You're not reading the right political newsletters that expose the crimes of Hillary Clinton and why she is the anti-Christ. That she invented lesbians while at Wellesley, that she wants to take our guns so that she can arm the school shooters, that she personally knows at least one Muslim, and against all that is holy and right with America she still refuses to make cookies at home!
The short Robert Mueller investigation is clealry a witch hunt, but it we had allowed Kenneth Starr another decade or so, he would have uncovereed evidence of all of these allegations!
The duty of these agencies is to investigate. Many agencies and dpartments recently have had leaders appointed that are actively hostile to the core missions of those groups and who want to shrink or eliminate them. Somewhat like appointing Richard Stallman to be the president of Microsoft, but not as entertaining. So it is no surprise if the CFPB is now actively engaged in undoing consumer protections.
If corporations now are going to be writing legistlation for us, be given regulatory favors by the government, and granted huge tax cuts, they should at least be asked to kick over some major bribes to help fill the coffers back up. Such as, if they were going to be sued for $1B then they can pay us $500M to make the case go away. Sure, it's totally immoral and unethical, but those things were made obsolete in US government decades ago. What's the point in having a kleptocracy if we can't benefit by it?
It's a volatile market though. So Nvidia likes it when they sell more, but they don't like it when sales suddenly plummet and the new manufacturing plants they invested in are idle.
The number quoted was the entire discretionary spending, military part was only $598 billion, from the chart I linked. People punch up the numbers differently depending upon what stories they they tell, such as including VA in military spending, but I just presented the top hit from a web search.
I'm growing slowly I think, I'm 55ish and each year my salary keeps going up. Though there's a bit of a rocky past, with leaving work and going back to grad school and leaving with nothing in the bank in my early 30s, taking a lowballed job offer for a few years since I was hungry, and then the salaries started catching up. Only single income and in Silicon Valley, so while I have a bigger salary than the Vice President, I don't actually feel rich. If I was in my home town though with this salary, I'd be doing awesome. I'm not very good/disciplined at investing, so I worry about retirement or what place I'll have to end up eventually (most likely someplace with too much snow, or too much dust).
I also felt that those in their 40s with the senior positions peaked too soon. Very often they didn't have the experience for their positions. There were even some senior director roles for people in their twenties...
Here's a 2015 chart, showing military budget as percentage of discretionary spending: https://www.nationalpriorities.... The entire total of discretionary spending was $1.11 trillion, and military spending alone (not counting VA, agriculture, etc) was over half of that.
I think you meant that the military budget PLUS all those other things will add up to over 1 T.
Social security is biggest, but military spending is still massive. Military spending in the US is over half of all discretionary spending. And discretionary spending are things that the president proposes for the budget and congress votes on, thus it is easier to make cuts here without changing legislation.
There are people who whine about government waste pointing to programs that cost maybe a couple million but then turn around and try to give the military even more money (more than the joint chiefs ask for). Note that under Bush, Rumsfeld was interested in scaling back military spending at first until the Iraq war. So the idea is not unheard of. There are a lot of boondoggle military spending that is encouraged and promoted by congresscritters that want tax dollars to flow back to their states.
Journals are peer reviewed. Wiki pages are reviewed by peoplel interested in following the odd wiki rules. Wiki is good for a good first step and getting some info, but for a serious paper you need to find real references.
The issue with Windows XP, or 7, or 10, is to disconnect these critical infrastructure maachines from the internet. If they are on the internet, then train users to not use a web browser on this critical machines. Upgrading the OS does not magically fix a poor security set up.
This should be basic training everywhere. I can certainly understand someone sneaking around the rules and browsing the net using their normal work computer, but it's a severe lapse of responsibility to use a critical production computer to do this browsing.
If a system got infected with malware that did mining, which is a relatively minor problem, it means they are susceptible to serious damaging malware. Anti malware or tracking that detects intrusions after the fact don't help much if the damage is already done.
It does feels odd that these sorts of simple and basic preventative measure (disconnecting from internet, restricted access to web sites) aren't being taken. Organizations using SCADA systems should presumably know all about security issues and know that SCADA systems are common targets.
Nonsense, the biggest elitist of them all got elected. Lives a life of luxury, inherited big money, went to private schools, is forgiven multiple bankruptcies, a reality TV star, a regular guest on talk shows, lives a life of luxury, is followed around by the papparazzi, has trophy wives, pals around with the stars, was good friends with the Clintons, and spends much of the working day playing golf. If that's not an elitist, then I need a new dictionary.
Bitcoin is most useful for the black market. A way to launder money, or make trades with less scrutiny (which isn't really as true as they think), and so forth. If that market for bitcoin dries up then bitcoin will seriously diminish in price.
