Slashdot Mirror

In fact there's now a tweet:

UPDATE: As of this morning we have lost DNS and Gerrit is now offline - with little doubt as a reaction to our blog post yesterday. Goodbye

Meanwhile, the real C-3PO (actor Anthony Daniels) had this to say:

At last I know what I want for Christmas. The galaxy's beloved Princess, fully functional once more. And soon.

Steam appears to be back up... for now.

It's not clear that Russia has any intention to minimize civilian casualties. For one thing, their proxy forces (the DNR and LNR) get paid to fire off a certain amount of salvos, and when they shoot these artillery shells, they often fire pretty indiscriminately. This guy is located in Lugansk, and his Twitter timeline is dedicated to keeping track of the artillery shelling, in case anyone's curious about it. Second, Russia controls all of the media in the occupied territories, and their MO has been to get one of their GRU/FSB-connected "journalists" into an area (there are certain channels, such as LIfeNews, which are particularly linked to Russian security services), have the Russian journalist direct artillery or tank fire into a civilian target, and then present the footage under the guise of "the junta" shelling Donbas civilians - this is intended to foment a local uprising against Ukraine, but it only works on the most gullible individuals, and according to Russian pollsters, most people in Donbas still support Ukraine.

Possibly two most famous incidents of Russia shelling civilians in Donbas were the Volnovakha bus station bombing (it was an MH17-like situation, where the Russians thought they hit a Ukrainian military target, took credit for it, realized they hit a civilian target, and started fabricating stories that Ukraine did it) and the Mariupol bombing, in which Russia killed at least 29 people, and injured at lest 97. Another famous one was a Donetsk city mortar shelling, which, of course, the Russians tried to pin on Ukraine, until everyone realized that the shelling was done by mortar, the mortar used has a range of a few km, at most, and the nearest Ukrainian position is 20km away; at that point, the Russian terrorists shut up about it. In summary - the only sure way to limit civilian casualties, is to get the Russian invading force off of Ukrainian territory.

Here's the WLTaskForce linking to the article you claim is debunked, so whether or not you believe that story, I was correct about them promoting it.

That said, your debunking is a bit off. How would they know it was an intermediary and not the original leaker if they'd never met them before that? He never said that was the only meeting, now, did he? In fact, it'd be damn stupid of the leaker to go about meeting him.

And thus, based on a lot of questionable assumptions, denzacar "decimated" them as you put it. What does that decimation mean, anyhow? That he can argue with maybe one tenth of the things they said? Sounds about right. I mean, I agree that the Daily Mail is a rag, I'll give you that, but we can read Craig's blog which they link to, so I'm not relying on them to be credible. And the guy you link to wants him to out the source? Why don't you ask Manning how that works out.

As for yelling about "conspiracy" in regards to burying news, it's a time honored practice. Bad news is dumped on Fridays, for example. And yes, I'd say that when you can no longer find something from a site's own search engine, it's reasonable to consider it buried. Funny how that screed takes up half the rant, though. Nothing better to talk about?

"Mistakes were made:" Less than 24 hours after releasing report claiming I lied, HPSCI is walking back its report. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-12-22/in-declassified-edward-snowden-report-committee-walks-back-claims-about-intentional-lying

From that link:

In Declassified Edward Snowden Report, Committee Walks Back Claims About 'Intentional Lying'

The House Intelligence Committee in September issued a three-page document alerting the public that information from its two-year investigation of former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden had turned up evidence that Snowden was a “serial exaggerator and fabricator” who exhibited a “pattern of intentional lying.”

Agreed, and the falsifications in that report are almost too numerous to count, but Ed gave it a try.

SJWs who need their safe spaces

You mean like Pence and Trump?

https://mobile.twitter.com/rea...

There's Trump calling for a safe space for Pence. Doesn't that make them SJWs now? I lose track of what it's supposed to mean now because it gets used so much. I think it means "someone I don't like and by the way I'm a fuckwit".

Law and Harm: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Privacy Policy, we may preserve or disclose your information if we believe that it is reasonably necessary to comply with a law, regulation, legal process, or governmental request; to protect the safety of any person; to address fraud, security or technical issues; or to protect our or our usersâ(TM) rights or property. However, nothing in this Privacy Policy is intended to limit any legal defenses or objections that you may have to a third partyâ(TM)s, including a governmentâ(TM)s, request to disclose your information.

The rubber word in there is "reasonably" but I think most people would agree this is a reasonable disclosure of user information.

