Slashdot Mirror

This is an article I found from digg that was very enlightening.
 
... And a quote from a nutritionist I know: "The childhood obesity epidemic is an epidemic of news stories, not a problem itself."

Because programmers are the construction workers of IT, not the architects.

Which makes the fact that we want to replace them with prison labor particularly interesting.

There's a brilliant essay by conservative history professor Garry Wills about the misuse of the phrase "Commander in Chief". His point is that in a free society the President is _not_ Commander in Chief of anything but the armed forces, the country as a whole is not under military discipline, and military concepts like secrecy and "need to know" don't contaminate politics.

He also points out that by historical standards the US hasn't looked like a peacetime government since 1941.

The same can be said about parts of "An Inconvenient Truth". You do have people on the far ends of both sides that may or may not have an axe to grind and then you have people in the middle. There are quite a few in the middle who feel the verdict on the causes of global warming are yet to be determined.

Here is a very interesting article from the New York Times about "An Inconvenient Truth".

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.h tml?ex=1331438400&en=2df9d6e7a5aa6ed6&ei=5090&part ner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Halliburton is incorporated in Delaware and its stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Reuters reported that Mr. Lesar said Halliburton would like to list its shares on an exchange in the Middle East, which it could do while maintaining its listing in New York.

The New York Times article explains why SimCity is one of the ten most important video games of all time:

SimCity helped establish the genre known as god games, in which players take on an omnipotent role, controlling the game world rather than simply participating in it. It also broke convention by refusing to establish criteria for winning, leaving the decision of what constituted success up to the player.

SimCity was selected by Mr. Bittanti, a researcher at the Humanities Lab at Stanford who works with Mr. Lowood. The game is "one of the most important art works of the 20th century," Mr. Bittanti said, adding: "It completely reinvented the whole notion of games. And then it transcended the game world to become a cultural phenomenon."

SimCity and its four follow-ups have sold 17 million copies, and the franchise it spawned, the Sims, has sold 85 million copies.

SimCity exemplifies Seymour Papert's ideas about Constructionist Learning:

Constructionism (in the context of learning) is inspired by constructivist theories of learning that propose that learning is an active process wherein learners are actively constructing mental models and theories of the world around them. Constructionism hold that learning can happen felicitously when people are actively making things in the real world. Constructionism is connected with experiential learning and builds on some of the ideas of Jean Piaget.

The OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) project is based on Seymour Papert's ideas about Learning Learning by fun immersive play, and his experience teaching the Logo programming language to elementary school students: Constructionist Learning and Constructivism are central to the goals of the OLPC.

At the Game Developer's Conference, SJ Klein (Director of Content for the One Laptop Per Child project) gave the keynote address at the Serious Games Summit. He explained the philosophy behind the project, and asked developers to join in the project to develop a game platform, games, tools and courseware to distribute to classrooms and homes of some two billion children across the globe.

SJ Klein said: "Existing games are nice, and cute," but games for things like learning language are the "gem they're targeting." Most importantly, Klein said in a direct plea to the serious game developers in front of him, the project needed frameworks and scripting environments -- tools with which children themselves could create their own content.

-Don

Despite all the navigation systems available to the modern world, even to the United States Navy, we still have gaps in our knowledge of the ocean. Recently a US sub crashed into an undersea mountain! Cold War-era data on the seafloor has been declassified, but still our navigation isn't all that great.

By the way, here is a free oceanography textbook!

Sorry, never heard of you up to now. This reminds me of the kind of protests we get a certain self appointed commentator regarding OSS zealots and how he has to sleep with a gun under his pillow after criticising 'Linux'. The fact is the big money is in denying global warming and it is those who affirm this that have been pressured into silence.

The function of such alarmist FUD is a cynical attempt to paint your opponents with what you are. It's my disinterested opinion that the 'climate change' isn't happening crowd, realising they haven't a leg to stand on, have resorted to the argumentum ad personam. That is when you can't attack your opponents views attack his integrity.