By the home grown economic theory of Bitcoin enthusiasts, anything can be "currency" as long as it is tradable. But bitcoin is hard to trade with by most people. It's not very useful for using to buy a loaf of bread at the store.
For paying your contractors, you're not really using bitcoin as currency, but as a money transfer vehicle.
Do you consider those old school Republicans, people like John McCain, Jeff Flake, George Bush (both), and so forth, to be the real Republicans, or that the new upstarts from the tea party to be the real Republicans?
Remember, that majority of Republicans were opposed to Trump during the primaries, and a few started backtracking when Trump won, and even more backtracked after Trump won the general election, and even more followed him when they realized he was going to help with their dream wishlist. Backtracking like this for political gain is not really integrity.
I think there's a bit of danger in assuming Trump is just a mindless buffoon. In certain areas that he cares about, he appears startlingly shrewd (or amazingly lucky). In areas he's not so much interested in then he comes across as a buffoon. It could be an act, or it could be that in areas he doesn't care about that he's willing to say whatever silly thing is likely to be quoted by the media or earn him points with the reality tv fanbase.
This is a reality TV star who's spend most of his adult life doing self promotion and staying in the spotlight. So when he says he wants his heroes to be people who weren't captured by the enemy, is this just an off the cuff remark that he thinks is a funny way to insult John McCain, or is he being serious and that's how he genuinely feels feels about this? I'm leaning towards the former, that he knows he's on stage and is giving an act.
No, there are countless right wing Republicans who also think Trump is a buffoon. Or by "partisan" do you mean "anyone who is opposed to Trump?" Remember, Trump personally insulted just about every opponent in the Republican primary as well as the many in the Republican leadership. And anyone who thinks the Republicans are being given partisan marching orders by the DNC is deluedd.
I don't think that's right. The extremist Republicans don't really want to empower states, they only want to empower their own states, and only the states and never the counties or municipal governments. If they had their way they would force states to outlaw marijuana and gay marriage. Extremist Democrats would be similar, preferring that their states are independent but other states follow their guidelines.
Two semesters comes to $2000 a year. Most families can afford that. If you live at home with parents then it's not bad. The problem comes from those who don't live at at home, they have to also pay rent, get a minimum wage job, work less than full time because they're going to school, pay for transportation, etc. If you're the sole breadwinner then it's rough, but then so is everything at that point, including getting a car, holding down a job with only a high school education, and so on.
No, the issue is not "Trump colluded with the Russians", but that the Russians sought to inflluence the presidential election. No one is accusing Trump of doing anything, but there were some improper actions by some people employed by the Trump campaign. The FBI investigation is about finding out what happened so that election interference can be diminished or prevented in the future.
The opposition research was originally funded by a Republican during the primaries, and the democrats picked this up later. It should be clear to everyone that both major parties engage extensively in opposition research.
I don't know what "the other foot" means here, I am not fan of either side. People need to stop thinking in terms of "if you're not for Trump you must be for Hillary". Instead we had two absolutely terrible choices for President we were stuck with. I don't want either party to be exposing intelligence information this way in an attempt to discredit an ongoing FBI investigation.
The partisanship is in selectively including only parts of the intelligence, making it look good for Trump's team. We don't know what else is there, but Democrats on the committee claim it balances things out more if the whole story is told.
If you have two brothers fighting and both claim "he started it!", the mom can either punish them both equally, or try to get both halves of the story. It wouldn't be good if the mom only listens to one of the sons' story and then punishes the other son. Both parties here are up to shenanigans, I don't doubt that. But listening to only one side of the argument is a stupid thing to do.
Partisanship in this committee is normally low, because the purpose is to protect national security and not to gain political points. But it seems clear that the release of the memo was intended to discredit Democrats and the FBI. Past members of the intelligence committee from both parties have said that release of this sort of information is unprecedented. Since they have already release the memo, let's play fair and hear both sides.
As for the 4th amendment, there were several warrants for getting a wiretap. This was done in the FISA courts which are secret. Those courts and not meant for the purpose of bringing charges against anyone or holding a trial. The memo only mentions slim details of one of the warrants but does not address the other warrants. The memo alleges with selective editing that the wiretapping was for political purposes instead of for the purpose of investigating the Russian influence on the election, which would potentially violate the 4th amendment. But we can't know that since we haven't been given the whole story.
Slashdot Mirror
You're not reading the right political newsletters that expose the crimes of Hillary Clinton and why she is the anti-Christ. That she invented lesbians while at Wellesley, that she wants to take our guns so that she can arm the school shooters, that she personally knows at least one Muslim, and against all that is holy and right with America she still refuses to make cookies at home!
