The Republicans don't plan to be around in anything resembling their past or current form for another generation. They know their platform can't win a popular vote anymore and that American society won't tolerate minority rule much longer, so they're catering to the worst of society for one last desperate hold on power. When this backfires spectacularly on them, I expect they'll spend a decade or two in the political doghouse and come back as something of a centrist party as the Democrats move left.
There are objectively few reasons to like almost anything he's done unless you're either very short-sighted and on the receiving end of his wealth transfers to the rich, and/or you're a godawful centipede who gets a boner at gratuitous cruelty toward brown people and wanton damage to global liberal-democracy, including the western world's economy as seen here.
Among non-deplorable people who use facts and math, Trump has made himself a supervillain, and his typical actions will be met with disapproval. DEAL WITH IT. Go full deplorable and revel in the destruction, or stop being an infected sore on humanity's ass and get off the wrong side of history.
Killing Maduro today isn't going to fix Venezuela's agricultural self-sabotage and failure to diversify the economy from oil exports years ago under Chavez.
Well Trump's added a corporatocrat and an executive power maximalist to the supreme court, so if there's ever a time they'll gleefully take this demand, it's now.
Google can just give every SF neighborhood a really awful name. West gash, Buttfungus grove, Trashpile drive, Stank avenue, etc, lowering property values until housing is affordable for mere mortals again!
I also wouldn't expect a decrease, but rather a near-total lack of improvement, while the rest of the world continues to push ahead, including with EV models that get 3-digit MPGe.
Soon the US could be building gas guzzlers nobody outside the US wants to buy...and then when gas prices go back up, nobody inside the US will want to buy them either...remember how awesome it was last time that happened around the OPEC oil crisis? #MAGA!
And where does commercial viability or popularity come into the definition of technology? Nowhere? Then in what ways does Apple "understand technology better?"
A company that builds a working launch loop also understands technology better than one that builds a playground swing, even if the playground swing is far more popular and the launch loop company goes bankrupt the day after they finish.
Reducing effort and cognitive burden is also not a vital function of technology. If effort and cognitive burden are reduced by limiting function, that can be counterproductive - like forcing a pilot to walk because the cognitive burden and greater peak effort of flying a helicopter is seen as too great. Similarly, this can cause a greater expenditure of effort overall depending on the size of the task.
Personally, the very existence of Apple hardware and software makes my life harder. Its widespread incompatibility with non-Apple technologies makes each Apple device a perpetual problem generator. I dread ever having to interact with any of it. From my point of view, Apple's technology is some kind of bizarro anti-technology.
I'd say that Apple understands marketing and consumers better, not technology. Slashdot is still very much a pro-technology website and is only on the losing side of the decline toward dumbed-down walled-garden computing in consumer electronics.
Two shalt be the number of notches thou may install, and the number of the notches shalt be two or less. Zero thou may choose, and one is righteous in my sight, and thou mayst proceed to two, but thou shalt not proceed to three. Four is right out.
When printed in ABS the odds of the gun working correctly the first time are certainly over 50%, judging by independent testing...if I was a politician I wouldn't like those odds.
And the child porn comment, the problem with that is that the overwhelming majority of the population feels abuse of and sexual objectification of children is abhorrent. You can't compare that to guns. Perhaps you imagine some vast social engineering and propaganda program that will give you that outcome. It was tried with alcohol and drugs as well. You're making the same mistake three times in a row.
It really doesn't matter. It just is a question of how many resources and how much time you want to waste before the inevitable happens.
Seriously, given what I've said, how do you really think you're going to stop this? The child porn comment doesn't work as I said above for the above cited reason. Let us be real here... this is check mate in four moves.
You don't think an overwhelming majority of the population finds easy production of untraceable guns significantly abhorrent to apply child porn levels of illegality to 3D-printed gun files? I do. Especially outside of the US. Make those files a nuclear bomb of legal ruination and people won't want to touch them with a 30-foot pole.
The big difference between gun control and alcohol/cannabis prohibition is first that we're not seeking total prohibition, just licensing and control. And second, there aren't enough people opposed to reasonable licensing and control efforts to matter. Even the NRA's overinflated membership numbers are less than 4% of the US population. The average Joe may like to get blazed up and shitfaced, but he doesn't want to build a ghost gun. Only a small fringe of wackjobs and criminals would vote for that right. The vast majority would vote against it.