For all the talk here, every single one of those in power in Sweden in obliged to abide by the laws of Sweden & Europe. If you don't like what they're doing or have done, don't complain here, go after them. They broke the laws they are liable to arrest, prosecution, prison.

Software patents are dead, your voices did that. Compulsory DRM is dead, you voices did that. You would be surprised at how powerful the voices of pissed off people are.

Britain doesn't like it's Prime Minister?
He's being investigated in cash for peerages scandal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4812822.stm

US thinks Bush lied?
His people are being arrested one by one, libby being the latest.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/washington/07lib by.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Israel moderates thinks it's prime minister planned the 'surprise' Lebanon war ahead of time?
Investigation into his government are ripping his story apart.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BF690E95-D2 97-45CD-942F-A3D6E18B05D2.htm

Voices no different from yours or mine did that. If you don't like what Sweden are doing, every single one of those politicians is vulnerable. So go after them.

Was it your sig that, at one time, held a link to Article V's Repeal the 17th page? That page has my favorite link for expressing, neatly and with footnote documentation, how the legislators have slowly and carefully destroyed the power of the states. As if the Civil War didn't do enough to that end.

Although I don't agree with the underlying principle of slavery (inescapable debt is slavery, and there's plenty of that today), I have a great respect for the SCOTUS decision elaborated here. In the discussion of the SCOTUS decision from 1857 it is quite plain that, at least at that time, the Supreme Court recognized that Congress tried, on occasion, to pass laws which were outside of its legal authority. I guess they didn't have the "interstate commerce" excuse back then or, more likely, the lawyers and judges knew that the legal definition of commerce, as it applied to the Constitution, was specifically limited.

June 22, 2004, Tuesday
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 17, Column 1, 554 words

Republican-controlled Senate votes to uphold Bush administration's policy of barring news photographs of flag-covered coffins of service members killed in Iraq; Democratic measure to instruct Pentagon to allow pictures is defeated in 54-to-39 vote; Republican Sens Olympia J Snowe and John McCain vote in favor of permitting news photographs of coffins; Sen Frank Lautenberg, who introduced measure, says majority of Senate is helping Pres Bush to conceal from American people true costs of war in Iraq

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F6 0713FA385D0C718EDDAF0894DC404482

GNU/Linux

1. Microsoft attempt to compete with GNU/Linux via conventional methods: reducing cost (releasing free--as in beer--versions of products), advertising that TCO is higher for Linux than Windows (it's a lie, but what else should we expect them to say?)
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. ...
4. Profit!

Google

1. Microsoft attempts to compete with Google via conventional methods: producing a competing services with similar capabilities. Then advertise the services as usual, and throw in a bit of IE7 integration in the name of 'choice'.
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. Throw chair across room
4. ...
5. Profit!

Personally am getting a feeling of: 'same bilge, different day' from Microsoft.

The New York Times finds it fit to print. But who cares about the NYT?

Out-of-body experiences are another phenomenon that science seems on the verge of convincingly explaining in purely naturalistic terms.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter though. The new agers will either continue to believe in out-of-body experiences despite convincing naturalistic explanations, or they'll give up that belief and cling to the ones that science hasn't yet investigated thoroughly. Similarly, religious people will either ignore science altogether (e.g., the creationists) or follow the tried and true god-of-the-gaps strategy by focusing more on other beliefs that science hasn't yet investigated, or creating new ones if necessary.

The will to warm, fuzzy self-delusion is the strongest will in many of us, and as the saying goes, where there is a will, there is a way.

• A government which regulates industry based on a honest belief in the need for regulation based on scientific assessments of risks or
  
• a government that considers regulation an opportunity for a shakedown of businesses.

This is a truly naive view of the power of the pardon.

.... as there have been others:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0 DE2DB1731F93BA35751C1A9609C8B63
http://www.techspot.com/news/23809-sanyo-faces-13m -cellphone-battery-recall.html

I guess this proves that it's not just Sony that puts the "boom" into laptops.

Judy Miller had to resign, under pressure if you watched the recent episodes of Frontline, from the NYT but Wikipedia thinks this situation (with their admin, not Judy Miller) is OK. Wikipedia is a lot worse than the NYT in this case.

