Slashdot Mirror

Furthermore you demand evidence of Russian involvement in Ukraine but provide none for the Western over throw of the Ukraine government.

That's like asking for evidence that the Bush Administration was full of crap about Iraq's WMD's and role in 911. Remedial current events here.

Before the coup, the assistant Secretary of State was on video bragging about spending $5 billion to 'give Ukraine the future it deserves' - and then Americans whine about imaginary interference in our elections. The same assistant secretary of state was also recorded picking post-coup leaders.

The United States immediately recognized the junta as illegitimate after the blatantly unconstitutional vote to remove Yanukovych from power, which itself was based on a known false flag operation:

• "So the chief of the government's security forces, the head of the opposition's security forces, and the snipers themselves all admit the snipers were killing both protesters and police."

And if that wasn't enough, the Vice President's son woke up one morning and just happened to find himself a top executive at a Ukraine energy company.

• "Isn't that a bit fishy? Why do you say that?

  Because he's the vice-president's son! That's a coincidence. "This is totally based on merit," said Burisma's chairman, Alan Apter.

  He doesn't sound very Ukrainian. He's American, as is the other new board member, Devon Archer.

  Who? Devon Archer, who works with Hunter Biden at Rosemont Seneca partners, which is half owned by Rosemont Capital, a private equity firm founded by Archer and Christopher Heinz.

  Who? Christopher Heinz...John Kerry's stepson."

The IMF also picked up their entire book of rules and threw it in a paper shredder to give the illegitimate government a legitimate loan:

• The IMF broke four of its rules by lending to Ukraine:
  (1) Not to lend to a country that has no visible means to pay back the loan (the "No More Argentinas" rule, adopted after the IMF's disastrous 2001 loan to that country).
  (2) Not to lend to a country that repudiates its debt to official creditors (the rule originally intended to enforce payment to U.S.-based institutions).
  (3) Not to lend to a country at war - and indeed, destroying its export capacity and hence its balance-of-payments ability to pay back the loan. Finally
  (4), not to lend to a country unlikely to impose the IMF's austerity "conditionalities." Ukraine did agree to override democratic opposition and cut back pensions, but its junta proved too unstable to impose the austerity terms on which the IMF insisted.

So the United States only spent billions to subvert Ukraine's democracy, recognized a blatant coup as a legitimate impeachment, immediately gave billions in aid to the junta, and then sends the highest number of troops to Eastern Europe under the premise that Russia is a threat.

And American Exceptionalists like yourself just eat that shit up. With a spoon. You didn't learn a damned thing from the lies about Iraq and Afghanistan, did you?

Eventually, once biologists came on board to listen, they found the source of the signals.

Farting Fish Fingered said the Guardian.

Elon Musk: 'I'm planning to retire to Mars'

https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Since a study found that about 90% of the [plastic] debris was microfibers – both in freshwater and the ocean, and these were identified as coming from clothes then perhaps we should ban these too.

Take, for example, a 700 mile trip.

Take for example, real world range of 55 miles

You're going to have to stop 13x to charge up that sweet ride on that 700 mile 20 hour road trip.

...upload nude photos of yourself (wink wink -- nod nod).

Are you sensing a pattern here yet?

Being forced to leave your home and your family and live in a forced labor camp in exceptionally cold temperatures with poor medical care

That's not what happened to Sakharov though. He was sent into internal exile in Gorky and his phone was taken away. He didn't get sent to a labour camp. They wanted to move him out of the Overton Window, but were a bit more subtle about it than they were in the 30's.

I do acknowledge that in theory there's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem in terms of discovering that the content is filtered in the first place, but in practice, any action that prevents people from hearing about other social networks would be a *blatant* anti-trust violation, which is already solidly covered by existing laws.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/...

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/201...

Antitrust only kicks in if FB is declared a monopoly, which it has not been.

As the left wing Guardian observed

https://www.theguardian.com/co...

"Don't you know what Facebook is?" a woman said. No interrobang, you notice. It wasn't a rebuke. It was worse than that - she was trying to be kind. It was as if I'd confided in her about my literacy problems or asked her to feel a lump. I can't forgive Facebook for that pang of humiliation and consequently have never signed up - which I'm perfectly happy about and my friends even happier because it's a great way for them not to invite me to parties. I'd only eat all the crisps and ask stupid questions anyway.

But is this a sustainable position? Is joining Facebook becoming mandatory if you wish to remain part of the modern world? I'm sure it feels like that for teenagers and I think it probably does for most people in their 20s. I know I'm not on the technological cutting edge - I don't want to be - but neither do I want to be a modern-day equivalent of those who refused to have TVs in the 80s, a self-absorbed, neo-Amish anachronism flinging a judgmental glance behind me as I stomp out of society in a strop.