The short Robert Mueller investigation is clealry a witch hunt, but it we had allowed Kenneth Starr another decade or so, he would have uncovereed evidence of all of these allegations!
>
Investigations go no where. Who cares.
The duty of these agencies is to investigate. Many agencies and dpartments recently have had leaders appointed that are actively hostile to the core missions of those groups and who want to shrink or eliminate them. Somewhat like appointing Richard Stallman to be the president of Microsoft, but not as entertaining. So it is no surprise if the CFPB is now actively engaged in undoing consumer protections.
If corporations now are going to be writing legistlation for us, be given regulatory favors by the government, and granted huge tax cuts, they should at least be asked to kick over some major bribes to help fill the coffers back up. Such as, if they were going to be sued for $1B then they can pay us $500M to make the case go away. Sure, it's totally immoral and unethical, but those things were made obsolete in US government decades ago. What's the point in having a kleptocracy if we can't benefit by it?
It's a volatile market though. So Nvidia likes it when they sell more, but they don't like it when sales suddenly plummet and the new manufacturing plants they invested in are idle.
The number quoted was the entire discretionary spending, military part was only $598 billion, from the chart I linked. People punch up the numbers differently depending upon what stories they they tell, such as including VA in military spending, but I just presented the top hit from a web search.
Yup, you get the good jobs from your network contacts. The jobs you get from websites and agencies are going be below par.
So a hint for younger workers - don't just impress your boss, also impress your coworkers, and don't burn any bridges when you leave.
I'm growing slowly I think, I'm 55ish and each year my salary keeps going up. Though there's a bit of a rocky past, with leaving work and going back to grad school and leaving with nothing in the bank in my early 30s, taking a lowballed job offer for a few years since I was hungry, and then the salaries started catching up. Only single income and in Silicon Valley, so while I have a bigger salary than the Vice President, I don't actually feel rich. If I was in my home town though with this salary, I'd be doing awesome. I'm not very good/disciplined at investing, so I worry about retirement or what place I'll have to end up eventually (most likely someplace with too much snow, or too much dust).
I also felt that those in their 40s with the senior positions peaked too soon. Very often they didn't have the experience for their positions. There were even some senior director roles for people in their twenties...
Iraq had way more than we had, if you only count what we actually deployed. We sent over a small force, whereas Iraq deployed everything they had.
Here's a 2015 chart, showing military budget as percentage of discretionary spending: https://www.nationalpriorities....
The entire total of discretionary spending was $1.11 trillion, and military spending alone (not counting VA, agriculture, etc) was over half of that.
I think you meant that the military budget PLUS all those other things will add up to over 1 T.
Social security is biggest, but military spending is still massive. Military spending in the US is over half of all discretionary spending. And discretionary spending are things that the president proposes for the budget and congress votes on, thus it is easier to make cuts here without changing legislation.
There are people who whine about government waste pointing to programs that cost maybe a couple million but then turn around and try to give the military even more money (more than the joint chiefs ask for). Note that under Bush, Rumsfeld was interested in scaling back military spending at first until the Iraq war. So the idea is not unheard of. There are a lot of boondoggle military spending that is encouraged and promoted by congresscritters that want tax dollars to flow back to their states.
Journals are peer reviewed. Wiki pages are reviewed by peoplel interested in following the odd wiki rules. Wiki is good for a good first step and getting some info, but for a serious paper you need to find real references.
And yet, half of the reference links I try to follow with wikipedia are dead links.
The issue with Windows XP, or 7, or 10, is to disconnect these critical infrastructure maachines from the internet. If they are on the internet, then train users to not use a web browser on this critical machines. Upgrading the OS does not magically fix a poor security set up.
This should be basic training everywhere. I can certainly understand someone sneaking around the rules and browsing the net using their normal work computer, but it's a severe lapse of responsibility to use a critical production computer to do this browsing.
If a system got infected with malware that did mining, which is a relatively minor problem, it means they are susceptible to serious damaging malware. Anti malware or tracking that detects intrusions after the fact don't help much if the damage is already done.
It does feels odd that these sorts of simple and basic preventative measure (disconnecting from internet, restricted access to web sites) aren't being taken. Organizations using SCADA systems should presumably know all about security issues and know that SCADA systems are common targets.
The drives can use GPS, they just have to pass the test without it.
I think the cat realized that you were merely the number two human in the house.
Nonsense, the biggest elitist of them all got elected. Lives a life of luxury, inherited big money, went to private schools, is forgiven multiple bankruptcies, a reality TV star, a regular guest on talk shows, lives a life of luxury, is followed around by the papparazzi, has trophy wives, pals around with the stars, was good friends with the Clintons, and spends much of the working day playing golf. If that's not an elitist, then I need a new dictionary.
