibly lucky couple of shots by a security guard.

I'm not sure where you find the pro 2nd anti 1st crowd.

Right here:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/...

It's fascinating to observe -- this must be what it was like in the early 30's in Germany, watching the fascists rise to power.

I'm waiting for him to talk about "solutions" to the "Muslim problem" -- final ones, even.

Ummm, errr, ...he's about 90% of the way there already.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/nov/24/donald-trumps-comments-database-american-muslims/

About the only thing he hasn't yet called for is to round them up into concentration camps and then...well...I'm sure you know the rest. It is truly frightening to see how high this man is in polling. What the hell happened to my country?

I think my number (1) pretty well covers (4). Do nothing is the 'right thing to do' but politically its not going happen. If you stop people like Trump and Cruz from solving the problem in their lousy but not all together bad for you and I way, you will get Hilliary, Jeb, or Marco doing something that will be a whole lot more shitty.

"Politically" the "do nothing" may seem impossible, but "realistically" it probably will. Candidates say a lot of shit on the road to get their drones to yell and scream on TV so that they appear popular, and thereby get people to support them in polls because you don't want to look like you're backing a loser. Thus, the Trump-radical snowball effect.

But exactly HOW is anyone going to "shut down", or even "monitor", the Internet, particularly without also affecting the MONEY that depends on the Internet every day?

Trump's running as a Republican, and the only thing Republicans can agree on is they don't like government doing anything with money, be that spending it or regulating it. Doing anything significant to the Internet will require a LOT of BOTH. The NSA is already spending metric tons of cash on the latest gear to sniff out the Internet, and they didn't catch a whiff of this (then again, if you're a crazed loner like the Colorado Springs shooter, anyone remember him? shutting down the Internet wouldn't have done a damn thing).

Thus, this is the kind of thing that will get a lot of lip service, but if actually elected, will get nowhere.

I think your opinion is based on outdated numbers. China is leading when it comes to renewable sources in 2015.

Except when they had to limit automobile traffic in Beijing leading up to the Olympics so that the air would actually be safe to breathe, or how China just issued a smog red alert for Beijing for the next 3 days, forcing schools to close and construction to halt. The pictures in the linked article make an LA summer look as clear and clean as the Swiss Alps.

Here, second hit on Google by searching on "police cannibal child". I'm probably on some list now, thanks a lot! :-) To the main point, the problem here is he hadn't actually done anything illegal. It's really important we only punish criminals. In order for someone to be a criminal they have to have committed a crime. Nail him on the DB search, having a taillight out or not trimming his trees properly (this is Cali after all) but find an actual crime to prosecute him for!

The story Slashdot won't run:

San Bernardino shooting: Attacker pledged allegiance to ISIS, officials say

... as the San Bernardino, California, attack was happening, female shooter Tashfeen Malik posted a pledge of allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Facebook ...

At least Muslims here in the US are condemning the San Bernardino attack. The other week when the guy in Colorado shot up the Planned Parenthood clinic Christians were cheering.

Putting aside the fact that the main story is borderline "news for nerds", do you know how Slashdot works? The discussion is still active in the news posted yesterday so why don`t you simply go there and post your update?