Initially, I assumed Facebook was just a fad like its predecessors and, when Twitter became popular and fashionable, it seemed that the MySpace trajectory was once again being observed. Having joined Twitter, I smugly waited for Facebook's inevitable demise, congratulating myself for having skipped a whole technological chapter and saved myself a lot of hassle, very much as would have happened with the fax machine if I hadn't made the eccentric last-minute decision to buy one in 1999. Then something nasty and unexpected happened: the zeitgeist left Facebook and yet somehow it survived. It was like the moment in Outbreak when the virus goes airborne.

It gets worse. Facebook is much more than an internet brand that's managing to ride the fad wave. It's becoming a monopoly. I know this because it's been mentioned in The Archers. A trade name in Ambridge! The place where old-school BBC rules about "sticky-backed plastic" and "a proprietary brand of spreadable yeast extract" still obtain to a ludicrous extent. No iPods, Walkmans, BlackBerrys or Kindles are ever mentioned but, in the last few weeks, the programme has started to call Facebook and Twitter by name. RIP Bebo. You only ever existed to demonstrate that "other social networking sites are available". Now there might as well not be. Everyone else is on Facebook and, if you update your status in the forest and there's no one there to read it...

I'm sure Facebook would claim it's not a monopoly - strictly speaking it isn't - but it clearly wants to be and, if there are whole sections of society who feel obliged to sign up in order to be able to communicate with one another, then its dreams a

Google should downlist American media too, because they also "inject themselves into US politics". In fact, even some private citizens have been caught expressing opinions on politics, and attempting to sway the votes of their friends and neighbors. Google needs to put a stop to that. We can't just have people going around saying whatever they want. Thank God that we have the corporate elite to protect us and tell us what to think.

Ya! And Russia is best at curtailing freedom of speech (well, technically in top 20%), so Google should actually increase the rank of their state-sponsored views!
https://freedomhouse.org/repor...
https://freedomhouse.org/repor...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

Many of the people who want to go back are elderly and in poor health anyway. Some have young children. Those groups will be worse affected, so you are not going to convince them to return just by looking at averages. They want to know the effect on themselves and their children.

In any case, so many people have moved on now that the communities they go back to won't be viable. They need to rebuild the population by attracting younger people who will want to start families, in an area that is still contaminated.

Before someone says it, the initial evacuation could not have been avoided. There was no way to know how bad the situation was going to get.

Its also important to note that there are still many people displaced from their homes due to the earthquake and tsunami alone;

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

and many people died in those evacuations as well;

https://reliefweb.int/report/j...

Ten years after Katrina, there were still thousands who did not have permanent homes, and many homes that will never be re-built.

The OP already answered that question, circuitously.

(1) In 2004 the UK Cleanfeed System was introduced. The UK public was told that Cleanfeed would never be used for censorship, and only had a specific mandate to block child abuse image content.

(2) UK bans access to The Pirate Bay and blocks torrent sites using BT's cleanfeed system. UK filesharers start to use VPNs to evade blocking.

(3) The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 requires all UK web activity to be retained by ISPs. Non-filesharing UK citizens start to use VPNs to prevent state surveillance.

(4) Now the Digital Economy Act 2017 seeks to expand the cleanfeed system to all pornography. As with the original torrent site blockade, VPNs will become the default method to access such content.

For months, scientists have been reporting the Great Barrier Reef is recovering.

http://www.cairnspost.com.au/n...
https://www.theguardian.com/en...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/201...

There's room for hundreds of billions of people on Earth given better designs. Even if there weren't there is room for quadrillions of humans and associated biosphere in self-replicating space habitats around the solar system.
http://pdfernhout.net/princeto...

Further, the big problem industrialized nations face now is actually falling populations. For an extreme example, Italy may be the future for us all (if we survive the slaughterbots and engineered plagues and nukes etc made by people with scarcity worldviews):
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
""We are very close to the threshold of non-renewal where the people dying are not replaced by new-borns. That means we are a dying country," Health Minister Beatrice Lorenzin said. "This situation has enormous implications for every sector: the economy, society, health, pensions, just to give a few examples," Lorenzin said. "We need a wake-up call and a real change of culture to turn the trend around in the coming years," added the minister.""

Even the USA is below replacement without immigration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"As of 2010, about 48% (3.3 billion people) of the world population lives in nations with sub-replacement fertility.[3] Nonetheless most of these countries still have growing populations due to immigration, population momentum and increase of the life expectancy. This includes most nations of Europe, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Russia, Iran, Tunisia, China, the United States and many others. In 2015, all European Union countries had a sub-replacement fertility rate, ranging from a low of 1.31 in Portugal to a high of 1.96 in France.[4]"

Let's say people do need an "arsenal" to keep the peace. How big should it be? The USA, for example, spends essentially all its surplus and then some on an arsenal. Which is part of why we in the USA can't have nice things like pothole-free roads without tolls, longer vacations, high speed broadband, first-rate medical care for everyone, community makerspaces everywhere, tuition-free college, and so on...
https://www.nationalpriorities...