All is not lost quite yet. Governments could make these files as illegal as child porn. That would put a significant dent in the practicality of 3D-printing guns, and keep 3D printing in general safe from these asshats.
I'm sure a stone or synthetic diamond firing pin would work at least once. And why would metal have to be used in the primer? A plastic or composite primer capsule should work just fine.
The sniffer problem may be harder to solve, but I imagine a DIYer could develop a sealed bullet. And sniffer devices aren't widely used anyway.
That was Stratasys, not the US government. Wait until they get involved, you'll need a license to own a 3D printer, it will have to be DRMed to be legal, and buying 3D printer parts or supplies without said license will get you on a watch list and will be reason enough to raid your house. Think I'm joking? Wait until the first politician is offed with a Liberator.
In the US at least, right-wing nutjobs and insane non-Muslim people with guns are killing more people than jihadists these days (even individually, not combined), so if some random Muslim were to replace a deplorable or a clearly dangerous killer with the right to keep his guns protected by the 2nd amendment, it would make the US a safer place.
The wrong side and the losing side can be two different sides. Making guns more freely available will only bring more gun deaths, mostly from crime and suicide. This makes the world deadlier, nobody wins except the random gun fetishists who survive.
Yep this will bring about a new golden age of assassination, right before it brings us 3D printer control instead of gun control.
For an assassin's gun, 3D printing is ideal and greatly lowers the barrier of entry vs. traditional or CNC machining (which requires much more expensive equipment and much more skill). The Liberator with a plastic casing and stone bullet could slip through a metal detector.
The next step to controlling 3D printed guns is, conveniently enough for our corporate overlords, 3D printer control - brought to you indirectly by Cody Wilson, profesional shit-disturbing deplorable asshat. Mark my words.
I didn't hit any paywall, but I will still help you educate yourself:
Collusion is not a crime by itself. Here are the charges Mueller could be exploring.
Special counsel Robert Mueller in 2013. (Thew/Epa-Efe/Rex/Shutterstock/Thew/Epa-Efe/Rex/Shutterstock) by Matt Zapotosky October 31, 2017 Email the author
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III fired his opening salvo this week, unsealing charges against three former Trump campaign aides thought to have engaged in a medley of wrongdoing.
The cases he revealed, legal analysts said, indicate he is pursuing an extensive probe that will explore both personal wrongdoing of those connected with President Trump and possible efforts campaign officials took to work with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Collusion — the word Trump often uses to describe Mueller's case, even as he asserts such a thing never happened — is not itself a crime, and Mueller's team will probably have to sort through unseemly political dealings to determine whether a law was broken, legal analysts said. In his first public charges, though, Mueller offered a hint of the direction he might take.
Former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, for example, pleaded guilty to making a false statement to FBI investigators who asked about his contacts with foreigners claiming to have high-level Russian connections.
Of particular note, he falsely described his interactions with a London-based professor claiming to have connections to high-level Russian officials who purportedly had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails."
Papadopoulos said his interactions with the professor — thought to be Joseph Mifsud, the director of the London Academy of Diplomacy — occurred before he joined the campaign and did not amount to much. In fact, the professor told him about the emails in April 2016 — after his role on the campaign was made public — and the two were involved in extensive discussions about a possible meeting between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, according to Papadopoulos's plea agreement.
The conversation about emails is possibly a critical piece of evidence, legal analysts said. That is because one charge that investigators might try to substantiate against those higher in the Trump campaign is a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
If Mueller can find evidence that members of Trump's team conspired in Russia's hacking effort — by directing it or aiding in another way — they might face criminal charges, legal analysts said. Papadopoulos's plea says that he discussed some of his efforts to broker a meeting with the Russians with other, more senior Trump campaign officials — although some seemed to treat him warily.
"There's a significant difference between the Russians having dirt and offering that dirt, and someone asking the Russians to commit an illegal act to obtain that dirt," said Jacob Frenkel, a white-collar lawyer at Dickinson Wright who previously worked in the now-defunct Office of the Independent Counsel. "The latter likely would be prosecutable, and probably as a conspiracy to commit a computer crime or as a computer crime."
Papadopoulos's conversation about "emails of Clinton" took place a month after Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's email account was hacked and well before WikiLeaks released his messages. Also, it was not until June 2016 that The Washington Post reported that the Democratic National Committee's computer network had been breached.