We can't forget about Ultimate Electronics... Deja Vu?

In San Francisco, we have Kink.com. They've been around for years, quietly, and very profitably, running a number of kinky websites. Recently, they decided to expand. So they bought the San Francisco Armory, an huge, old National Guard armory that's been vacant for thirty years. It covers half a city block. Paid $14 million in cash for it.

Big flap. National press coverage. Minor local protests. But Kink.com has all the planning permissions it needs; it's a done deal.

The CEO of Kink.com, Peter Acworth, isn't embarrassed about the business. He's met with local politicians, neighborhood groups, and the planning department. He has these meetings videotaped, and puts stills and video on Kink.com. (This is not a work-safe page; scroll down past the kinky stuff to the pictures of City Hall.)

The mayor of San Francisco has been a bit upset about the "Kink.com" thing. But the mayor has worse problems than Peter does - he's in rehab right now after an affair.

So now there's going to be an "informational hearing" at City Hall on March 8th. Both sides are working to get a turnout from their crowd.

Now that's a real "porn portal".

Try this non-registration link.

It's amazing how fast a corporation can move when one of it's products is about to be outlawed.

http://science.slashdot.org/science/07/02/20/16322 04.shtml

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/ 31/1826230

Why couldn't they have done this 10 years ago? 20 years ago?

Here's why:

They're making a nice profit on those old bulbs and they had no reason to rock the boat.

Now the game has changed. They are facing extinction unless they change fast.

Hate to be replying to my own post... however, the link to the NYtimes article regarding science funding in the US can be read without registration/TimesSelect only via the following link

Funding for the physical sciences (among others) in the United States has been facing a lot of difficulties lately as well. Failure of the congress to pass the new budget has caused a crisis in science funding from agencies such as the NSF and NIH that supply much of the money for taxpayer funded research in the states. This threatens to close major facilities*, delay new projects and leave thousands of government scientists out of work.

Concerned citizens are encouraged to write to their congressmen to not forget the cause of advancement in the US. Instead of bemoaning the loss of the US edge in the sciences , speak up!

It seems hardly a coincidence that the US and UK are allies in the misguided Iraqi Invasion, as well as the fight against adequate science and research funding. With all the money diverted into these misguided efforts, no wonder science funding is suffering all over (There's only so much of it to go around!)

* Example from the nytimes.com article:
"Among the projects at risk is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, on Long Island. The $600 million machine -- 2.4 miles in circumference -- slams together subatomic particles to recreate conditions at the beginning of time, some 14 billion years ago, so scientists can study the Big Bang theory. It was already operating partly on charitable contributions, officials say, and now could shut down entirely, throwing its 1,069 specialists into limbo."

Not venerable, but vulnerable.
Not Actel, but Alcatel.

If you're going to throw bullshit around, please get the words right.

Their recent loss to Actel/Lucent, and the $1,500,000,000.00 judgment highlights this.

It's amazing you would use this as an example, because it proves you don't actually have a clue what you're talking about. Microsoft licensed the exact same technology from Fraunhofer for a quite substantial amount of money and yet the court still ruled against, and thus opened up every other company who uses that same license to a patent lawsuit including Apple and Real. Essentially, then, we have seen a company misrepresent itself as the owner of a particular patent, either deliberately or otherwise, while the real owner waits until it starts posting stockmarket losses to try and fight the case. See what a little research gets you?

All that case shows is how ludicrous the patent system really is. To be honest, there are plenty of other examples you could have used for this (MS, as you say, are not the kindest company with regards to patents and copyrights) and you chose the worst one. Kudos as usual.

Excuse me, while I go listen to some nice oggfiles I downloaded from archive.org. I'll keep right on partying

Well, seeing as you seem to have the time, maybe you could compose some semblance of a response to the argument I put to you here?

The drug is not FDA approved for men. As you can read here, Merck is not legally allowed to advertise it as a treatment for anal cancer. When the studies are done I am sure they will. It's in their interest to have as many people taking it as possible, hence the controversy about the lobby effort.