Needless competition, artificial scarcity, and huge for-profit prison populations are other reasons we can't have nice things:
http://www.alfiekohn.org/artic...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

People are a lot less likely to support autocrats and so on if they aren't desperate.
"The Desperate Middle-Class Voters Who Made Trump the Republican Nominee"
http://time.com/money/4318531/...

Strangely, the USA has the most guns and now also is getting increasingly autocratic -- how does that fit into your model of why we need an arsenal?

IRV is another term for AV. And the argument for non FPTP voting systems is that they are more proportional. You measure 'proportionality' using the Gallagher Index. And AV has a lower Gallagher Index than FPTP

The Guardian, which supported AV say that it wouldn't affect the results of the 2010 election

https://www.theguardian.com/po...

However that's not actually true.

Here are the vote shares

Conservative: 36.10%
Labour: 29%
Lib Dem: 23%
Others: 11.90%

Under FPTP you got these numbers of seats. You can work out the Gallagher Index using the formula here

Conservative: 306
Labour: 258
Lib Dem: 57
Others: 28
Gallagher Index: 15.73

Under AV you'd get

Conservative: 281
Labour: 262
Lib Dem: 79
Others: 28
Gallagher Index: 13.30

Under AV+

Conservative: 275
Labour: 234
Lib Dem: 110
Others: 31
Gallagher Index: 9.36

Under STV

Conservative: 246
Labour: 207
Lib Dem: 162
Others: 35
Gallagher Index: 5.35

Now a majority in the UK parliament is 326 seats. If you add up Conservative+Lib Dem and Labour+Lib Dem for each you find that only under FPTP is there one possible coalition partner for the Lib Dems, the third largest party, i.e. the Conservatives. Under all the other, lower Gallagher Index which is to say more proportional systems the Lib Dems would be able to form a coalition with either the Conservatives or Labour.

This is exactly the problem David Deutsch was pointing out here in his video opposing AV

In Germany for 49 years the FDP with <12.8% of the vote usually chose which party would govern, twice changing sides and 3 times putting the less popular party (measured by votes) into power. Meanwhile nothing the voters could do could oust the FDP leader from the Foreign Ministry. Only the 4th party finally did.

I.e. the third largest party can decide who is PM. The lower the Gallagher Index of an electoral system, i.e. the more proportional it is, the worse the problem becomes!

Here is what's boring brother;

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politic...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech...
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

You can get there on a LearJet 45 where apparently the ceiling is 51,000 feet. I've heard that you can see the curvature at 45K. Contracting a LearJet would sure be a heck of a lot safer and cheaper. There is no end to the stupidity here; apparently he only plans on reaching 1800 feet. You can climb that high!

Except :

One pro-Trump Facebook ad called for the "removal of Hillary Clinton from the presidential ballot" while another blamed Black Lives Matter for a "gruesome attack on police". Meanwhile, a fake gay rightsâ(TM) account praised Bernie Sanders as a "hero", and an anti-Trump profile advertised a "not my president" rally after the election, which attracted interest from nearly 50,000 people on Facebook and said: "Racism won, Ignorance won, Sexual assault won ⦠STOP TRUMP!"

https://www.theguardian.com/te...

People still aren't getting it. Or are being purposefully obtuse to try and keep the "Russia!" panic alive and try to paint Trump in a bad light. If he's such a bad president and bad person, why do you people even need to make stuff up to defame him ?

The only thing creating division in the U.S. right now is not the President, it's all the #RESIST BS that keeps shoving "Russia!" hysteria and spinning everything the President does as negative. It's gotten so bad that if the man cured Cancer tomorrow, he'd be accused of putting Oncologists out of a job.

I was unable to find evidence of Nazi's rising.

All hate groups are growing. You clearly didn't even try. This is not merely an American problem, either. Neo-Nazis are actively recruiting and the downtrodden are ever easy targets.

Even in an alternate world awash with Nazis it still wouldn't justify intolerance.

Nazis are not just pro-murder, pro-racism, they actively perpetrate abuse. Acceptance of abuse is not tolerance, it is only abuse. Nazis are actively doing harm not just by promoting genocide, but by actually engaging in violent and antisocial acts. Anyone who suggests that we accept that is, not to put too fine a point on it, a complete and total piece of shit.

The good news is much like Charlie Rose gets embarrassed off the national stage, hopefully companies that don't take security seriously will be forced into bankruptcy.