But at that time, it was well known that Clinton had deleted tens of thousands of emails she deemed personal from her private server. Those messages were of great interest to Republicans who believed they might show something nefarious.
It was unclear to what emails the professor was referring or if he truly had access to any messages damaging to Clinton. Jonathan Biran, a former federal prosecutor now in private prac
Slashdot Mirror
The Republicans don't plan to be around in anything resembling their past or current form for another generation. They know their platform can't win a popular vote anymore and that American society won't tolerate minority rule much longer, so they're catering to the worst of society for one last desperate hold on power. When this backfires spectacularly on them, I expect they'll spend a decade or two in the political doghouse and come back as something of a centrist party as the Democrats move left.
There are objectively few reasons to like almost anything he's done unless you're either very short-sighted and on the receiving end of his wealth transfers to the rich, and/or you're a godawful centipede who gets a boner at gratuitous cruelty toward brown people and wanton damage to global liberal-democracy, including the western world's economy as seen here.
Among non-deplorable people who use facts and math, Trump has made himself a supervillain, and his typical actions will be met with disapproval. DEAL WITH IT. Go full deplorable and revel in the destruction, or stop being an infected sore on humanity's ass and get off the wrong side of history.
Online dating sites have been using tools like this internally for years to track users' activity on competitors' sites.
Climate Researchers Warn Only Hope For Humanity Now Lies In Possibility They Making All Of This Up
Killing Maduro today isn't going to fix Venezuela's agricultural self-sabotage and failure to diversify the economy from oil exports years ago under Chavez.
Well Trump's added a corporatocrat and an executive power maximalist to the supreme court, so if there's ever a time they'll gleefully take this demand, it's now.
Sideloading could become more difficult in future official Android builds as a response to this...but hopefully Google will choose the high road.
What an adorably innocent worldview, never change!
Google can just give every SF neighborhood a really awful name. West gash, Buttfungus grove, Trashpile drive, Stank avenue, etc, lowering property values until housing is affordable for mere mortals again!
I also wouldn't expect a decrease, but rather a near-total lack of improvement, while the rest of the world continues to push ahead, including with EV models that get 3-digit MPGe.
Soon the US could be building gas guzzlers nobody outside the US wants to buy...and then when gas prices go back up, nobody inside the US will want to buy them either...remember how awesome it was last time that happened around the OPEC oil crisis? #MAGA!
And where does commercial viability or popularity come into the definition of technology? Nowhere? Then in what ways does Apple "understand technology better?"
A company that builds a working launch loop also understands technology better than one that builds a playground swing, even if the playground swing is far more popular and the launch loop company goes bankrupt the day after they finish.
Reducing effort and cognitive burden is also not a vital function of technology. If effort and cognitive burden are reduced by limiting function, that can be counterproductive - like forcing a pilot to walk because the cognitive burden and greater peak effort of flying a helicopter is seen as too great. Similarly, this can cause a greater expenditure of effort overall depending on the size of the task.
Personally, the very existence of Apple hardware and software makes my life harder. Its widespread incompatibility with non-Apple technologies makes each Apple device a perpetual problem generator. I dread ever having to interact with any of it. From my point of view, Apple's technology is some kind of bizarro anti-technology.
I'd say that Apple understands marketing and consumers better, not technology. Slashdot is still very much a pro-technology website and is only on the losing side of the decline toward dumbed-down walled-garden computing in consumer electronics.
Two shalt be the number of notches thou may install, and the number of the notches shalt be two or less. Zero thou may choose, and one is righteous in my sight, and thou mayst proceed to two, but thou shalt not proceed to three. Four is right out.
When printed in ABS the odds of the gun working correctly the first time are certainly over 50%, judging by independent testing...if I was a politician I wouldn't like those odds.
And the child porn comment, the problem with that is that the overwhelming majority of the population feels abuse of and sexual objectification of children is abhorrent. You can't compare that to guns. Perhaps you imagine some vast social engineering and propaganda program that will give you that outcome. It was tried with alcohol and drugs as well. You're making the same mistake three times in a row.
It really doesn't matter. It just is a question of how many resources and how much time you want to waste before the inevitable happens.
Seriously, given what I've said, how do you really think you're going to stop this? The child porn comment doesn't work as I said above for the above cited reason. Let us be real here... this is check mate in four moves.