I honestly believe that the incoming President Trump showed great insight when he said this:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Good thing that the US is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy.

Thought you were talking about Anita Sarkeesian. You know much like how she claimed that "gamergaters threatened her speaking engagement in Colorado." Except of course, that the threat was so full of BS, that no wonder the FBI said it wasn't credible. The only thing missing from that threat was a navy seal with 300 confirmed kills.

I honestly believe that the incoming President Trump showed great insight when he said this:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

no, the one released today: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/...

Required reading for IoT foibles, trials, and tribulations:

https://twitter.com/internetof...

Kristallnacht!

Yep, it's science. We all benefit from the wealth of knowledge that scholarly articles from the academic world provide for us.

DPRK news is best news.

...

of course it's parody you fools

Which "criminal", "abuser" or "racist" with the ear of Twitter's Trust and Safety Council are you referring to? There list of members is here, for reference.

> Bringing up 538 is pretty random. But since you did. He was the one pollster
> who consistently said that Trump had at least a 30% chance of winning.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver...

> Reminder: Cubs will win the World Series and, in
> exchange, President Trump will be elected 8 days later.

    That was posted May 10th, 2016. I like the response from "That Royals Guy"...

> I think this is all covered in Revelations.

While nobody wants a huge abusive spy agency tracking Americans at all times, there are going to be plenty of people on here jumping up and down hoping for the destruction of the NSA... while simultaneously running around like chickens with their heads cut off claiming that Russian Hackers are the sole reason that Trump is president.

Seriously, WTF is this comment and why is it (currently) +4 Interesting?

#1. Many, many people who have been most critical of the NSA's activities have been skeptical of the claim that Russian hackers are the sole reason Trump is president. This includes Glenn Greenwald as well as many in the security community who don't take leaked reports of CIA briefings at face value. I'm not seeing anyone who is anti-NSA spying wholesale accepting the CIA's story. So the premise of your point is not correct.

#2. Even if they DID accept the Putin story... There is no inherent conflict between not wanting a "huge abusive spy agency tracking Americans at all times" and wanting an agency to protect against foreign attack (if one has occurred, which as I said is not certain).

#3. The NSA has done very little that would have prevented the hacks, while actually having done very much to weaken national security-- the kind of thing that facilitates break-ins. They have compromised security algorithms and pushed the RSA to accept them as standards. They have deliberately inserted weaknesses into Cisco products. There are numerous examples of this. If the "Russians" has hacked us because of weak technology, the NSA very well could be to blame. The assumption that they're some kind of shield against attacks appears to be backwards.

#4. Podesta's emails were reportedly hacked via social engineering. Explain to me how you think the NSA's role has been stopping human beings from typing in their own Gmail login information when tricked to do so.

#5. Finally, elucidate on the connection you make between a "huge spy agency tracking Americans at all times" and an alleged nation state hacking campaign. What the hell does the surveillance state agency spying on all citizen activity have to do with these hacks? If anything, the alleged influence of Russian agents in our election occurred WHILE the mass-spying is occurring. Therefore, by your logic, the NSA should stop all spying to stop Putin. Right?. Right??

In short, your post makes no sense, it is not "insightful"-- it connects dots that don't have anything to do with each other. Worse, it is in some ways dangerous because it is really an attack on questioning authority. There is zero contradiction in opposing an all-powerful state surveillance agency on one hand vs. a corrupted electoral system on the other.

Not to mention that those reports of foreigners meddling in our election originate from an agency with a notorious decades of history in... well, meddling with foreign elections.

And let's not talk about who fed that conspiracy.

True, there's no need to bring Sid Blumenthal into this - just because he and Podesta pushed that and the "Obama is a Muslim" lies doesn't mean they need to be brought up every time some criticizes Obama.

Guess they'll have to use Beautiful Soup. Do some web scraping.
How inconvenient, I guess.

Here:
https://mobile.twitter.com/slp...

I am using this useful twitter user to target the vile fake news of Breitbart.
https://mobile.twitter.com/slp...

It'd be kinda weird for an attorney using their real name on Twitter and talking about Comet positively to want to lie about that, but that would by no means be the strangest thing seen so far. You can see from his Twitter that he strongly believes pizzagate is false: https://mobile.twitter.com/bayreef The most rational explanation would be that any gunfire happened when he wasn't there given that the police report came out and it says this guy shot a door, a wall and a computer before surrendering peacefully:

https://www.scribd.com/document/333348331/Edgar-Welch-Criminal-Complaint-Comet-Ping-Pong

We need a government official to fact check this unsubstantiated allegation, right now, before these rumors get out of hand!