Hoping for some unaccountable process to help users is no substitute for software freedom. Hoping is apparently flatly incapable of addressing purposeful choices to not fix remotely-exploitable problems (whether bugs put there by accident or weakening something on purpose like Microsoft did with the Skype protocol to make it easier to spy on Skype users).

Proprietary software is often malware and there are plenty of instances where the proprietor goes unpunished despite years of anti-user aggression (Apple's iTunes being vulnerable for years allowed spying, Microsoft Windows ignored user privacy settings, Google admitted it tracked user location data even when the tracking setting was turned off). Each of these problems and many more could have been fixed for virtually everyone by sufficiently skilled and motivated users if the software involved were free software, but users were not allowed to inspect the software, improve the software, or distribute improved variants to others.

There are no guarantees of program security so a useful perspective focuses on how users can improve the chances they'll get software that does what they want. Hoping for something better is foolish, passive, and completely unnecessary.

China recalls that US software opens global networks to US "team sport" efforts... (12 July 2013)
"encryption unlocked even before official launch"
"... worked to enable Prism collection of video calls"
" .. NSA boasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of .... video calls being collected through Prism"
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
China is risking its networks by trusting US brands code that have to support US "lawful demands" to help "police"
Who wants to risk junk US encryption products running on domestic networks?

He's been on a very aggressive campaign to stop the flow of in information to/from foreign countries since 2 years ago, and with a fair amount of success. Shutting out any media service that contains any information critical of major government policies (Facebook, Google) as well as any search engines using search engines from those companies (startpage iquick also will not function in China) as well as apps/service that encrypt the data from the Chinese government (WhatsApp and likely many others). Last March policy was implement to limit the influence of foreign books on "young minds".

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

Another relatively new policy is requiring passpost information for virtually any telecommunications service. That includes buying simcards for phones, trading currency, and even getting a VOIP number in China. (making it the most expensive place to get a local VOIP line). I say "successful" because I've seen in China virtually everyone on Wechat (made by one of the 2 big software companies in China, TenCent). Not only to people keep their entire social lives, have virtually all chat conversations and probably 1/2 of vocal calls going through this app, but virtually 50% of all small-medium retail store transactions are conducted using predeposited money to Wechat accounts. Even taxi drivers are often paid through WeChat. It's so wide spread many people are keeping less cash on their persons in favor of WeChat pay. Ironically, companies collecting this information often do it through the most insecure means. On paper forms, that are sent two and frow, as well as taking pictures of your passpost to register your ID for a sim card on another cell phone. (yikes).

The direction of the current Chairman is clear: Keep data from leaving, keep all transmissions of data (including cultural) monitored and strictly controlled), and reduce/remove sources of data exchange that are not Chinese owned/controlled (meaning the government has complete control). TenCent has probably made increasing financial gains from all this. They have a virtual monopoly on social media in China. People I knew on Skype no longer use skype in favor of WeChat even though skype is not blocked there.

I heard ZERO indictments of him about his political leanings

https://qz.com/1055466/the-alt... basically calls him a liar when he denies being 'alt right'.

Then there are the suspicious string of articles all basically going, "Damore is an alt-right [hero|martyr]":
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
https://www.recode.net/2017/8/...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
https://www.vox.com/culture/20...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.newsweek.com/who-ja...
http://nymag.com/selectall/201...

Maybe that was just because there was too much material to get to boring stuff like that in his 15 minutes of fame.

No, it's because his political leanings are by all accounts very much aligned to the people trying to demonise him, hence the multitude of articles trying to position him with the people they don't like.

I hesitate to say 'conspiracy' but it sure as fuck doesn't look like independent and honest reporting to me.

I doubt there is more than a little chance of that over time. He is far enough on the Left to regularly defend the horror show that is North Korea including stating, more or less verbatim that, "It's not so bad."

That is a bit too far for even the Guardian.

Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag

How low will you go?

Maybe you would like to chew on this for a bit.

Swedish police admit race cover up on crime
This cover-up of sex assaults in Sweden is a gift for xenophobes
It’s not only Germany that covers up mass sex attacks by migrant men... Sweden’s record is shameful

Don't you think it is problematic when the government is hiding facts from the public? Including for the purpose of political manipulation and the prevention of the discussion of public policy based on the facts?

Of course some things are more difficult to hide than others.

Sweden gang rape ‘live-streamed on Facebook’

Is this like Millennium Challenge where swarms of small, fast boats were able to disable/sink numerous simulated ships? Or, during that same exercise, swarms of cruise missiles overwhelmed the fleet defenses?

I guess, in one respect, at least someone's talking about it.