Bitcoin is most useful for the black market. A way to launder money, or make trades with less scrutiny (which isn't really as true as they think), and so forth. If that market for bitcoin dries up then bitcoin will seriously diminish in price.
By the home grown economic theory of Bitcoin enthusiasts, anything can be "currency" as long as it is tradable. But bitcoin is hard to trade with by most people. It's not very useful for using to buy a loaf of bread at the store.
For paying your contractors, you're not really using bitcoin as currency, but as a money transfer vehicle.
Do you consider those old school Republicans, people like John McCain, Jeff Flake, George Bush (both), and so forth, to be the real Republicans, or that the new upstarts from the tea party to be the real Republicans?
Remember, that majority of Republicans were opposed to Trump during the primaries, and a few started backtracking when Trump won, and even more backtracked after Trump won the general election, and even more followed him when they realized he was going to help with their dream wishlist. Backtracking like this for political gain is not really integrity.
I think there's a bit of danger in assuming Trump is just a mindless buffoon. In certain areas that he cares about, he appears startlingly shrewd (or amazingly lucky). In areas he's not so much interested in then he comes across as a buffoon. It could be an act, or it could be that in areas he doesn't care about that he's willing to say whatever silly thing is likely to be quoted by the media or earn him points with the reality tv fanbase.
This is a reality TV star who's spend most of his adult life doing self promotion and staying in the spotlight. So when he says he wants his heroes to be people who weren't captured by the enemy, is this just an off the cuff remark that he thinks is a funny way to insult John McCain, or is he being serious and that's how he genuinely feels feels about this? I'm leaning towards the former, that he knows he's on stage and is giving an act.
No, there are countless right wing Republicans who also think Trump is a buffoon. Or by "partisan" do you mean "anyone who is opposed to Trump?" Remember, Trump personally insulted just about every opponent in the Republican primary as well as the many in the Republican leadership. And anyone who thinks the Republicans are being given partisan marching orders by the DNC is deluedd.
I don't think that's right. The extremist Republicans don't really want to empower states, they only want to empower their own states, and only the states and never the counties or municipal governments. If they had their way they would force states to outlaw marijuana and gay marriage. Extremist Democrats would be similar, preferring that their states are independent but other states follow their guidelines.
Two semesters comes to $2000 a year. Most families can afford that. If you live at home with parents then it's not bad. The problem comes from those who don't live at at home, they have to also pay rent, get a minimum wage job, work less than full time because they're going to school, pay for transportation, etc. If you're the sole breadwinner then it's rough, but then so is everything at that point, including getting a car, holding down a job with only a high school education, and so on.
No, the issue is not "Trump colluded with the Russians", but that the Russians sought to inflluence the presidential election. No one is accusing Trump of doing anything, but there were some improper actions by some people employed by the Trump campaign. The FBI investigation is about finding out what happened so that election interference can be diminished or prevented in the future.
The opposition research was originally funded by a Republican during the primaries, and the democrats picked this up later. It should be clear to everyone that both major parties engage extensively in opposition research.
I don't know what "the other foot" means here, I am not fan of either side. People need to stop thinking in terms of "if you're not for Trump you must be for Hillary". Instead we had two absolutely terrible choices for President we were stuck with. I don't want either party to be exposing intelligence information this way in an attempt to discredit an ongoing FBI investigation.
The partisanship is in selectively including only parts of the intelligence, making it look good for Trump's team. We don't know what else is there, but Democrats on the committee claim it balances things out more if the whole story is told.
If you have two brothers fighting and both claim "he started it!", the mom can either punish them both equally, or try to get both halves of the story. It wouldn't be good if the mom only listens to one of the sons' story and then punishes the other son. Both parties here are up to shenanigans, I don't doubt that. But listening to only one side of the argument is a stupid thing to do.
Partisanship in this committee is normally low, because the purpose is to protect national security and not to gain political points. But it seems clear that the release of the memo was intended to discredit Democrats and the FBI. Past members of the intelligence committee from both parties have said that release of this sort of information is unprecedented. Since they have already release the memo, let's play fair and hear both sides.
As for the 4th amendment, there were several warrants for getting a wiretap. This was done in the FISA courts which are secret. Those courts and not meant for the purpose of bringing charges against anyone or holding a trial. The memo only mentions slim details of one of the warrants but does not address the other warrants. The memo alleges with selective editing that the wiretapping was for political purposes instead of for the purpose of investigating the Russian influence on the election, which would potentially violate the 4th amendment. But we can't know that since we haven't been given the whole story.