No need to investigate. Michael G. Flynn's OWN WORDS:

https://twitter.com/mflynnJR/s...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...

unnamed provider... We all know who it is https://twitter.com/olesovhcom...

Trump's also been triggered twice now by Saturday Night Live. His latest spilling of the salt shaker is here.

It's the school system that created all this snowflake syndrome we have now.

Let's see who the snowflakes are. In the past week or so, Trump supporters have been triggered by:

1. A Broadway play.
2. Starbucks
3. cornflakes

The main Trump, Donald even tweeted a demand for a safe space at the theater:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

There is nobody more sensitive and thin-skinned than a Donald Trump supporter.

Actually no, they're not that simple. You can read them here.

I reaffirm: nobody is banning speech. Twitter is banning people who break their rules of conduct on their forum.

Actually yes. They've banned people that simply stated facts. Facts that certain groups feel are offensive. Sorry, facts aren't offensive, they're facts.
Sensitive groups include feminists, black groups, the gay or whatever the hell they want to be called now so they won't act offended if you don't get it right.

You sound exactly like you work on the @HouseScience committee.

Who yesterday tweeted out an anti climate change article. From Breitbart. Because it got colder. In winter.

Holy Fucking Shit.

https://twitter.com/HouseScien...

Also, odd that Pence has said that the government shouldn't pick winners & losers:
https://twitter.com/speechboy7...

But he & Trump are doing exactly that.

Are they lying, unethical, or just scummy? Or actually closet Democrats?

There's plenty right here lol

From "The Twitter Rules"

if the reported behavior is one-sided or includes threats

The POTUS can prohibit immigration to the US for almost any reason. If the POTUS decides to post intent to do this via Twitter, it could conceivably violate the above rule.

So yes, Twitter is banning certain types of speech by creating user rules against certain types of speech.

That said, they would be utterly stupid to ban Trump. If he moves to another service, it will be very harmful to Twitter.

Take, for example, the radical feminist Clementine Ford. She has repeatedly engaged in blatant anti-male harassment and is known to then cry wolf when a man responds with anti-female harassment and had a man fired from his job for his comment. Yet, for some reason, Clementine Ford's account is still miraculously active. No matter what Trump said he did or didn't grab, this woman should be off Twitter permanently by that same policy.

That's seriously the best you could come up with? Some woman making a few dick-themed insults in what looks like larger back-and-forth conversations?

This is what actual harassment looks like.

For one he's targeting visible characteristics (weight, attractiveness, and skin colour) of his targets. Clementine Ford's dick jokes are just non-specific insults since no-one can actually see the target's dick.

Second Milo was the instigator going after people who did nothing to deserve it. There's no context for your examples but they look like excerpts from conversations.

Finally Milo wasn't banned just for posting a few offensive things, he was banned because he knew it would trigger his troll army to join in on the fun by escalating the harassment. You posted no evidence of troll armies from Clementine Ford.

Actually no, they're not that simple. You can read them here.

I reaffirm: nobody is banning speech. Twitter is banning people who break their rules of conduct on their forum.

It occurs to me that, while a company shouldn't necessarily advocate for open harassment of its users, it needs to apply the policy equally if it is to be taken seriously.

Take, for example, the radical feminist Clementine Ford. She has repeatedly engaged in blatant anti-male harassment and is known to then cry wolf when a man responds with anti-female harassment and had a man fired from his job for his comment. Yet, for some reason, Clementine Ford's account is still miraculously active. No matter what Trump said he did or didn't grab, this woman should be off Twitter permanently by that same policy.

This is a pattern that repeats over and over. As it is obvious that Twitter is engaging in selective enforcement, they are not only slowly alienating a substantial portion of their user base for the minority of vocal SJWs, they are threatening their own safe harbor provisions for anything else that goes on Twitter such as terrorist communication or other criminal activity. That translates to fewer users and significant financial risk for operating as they currently do.

The real question is: why are the shareholders not demanding Dorsey's resignation for these policies? Mentioning Trump is a complete non-sequitur and clickbait for Salon's liberal slant. More importantly, it indicates that they are defocused from the real goal of shareholder returns and preserving shareholder value. The tail can't wag the dog any more, and it has to belong to the same animal in any case. Either Twitter curates content consistently or they get out of that business and respond only to complaints of criminal and terrorist activity; otherwise, this half-way house will fall on itself.