I downloaded the report[1] I think you are talking about, from:
http://www.heinzctr.org/NEW_WEB/PDF/08014_Time_1to 51.pdf
http://www.heinzctr.org/NEW_WEB/PDF/08014_Time_52t o102.pdf

But I don't see the part that proves what you claim. It jumps straight to net CO2 without showing how that is calculated. So I attempted to do my own calculations based on the report's data.

From page 66 (second PDF), I get 22938 CO2-eq emitted from paper making (mill emissions- the dominating fraction as per page 80) that's passed to "magazine chain". But I am not sure how many tons of magazine paper were produced that generated those tons of CO2. I assume from page 67 that it's 37245 tons, but page 47 claims 37477 (which doesn't improve the report's credibility). To be conservative I shall take the lower figure (a higher figure will better support my claims).

I assume 44% per mass of carbon in paper (from various sources including cellulose being 44% carbon by mass). Using the figures from page 66 - it's 3.66 tons of "CO2-eq" to 1 ton of carbon. 37245 * 0.44 * 3.66= 59979 CO2-eq.

So you have 22938 tons of CO2 emitted as mill emissions for 59979 CO2-eq (of paper produced). Given the ratios in page 80 (comparing ME etc - ME seems to be about 60% of total emissions - 61% to 77% according to nytimes article[1]), if more than 90% of that paper is landfilled or just left lying around (preferably 100% as per my post and recommendation, but see also page 82 and 83[2]), tell me how there is net CO2 emission?

Keep in mind that my original suggestion[3] was that reusable paper is overrated and normal paper producing should be made more efficient and safer, and then keeping stacks of paper around would be fine for the environment.

Show me how the report you refer to actually proves that my suggestion is not practical or possible. In fact, the numbers in the report seem to show it's already possible.

Maybe I'm just too stupid to understand the report? In my opinion the report doesn't seem very good, perhaps I'm biased but I've seen much better reports and papers that clearly show how their respective conclusions are reached.

[1] Linked from: http://www.heinzctr.org/Press_Releases/carbon_stud y.shtml
  as I gather from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/business/media/2 5adco.html?ex=1319428800&en=09ac79cfbc5f3df4&ei=50 88
[2] From page 82 and 83 less than 8% of the magazines produced would be incinerated. If we assume 6% of the landfilled paper turns to CO2, then that brings the figure up to about 12% becoming CO2.
[3] http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=223764&cid=181 18848

A computer is a machine for manipulating data according to a list of instructions.

Computers take numerous physical forms. Early electronic computers were the size of a large room, consuming as much power as several hundred modern personal computers. [1] Today, computers can be made small enough to fit into a wrist watch and be powered from a watch battery. Society has come to recognize personal computers and their portable equivalent, the laptop computer, as icons of the information age; they are what most people think of as "a computer". However, the most common form of computer in use today is by far the embedded computer. Embedded computers are small, simple devices that are often used to control other devices--for example, they may be found in machines ranging from fighter aircraft to industrial robots, digital cameras, and even children's toys.

"These are devices that need to work, and you can't do that if you load any software on them," he [Steve Jobs] said. "That doesn't mean there's not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn't mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment."

I was actually saying that leaving carbon in the ground is the most secure, not putting it back in. If we need to pull it back out of the atmosphere, then I agree that mineralization is the most reliable, but if we do need to pull it out, then I kind of think that a few quarries won't do the job and we are going to have to use biological methods. I'm considering competing for the prize in this by making ocean seeding profitable through the induced fishery. Let me know if you'd like to work on this. I don't think I can pull it off without some help.

On the "we have ten years" thing. We don't actually know it we have plus ten or minus ten. Feedbacks could already be underway that reducing emissions can no longer hold back. This would be the situation where we would need to pull carbon out of the atmosphere quickly. We could also have room for a doubling of CO2 with major species loss only happening at the poles and a gradual loss of coastal cities but no runaway feedback.