The key decision-makers – major shareholders in General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, etc, and the boards of directors they selected – made many disastrous decisions.

They failed in competition with European and Japanese automobile capitalists and so lost market share to them.

They responded too slowly and inadequately to the need to develop new fuel-saving technologies.

And, perhaps most tellingly, they responded to their own failures by deciding to move production out of Detroit so they could pay other workers lower wages.

Detroit wasn't about politics. It was about capitalism, and it's all around us today.

FWIW none of the Google security and privacy engineers I know have any concern about having a Google Home in their house, and many do. Those who don't, don't because they don't see the value, not because they perceive privacy or security problems.

I'll venture to say that somebody who works at Google already doesn't care about privacy - in particular for other people. It's probably a condition of employment. But that's not the issue. If you choose to be tracked, by buying a Google Home or suchlike, that's fine. The issue is that Google will track you whether you choose to be tracked or not, and there is no way to opt out (and no, the current "solution" they suggest, to create an account with them in order to to tell them "don't track" is not sufficient or even workable).
 

IMO, the privacy concerns are overblown and based on a misunderstanding of how the tech works,

IMO it's Google and other similar companies' business model that's based on a misunderstanding: the misunderstanding by the general population of Google's actions and scale of data gathering. As people were generally unaware, Google has expanded their spying and made stalking and data slurping the current accepted model for anything. They have basically poisoned the internet; it's not easy (if even possible) to get on the web with a reasonable expectancy of privacy anymore, mainly due to Google and their actions.

Google should be harshly regulated: they should only be allowed to collect data of people that explicitly opt in to being tracked. Any data Google collects that can't be directly correlated to one of their opt in customers should be immediately discarded. Of course, Google can block people who haven't opted-in to tracking from GMail or Google Maps or whatnot. I'm sure that trade-off would be totally acceptable for many privacy concerned people.
 
Unfortunately the chances of such a regulation are slim; as Google is well aware their model is based on abusing people's privacy, and that there is a risk of legal action - they spend huge amounts on lobbying, apparently being on track to become the largest political contributor in Washington.

... from consulting firm Deloitte, consumers are uneasy about being watched

Yeah, because when it comes to security advice, Deloitte are the go-to-guys for that!

Did you miss the case where police were told not to have the union jack on their uniform because "it might upset some communities" as well?

No, but maybe you did... https://www.theguardian.com/po...

Because unlike you, I don't believe speech should be censored. I believe that no matter how abhorrent their views are, they should speak them and people should be allowed to see exactly how bad those views are. I believe that the line for free speech stops when there's an actionable threat, not before.

I believe that too. I've told you that fore, but you still keep on telling me I don't.

Where we differ is that you want Twitter to broadcast that speech, where as I support their right to not publish on your behalf.

antifa(that's actual communists FYI)

Citation needed on that one. If I were being unkind I'd suggest you are only trying to pretend they are communists because communism gives you a whataboutism for how bad the Nazis were.

As for thorium it was a great idea in the 50's if we didn't want to have MAD but we chose Uranium and the thorium fuel cycle does not provide anyway (that I have seen) to deal with the existing waste problem we have with Uranium and plutonium

There are proposals for waste burning reactors

https://www.theguardian.com/en...

A plan to burn Britain's radioactive nuclear waste as fuel in a next-generation reactor moved a step closer to reality on Monday when GE-Hitachi submitted a thousand-page feasibility report to the UK's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA).

The UK has a large stockpile - around 100 tonnes - of plutonium waste. This is considered a security risk and the government is considering options for its disposal. The current "preferred option" is to convert the plutonium into mixed-oxide fuel (Mox) for use in conventional nuclear reactors.

But a previous Mox plant in the UK was deemed a failure, and GE-Hitachi claims that its Prism fast reactor - a completely different design fuelled by plutonium and cooled by liquid sodium - offers a more attractive solution.

One of the potential benefits of fast reactors is that they could extract large quantities of energy from nuclear waste. In February, David MacKay, the chief scientist at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) told the Guardian there was enough energy in the UK's waste stockpile to power the country for more than 500 years.

The NDA initially dismissed fast reactors as being decades from commercial viability. But after the Prism proposal was submitted by GE-Hitachi, the NDA agreed to review the evidence. Monday's report - a summary of which has been seen by the Guardian - is designed to persuade the NDA that the Prism is technically credible and commercially attractive.

And there are proposals for molten salt waste burners too

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

Not thorium based, but it is based on molten salt, the same as a LFTR.

Nuclear power was the resurgent darling of the energy industry just a few years ago as concerns over global warming mounted. Then there was the disastrous meltdown of the Fukushima Daiichi plant in central Japan, which will continue to affect residents for years to come. In the wake of this event, nuclear plants in Japan and Germany were completely shut off and plans to expand nuclear power around the world were shelved.