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Congratulations, you have been personally trolled by the president. Few people before the Trump era could say that.

But where were these concerns about "government surveillance" not going away when Pres. Obama was expanding them,

To be fair, Obama got a break because he wasn't certifiably nutso. That was our mistake: believing a minority of the American people wouldn't next elect someone who believes you should take away someone's citizenship for exercising their First Amendment rights.

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Let's ask Donald Trump what he thinks of the electoral college:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Well, I'm not going to argue with him. Now that he is President, he can try and do something about it.

he's not particularly PC

I don't know if you follow the news over there in Russia, but apparently President-Elect Urinal Cake is very PC when it comes to burning the American flag.

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Of course, he'll have to deal with that pesky Constitution, but I'm sure Trump won't let that stand in his way.

In other news, Josef Prusa has his PayPal account locked the day before black Friday.

Prusa is the maker of the (fairly well known) Prusa 3-d printer, and as is typical in these PayPal situations, he hasn't the first clue why it happened. They locked all his funds - he can't fulfill purchases and can't even refund his customers.

At least in the Europe case it was the police doing it. When companies do this on request of other companies it puts them in a very hard position.

I wonder how many *non fake* websites got caught up in the sweep, and how many legitimate businesses will be trashed as a result?

Well he didn't accept the voting results. In his own words millions of illegal votes were cast.

So I am right there with him. This is very upsetting. We need a do over. I suggest Obama declares a state of emergency until we can figure this out.

The electoral college was specifically set in place to allow "states" to elect the president of the united "states" instead of the people. The federal government has a president of the United States not the United "People".

Let's ask Donald Trump what he thinks of the electoral college:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

And let's ask him about how people should just suck it up and accept the results of the election:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

So let's apply what you said to Donald Trump, first and foremost, huh?

I don't know if you actually understand this and are simply trying to convince the ignorant to be useful idiots or if you seriously never bothered reading past the preamble and skipped school during your civics classes or something.

The electoral college was specifically set in place to allow "states" to elect the president of the united "states" instead of the people. The federal government has a president of the United States not the United "People".

Let's ask Donald Trump what he thinks of the electoral college:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

And let's ask him about how people should just suck it up and accept the results of the election:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

So let's apply what you said to Donald Trump, first and foremost, huh?

I don't know if you actually understand this and are simply trying to convince the ignorant to be useful idiots or if you seriously never bothered reading past the preamble and skipped school during your civics classes or something.

The electoral college was specifically set in place to allow "states" to elect the president of the united "states" instead of the people. The federal government has a president of the United States not the United "People".

Let's ask Donald Trump what he thinks of the electoral college:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

And let's ask him about how people should just suck it up and accept the results of the election:

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

So let's apply what you said to Donald Trump, first and foremost, huh?

I don't know if you actually understand this and are simply trying to convince the ignorant to be useful idiots or if you seriously never bothered reading past the preamble and skipped school during your civics classes or something.

Assange doesn't have the funds and probably also not the influence.
In any case, the whole "russians are hacking us" is mostly paranoia.

"Mostly" is being generous.

Assange took the unprecedented step to say specifically "it was not the Russians". He has stated that they never reveal their sources, so to go that far (eliminating Russia gives information about the actual source) he probably felt the fear-mongering was a prelude to a declaration of war, or at least minor hostility.

(And to be fair, it sure looked, at the time, that America was ginning up for a fight with Russia.)

And as for Clinton wanting to kill him, she specifically asked in a meeting "can't we just drone this guy", apparently was not joking, and as a result of the meeting the aides sent her a list of "legal and non-legal strategies" for dealing with assange.

But then again, this could be fake news. Hillary doesn't remember joking about Assange, and Snopes has the "drone strike" claim listed as "unproven".

(Note: The "legal and extra-legal" link is to a copy of the actual memo sent to Hillary.)

Feel free to explain if Politifact isn't biased, why they contradict themselves on if a claim is true or not based on who said it.

For years before the election, Trump and Trump supporters hammer about how the Electoral College was the worst thing to happen to democracy. [1].

So "Trump and Trump Supporters" can now tweet on Trump's twitter?
A single tweet is now "hammering?"

You may want to rethink your argument there Sparky.

> For months before the election, the MSM & Hillary supporters hammered about how Trump & his supporters wouldn't accept the results of the election.

For years before the election, Trump and Trump supporters hammer about how the Electoral College was the worst thing to happen to democracy. [1].