I terms of the equivalent solar forcing, the IPCC report has quantified errors, and thus is persuasive regarding the origin of the warming. The models about the future seem a little biased though. You can read about my take on that at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/executive-summ ary.html.

It is sad that we have not yet joined Kyoto even though we participated in the negociations. It is quite possible that our efforts on ozone depletion will have been wasted because we no longer have the credibility to work on treaties about the content of the atmosphere. What shall we say now to this situation? http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/23/business/23cool. html

The uncomfortable truth is that the German voter got exactly what he asked for. Handouts From Hitler: Götz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" [NYT Book Review]

There's an interesting article on what the space program could've look like if the Saturn V rocket program wasn't cancelled. The new program will be just a shadow in comparison.

They suck dollars from non-manned (i.e., robotic) missions whose focus IS actually collecting data for research. This is pretty well-known, but here's a recent news link that puts this into perspective -- NYTimes interview with NASA physicist Drew Shindell.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/18/magazine/18WWLNQ 4.t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin

Regarding manned missions: "It's fine to do it for national spirit or exploring the cosmos, but the problem is that it comes at the cost of observing and protecting our home planet."

From the New York Times article:
"When he put the Hatto CD of the Liszt études into his computer, Mr. Inverne recounted, "his iTunes player identified the disc as, yes, the Liszts, but not a Hatto recording." Instead, it identified Mr. Simon as the performer."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/17/arts/music/17hat t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

I don't know if any of the articles linked in the submission mentioned it or not (I guess they didn't). My guess is that the submitter read it in the news paper, then searched online and found an article that was very similar, then submitted it without actually reading the article they were submitting.

This reminds me of the case (again, near Atlanta) of a vegan being arrested and sent to jail for writing down the license plate number of an unmarked cop car that Homeland Security sent to photograph the protester.

Fortunately the ACLU took up the case .

Don't be shocked as the tyrants find more ways to increase their power of tyranny. They are not here to help you, there are not here to protect you -- there are there to protect their own incomes and pensions, and you are powerless to stop...

To show the truth of this, and to point out the absurdity, anyone who is engaged in political protest is targeted in an effort to intimidate -- even the police themselves. When the police publicly protested the slow pace of their contract talks with the city, they too were videotaped, photographed, and harassed . They were very surprised, because they were police themselves.

If you look at that situation in terms of the system being mostly in maintaining itself, then it would be natural for the system to fear and harass anyone pushing for change, even the police themselves.

Hopefully the "new media" of blogs and other internet information will help become an effective counterweight to the immense power of the authoritarian elements of our government. Meanwhile, don't be too surprised at finding other examples of creeping authoritarianism in our country. A grandmother in Atlanta was shot and killed by plainclothes police when they invaded her home no-knock raid at night . She thought they were robbers trying to break in when she wounded three of them and was killed by return fire. All they found in her house was a small amount of marijuana. They tried to get an informant to lie and say that he told them that drugs were being sold there after the whole affair becam a public relations nightmare.

A New York Times article with more detail suggests they didn't even clear him of that, just of passing off his own work as independent replication. It sounds like no one's interests have been especially well-served here.

Apparently, Purdue refused to state what the exact allegations investigated were, how many inquiries it conducted, or what its conclusions were based on. Hard to tell if the investigation's conclusions were arrived at fairly or were politically motivated. More details in this NYT article which I found from this blog entry.

Maybe this will explain some of the many mysterious hum phenomena.

I just Googled and in addition with the most recent pricing error, came up with this (March 2003) and this (December 1999).

More importantly, from the last link:
The Federal Trade Commission generally occupies itself with unfair business practices like so-called bait-and-switch pricing and cedes issues of pricing errors to state jurisdictions. State contract laws, meanwhile, typically protect merchants who make a genuine error in pricing.

But other watchdog organizations may set higher standards. The Better Business Bureau Online, for instance, is drafting a new set of standards for Web merchants who want to post the organization's seal of approval on their sites. The current version of the draft requires merchants to "comply with all commitments, representations, and other promises made to a consumer."