A few companies have continued pushing safer forms of nuclear power in a smaller form, and now one of them is getting the finding to make its plans a reality. Transatomic Power has just picked up $2 million from Founders Fund to develop a custom molten salt reactor that can eat nuclear waste.

It's definitely worth funding pilot projects for this sort of thing. Potentially you could get rid of waste and produces non negligible amounts of energy doing it.

Though a free country can't ban them, we do have to be aware of these efforts and we can't base any actual decisions on the "sentiment" of social networks and blogs. Because the enemy — such as Russia — really does make massive use of these methods, paying loony activists and saturating twitter et al with comments by both human trolls and outright robots.

And whereas the old USSR was only relying on Left-leaning movements abroad, Putin is happy to use everyone. In France, for example, it is the Right that's on his payroll, whereas in Germany — the Left, even if the common media wouldn't admit that, singling out individual assholes, rather than entire movements it finds sympathetic.

Though a free country can't ban them, we do have to be aware of these efforts and we can't base any actual decisions on the "sentiment" of social networks and blogs. Because the enemy — such as Russia — really does make massive use of these methods, paying loony activists and saturating twitter et al with comments by both human trolls and outright robots.

And whereas the old USSR was only relying on Left-leaning movements abroad, Putin is happy to use everyone. In France, for example, it is the Right that's on his payroll, whereas in Germany — the Left, even if the common media wouldn't admit that, singling out individual assholes, rather than entire movements it finds sympathetic.

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

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

The problem is, you're telling the wrong audience. Western societies are already having depopulation problems.

But your fingerprint is still somewhat private. You can't replicate my fingerprints from a picture of me that you found on facebook.

Hahaha is that what you believe?

https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Not a persuasive argument.

I'm still not worried about an imminent invasion of rat multiborgs.

And why are there no local predators?

There are local predators... But they aren't usually *killing* humans they prey on, so that means they aren't totally effective for the role of lowering the population...

Your original claim was that "The Democrats openly dislike and work against them [white people]". Your cites included one from someone who wasn't necessarily a Democrat, and one a call for diversity that may have gone too far. Let's see, that's jumping to an unwarranted conclusion, five yards, using it as an ad hominem, ten yards, changing the topic ten yards, that's twenty-five yards, still second down.

As far as "the qualifications be related to the job" goes, there is solid evidence that white-appearing males tend to get interviews over others of similar qualifications. How do you know that all the white guys were hired because they were the best qualified?

To be honest you only confirm my opinion. You describe blatant law breaking as "a call for diversity that may have gone too far". Not even did go too far, as it clearly did, just a maybe. I wonder what it would take for you to consider it as too far. Regarding your subtle implication that the existing white workers were maybe not qualified, they must have been. After all the leadership there is clearly against them and wants to see straight white applicants filtered out of the hiring process. Since you seem to want more citations here are a few:

https://www.realclearpolitics.... https://www.theguardian.com/us... http://www.newsweek.com/white-... plus the free pass they give extremeists from Black Panthers, La Raza, Antifa, and other shameful organizations that would all qualify as bad to the media if they were trying to help white people.

I'm reminded of an old college professor of mine who was so frustrated one day. He was a solid liberal (big surprise for a college professor I know) and had always been a fan of affirmative action and the like as he always figured that it impacted someone other than him and was for the greater good. Anyway his son had just graduated from the fire academy and was second in his class having just barely missed top cadet. However he couldn't find a job. The people being most aggressively recruited were minorities and especially women. He was stunned that affirmative action could produce bad outcomes. He was equally outraged that his son was discriminated against on the basis of his skin color or gender. Me personally, when I think of a fire I want the best possible, most qualified candidate to be in charge of rescuing me or my family. I don't want the quota who is less qualified.

I'm neither a D nor an R but in general I think being a straight white male means Democrats dislike me. Not literally every Democrat, but enough that I can't get behind them. They choose illegal immigrants kids (AKA dreamers) over actual citizens like my kids. They mistake the 1% being largely white for all white people are the 1% and have it easy. Indeed it's because they don't want the best person for the job and instead want to play social engineer that I want government to be as small as possible. They have clearly chosen their side and I'm not it.

While you were busy trolling, you might have missed this: Electric cars emit 50% less greenhouse gas than diesel, study finds.

There is already an established scientific consensus that nuclear power paves the only viable path forward on climate change. Germany has spent 100 of billions on renewables and have not made a dent in their carbon carbon emissions. Germany pollutes 10x as much as France. The New York times recently posted an analysis of the cleanest countries in the world, and they all use a combination of hydro and nuclear.

https://www.theguardian.com/en... Of course it's easier here in Sweden were we supposedly didn't promised anything.

Sorry I didn't see what the concrete promises were vs the vague promises? What are the US proposing that is better/worse/more concrete/less vague than others?

https://www.theguardian.com/en...
Of course it's easier here in Sweden were we supposedly didn't promised anything.

Something very new for being Sweden. I'm amazed by our new politicians who supposedly promised to do much less than the always so willing to sacrifice for common good US of A.

Strange times.

The Chinese don't even have binding CO2 targets. The government of China are always getting special treatment because they pretend China is still a developing country. To hell with those "Climate Deals" that always leave China of the hook and always give them special treatment. As if their slave labour practices and their 25% tax on imports to mainland China doesn't give them enough unfair advantage.

Whatever your opinion of China's treatment of workers, they are cutting emissions. https://www.theguardian.com/en... http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/0...

nonsense, even "green" leaders called the Paris Agreement a fraud and a fake. useless.

https://www.theguardian.com/en...

Speaking from experience many academic libraries cannot afford the extortionate fees charged by the journals. As far as community libraries go, I recently went into one and asked them if I could access Nature or Science and they laughed at me. And it was the largest community library for about 10 miles.

Try going to community college and trying to write a paper that relies on articles from journals that it does not subscribe to. Even Harvard says it cannot afford the fees. It's a classic case of abuse of IP. https://www.theguardian.com/sc...

The problem is only getting worse. And if you are not affiliated with an academic institution you are screwed. Some university libraries won't even let in members of the public and you invariably need a university login to use the computers if you are able to freely enter. http://www.dailytexanonline.co...

The general price of consumer goods went up by 73 percent between 1986 and 2004, but the price of serials increased by 273 percent, according to Tufts University. Congress gets big campaign contributions from the publishers so there is no realistic option for those who want to access research they already largely payed for via taxes. Unless you come with a realistic alternative you cant criticize sci-hub.

TFA mentions that Donald Trump's close friend and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross "stands to benefit from the operations of a Russian company run by Putin's family and close allies, some of whom are under US sanctions."

The link it provides is also pretty damning: https://www.theguardian.com/ne...

I suspect real Americans take a dim view of a high administration official who maintains financial ties to companies being sanctioned by the US government.

Well, actually Apple has quite a significant share of time-related bugs and it almost seems like they are trying to... ehm... "corner the DST market" ? :)
For example, I distinctly remember my iPhone forgetting to wake me up in time a few years ago after DST. From a quick search I see it was 2010. So, iOS 4.1 had a bug where repeating alarms did not work across DST change boundaries. What was infuriating about the bug is that Apple had ample warning, as 2-3 weeks before the Europe, it hit Australia and NZ. That was not enough time for a fix (Apple appears to have suggested "use non-repeating alarms" aka "you're doing it wrong"), so it hit Europe and, then, a week later the US as well. Then they had a DST bug in 2013 as well.

But of course apart from DST there have been other gems like the aforementioned 1970 bug...

And these are the high profile bugs, as a developer I know of subtle bugs that you have to work around since Apple declares them as "as designed" (for example, the date formatter "HH" may or may not be affected by the "24h time" slider in settings, depending on what is the default of that slider in the phone region.. ugh).

Unless it's using something like Android TV or an embedded Chromecast, which some recent TV offerings do, the answer is a definitive no.
If it's a Samsung TV, then it's an pretty blatant and obvious NO, all caps. Samsung, LG and Vizio were already caught red handed with active spying practices, and some of them are facing or faced lawsuits because of it.
Just unplug it. Without smart TV features, it's just a plain TV, which is the safest option as it always was.

https://www.pcworld.com/articl...
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
http://bgr.com/2014/10/31/smar...
http://abcnews.go.com/Technolo...
https://www.consumerreports.or...
https://www.cnet.com/news/sams...
http://bgr.com/2013/11/20/lg-s...

And no, it's not illogical to prevent some devices from connecting to the Internet. The reality of it is that the less stuff you have connected, the less chance you have of getting spied upon and your data being collected. This also applies to IoT devices and other Internet connected devices. If it does not make sense for a service to be connected to the Internet, it shouldn't be. You already have a proper dedicated device for all the "smart" needs, you don't need the often poorly updated with crappy hardware duplicate that came with the TV.

Basic principle of privacy and security standards, limit the stuff you have connected, always measure the convenience of devices versus the privacy risks they can bring. Something that it just seems that lots of people don't realize these days, which is why we'll soon miss the days we didn't have all details of our lives exposed to hackers, advertisers and big corporations.