Whether that statement would require a merchant to sell a DVD player for $100 as a result of an advertising error, however, is an open question. "We're open to feedback on this one," said Russ Bodoff, the Better Business Bureau Online's chief operating officer. "It's a difficult issue, because the Internet presents real questions around this area of consumer expectations."

I know that retailers such as Fry's have disclaimers in their weekly advertisements: "Store not responsible for pricing mistakes, etc." Does Amazon have any such clause in their T&C?

No, they're the same case. The original article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM .20070213.w2belggoogle0213/BNStory/Business/home

This article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/14/business/14googl e.html?_r=2&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Notice they both talk about Google News and a group of French newspapers.

I think it unlikely that a lawsuit would have been necessary when the NY Times could simply go ahead and do this

Would you PLEASE back up your claim with a citation that shows overstaying a visa is a federal FELONY as you originally claimed.

Well, I'm not real sure it is. But that's how the 1986 Amnesty deal was sold to the American citizenry- that they were going to let a bunch of people become citizens, and in return, from here on out they were going to arrest & deport every new illegal immigrant. Ok, after researching, I seem to have had it wrong. Giving an illegal alien a job was what was supposed to have become a felony (this has never been enforced). Also, committing a felony or three misdemeanors while overstaying your visa or other illegal immigration status is a felony requiring instant deportation (also never enforced).

Now you tell me- is it right to break a law merely because it is unenforced? Is it moral in your mind to enter a home and steal from it's inhabitants, while claiming "it's just a civil offense"?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/opinion/19cricht on.html?ei=5088&en=9addb806498d2739&ex=1300424400

The Eyes of Honesty
By CLIVE THOMPSON
Published: December 10, 2006

In the psychology department at Newcastle University, there is a coffee station where people can help themselves, so long as they leave money in the tray -- 50 pence (about $1) for a coffee and 30 for tea. It operates on an honor system.

Alas, not everyone is honorable. "The woman running the station was a little disappointed at the level of contributions," says Gilbert Roberts, a professor in the department. Psychologists have long been aware of this dismal aspect of human behavior: people are more honest if they know they're being observed -- so when nobody's watching, they feel they can get away with murder, or at least with a free cup of coffee.

This problem gave Roberts and two colleagues an idea for an experiment. For 10 weeks this spring, they alternately taped two posters over the coffee station. During one week, it was a picture of flowers; during the other, it was a pair of staring eyes. Then they sat back to watch what would happen.

A remarkable pattern emerged. During the weeks when the eyes poster stared down at the coffee station, coffee and tea drinkers contributed 2.76 times as much money as in the weeks when flowers graced the wall. Apparently, the mere feeling of being watched -- even by eyes that were patently not real -- was enough to encourage people to behave honestly. Roberts says he was stunned: "We kind of thought there might be a subtle effect. We weren't expecting such a large impact."

The paper prompted a British police department in Birmingham to slap posters of eyes around the city as part of a campaign called "We've Got Our Eyes on Criminals." The researchers are studying the campaign to see if the posters have an effect on things like car crime and vandalism.

Patents on the medical and biological industry, while potentially good for the companies, are truly terrible for the rest of the world. The last thing we need is more expensive medicine, and having biological trade secrets released will help humanity as a whole.

I've done a little research on AIDS, for example, and to give you an example of what patents do for the cost of medicine, take a look at this quote from the New York Times article, "Look at Brazil."

"Until a year ago, the triple therapy that has made AIDS a manageable disease in wealthy nations was considered realistic only for those who could afford to pay $10,000 to $15,000 a year or lived in societies that could."

In developing countries, the cost of patented medication is the reason why many families cannot afford it and so many suffer from it. Now look at another quote from the same article:

"Brazil now produces some triple therapy for $3,000 a year and expects to do much better, and the price could potentially drop to $700 a year or even less."

Many countries cannot do this for fear of economic sanctions, which means the next logical step would be for companies to open up their medical and biological information, for the good of humanity. Not only will this help potential consumers of this medication, but also provide a base for other companies to build on to excel each other's knowledge.

I think we may have learned not to trust the "intelligence" coming out of this administration