A single smartphone and a computer is bad enough as is, adding security cameras, TVs, refrigerators, thermostats, smart bulbs, automated blinds, always listening assistants, and whatever more is out there is not simply wrong, it's just plain stupid. People barely have any knowledge or control of simple routers and their desktop computers, let alone all these smart home crap that most don't even really need. People and the tech industry in general are just marching towards a path of no return, we already have growing evidence on how damaging the move is, but people are usually blind to it because they still didn't face their first identity theft case, or something of the like. By the time most people realize the problem it'll already be too late. Data is out there, either publicly exposed or being sold in huge packages of information to be exploited on the dark web, and there will be nothing you can do about it.

You appear to have redefined the term 'misogynist'. Could you perhaps highlight the "misogynist bullshit" in Damore's document because I didn't spot it.

Oh gosh, you didn't? How terrible. If only there were numerous critiques of the paper so you could have read them, instead of having to rely on your own abilities.

Oh wait, there are. You're just blowing smoke, pretending to be upset over a few internet trolls, while ignoring others for your own self-aggrandizement.

Whether he had valid points or not, the way people have demonised his writing means he was indeed clearly working within a hostile workplace culture. It's just that it was clearly hostile to men, not to women.

Or maybe they're hostile to bullshit artists. Like you. Who want to demonize them, because it's easier than facing their criticism.

Huh.

Google fires James Damore for writing a conservative memo.

Liberals: It's a private company, they're not obligated to respect his free speech rights.

The NFL fires Colin Kaepernick for kneeling during the anthem

Liberals: THEY VIOLATED HIS RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH!!

Another example was the gay wedding cake case. A private company refused to bake a cake saying "I support gay marriage" because the owners were religious types who didn't support gay marriage and they got sued out of business with the left cheering it on.

Now I'm sure someone will say "gay people are a protected class and white cisscum male like Damore are not".

Curious how the left keeps adding more protected classes like trans people. I.e. the protected class notion had some validity post civil rights but the left have basically added all the groups other than white ciscum males to the protected class category.

And then they act surprised when white cismen start acting like an identity group too. Actually I'm surprised it doesn't happen more.

The left in the US have a peculiar 'build a majority out the minorities' strategy which depends on them siding against white cisscum males and with every other group. I'm not really sure this is viable - e.g. what do the left do if one of their protected groups takes a stand against another. Which basically guaranteed. Black in the US people are less likely to support gay marriage than whites, a poll of UK muslims found zero tolerance for homosexuality. In fact gay rights is something which is almost exclusive to majority white, judeo christian based societies like the US and Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

There's no real reason to believe that importing lots of people from outside those countries into them will make the country more 'progressive'. And yet the far left continue to say that once white people are a minority will 'true revolution' be possible.

https://www.theguardian.com/co...

Of course this sort of rhetoric is hardly likely to make white people decide to vote democrat and stop worrying about immigration.

If one party is plotting to make you a powerless minority, aren't you more likely to vote for the other? Even if the other party nominates someone who is a bit non politically correct as its candidate? In fact given PC means becoming a powerless minority, maybe Trump's non PC-ness is a feature.

Google fires James Damore for writing a conservative memo.

Liberals: It's a private company, they're not obligated to respect his free speech rights.

The NFL fires Colin Kaepernick for kneeling during the anthem

Liberals: THEY VIOLATED HIS RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH!!

Another example was the gay wedding cake case. A private company refused to bake a cake saying "I support gay marriage" because the owners were religious types who didn't support gay marriage and they got sued out of business with the left cheering it on.

Now I'm sure someone will say "gay people are a protected class and white cisscum male like Damore are not".

Curious how the left keeps adding more protected classes like trans people. I.e. the protected class notion had some validity post civil rights but the left have basically added all the groups other than white ciscum males to the protected class category.

And then they act surprised when white cismen start acting like an identity group too. Actually I'm surprised it doesn't happen more.

The left in the US have a peculiar 'build a majority out the minorities' strategy which depends on them siding against white cisscum males and with every other group. I'm not really sure this is viable - e.g. what do the left do if one of their protected groups takes a stand against another. Which basically guaranteed. Black in the US people are less likely to support gay marriage than whites, a poll of UK muslims found zero tolerance for homosexuality. In fact gay rights is something which is almost exclusive to majority white, judeo christian based societies like the US and Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

There's no real reason to believe that importing lots of people from outside those countries into them will make the country more 'progressive'. And yet the far left continue to say that once white people are a minority will 'true revolution' be possible.

https://www.theguardian.com/co...

Of course this sort of rhetoric is hardly likely to make white people decide to vote democrat and stop worrying about immigration.

If one party is plotting to make you a powerless minority, aren't you more likely to vote for the other? Even if the other party nominates someone who is a bit non politically correct as its candidate? In fact given PC means becoming a powerless minority, maybe Trump's non PC-ness is a feature.