You don't think an overwhelming majority of the population finds easy production of untraceable guns significantly abhorrent to apply child porn levels of illegality to 3D-printed gun files? I do. Especially outside of the US. Make those files a nuclear bomb of legal ruination and people won't want to touch them with a 30-foot pole.
The big difference between gun control and alcohol/cannabis prohibition is first that we're not seeking total prohibition, just licensing and control. And second, there aren't enough people opposed to reasonable licensing and control efforts to matter. Even the NRA's overinflated membership numbers are less than 4% of the US population. The average Joe may like to get blazed up and shitfaced, but he doesn't want to build a ghost gun. Only a small fringe of wackjobs and criminals would vote for that right. The vast majority would vote against it.
All is not lost quite yet. Governments could make these files as illegal as child porn. That would put a significant dent in the practicality of 3D-printing guns, and keep 3D printing in general safe from these asshats.
I'm sure a stone or synthetic diamond firing pin would work at least once. And why would metal have to be used in the primer? A plastic or composite primer capsule should work just fine.
The sniffer problem may be harder to solve, but I imagine a DIYer could develop a sealed bullet. And sniffer devices aren't widely used anyway.
That was Stratasys, not the US government. Wait until they get involved, you'll need a license to own a 3D printer, it will have to be DRMed to be legal, and buying 3D printer parts or supplies without said license will get you on a watch list and will be reason enough to raid your house. Think I'm joking? Wait until the first politician is offed with a Liberator.
In the US at least, right-wing nutjobs and insane non-Muslim people with guns are killing more people than jihadists these days (even individually, not combined), so if some random Muslim were to replace a deplorable or a clearly dangerous killer with the right to keep his guns protected by the 2nd amendment, it would make the US a safer place.
The wrong side and the losing side can be two different sides. Making guns more freely available will only bring more gun deaths, mostly from crime and suicide. This makes the world deadlier, nobody wins except the random gun fetishists who survive.
Yep this will bring about a new golden age of assassination, right before it brings us 3D printer control instead of gun control.
For an assassin's gun, 3D printing is ideal and greatly lowers the barrier of entry vs. traditional or CNC machining (which requires much more expensive equipment and much more skill). The Liberator with a plastic casing and stone bullet could slip through a metal detector.
The next step to controlling 3D printed guns is, conveniently enough for our corporate overlords, 3D printer control - brought to you indirectly by Cody Wilson, profesional shit-disturbing deplorable asshat. Mark my words.
Let him go to jail too if he's found guilty of any crimes, I don't care.
I didn't hit any paywall, but I will still help you educate yourself:
Collusion is not a crime by itself. Here are the charges Mueller could be exploring.
Special counsel Robert Mueller in 2013. (Thew/Epa-Efe/Rex/Shutterstock/Thew/Epa-Efe/Rex/Shutterstock)
by Matt Zapotosky October 31, 2017 Email the author
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III fired his opening salvo this week, unsealing charges against three former Trump campaign aides thought to have engaged in a medley of wrongdoing.
The cases he revealed, legal analysts said, indicate he is pursuing an extensive probe that will explore both personal wrongdoing of those connected with President Trump and possible efforts campaign officials took to work with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
Collusion — the word Trump often uses to describe Mueller's case, even as he asserts such a thing never happened — is not itself a crime, and Mueller's team will probably have to sort through unseemly political dealings to determine whether a law was broken, legal analysts said. In his first public charges, though, Mueller offered a hint of the direction he might take.
Former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, for example, pleaded guilty to making a false statement to FBI investigators who asked about his contacts with foreigners claiming to have high-level Russian connections.
Of particular note, he falsely described his interactions with a London-based professor claiming to have connections to high-level Russian officials who purportedly had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails."
Papadopoulos said his interactions with the professor — thought to be Joseph Mifsud, the director of the London Academy of Diplomacy — occurred before he joined the campaign and did not amount to much. In fact, the professor told him about the emails in April 2016 — after his role on the campaign was made public — and the two were involved in extensive discussions about a possible meeting between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, according to Papadopoulos's plea agreement.
The conversation about emails is possibly a critical piece of evidence, legal analysts said. That is because one charge that investigators might try to substantiate against those higher in the Trump campaign is a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
If Mueller can find evidence that members of Trump's team conspired in Russia's hacking effort — by directing it or aiding in another way — they might face criminal charges, legal analysts said. Papadopoulos's plea says that he discussed some of his efforts to broker a meeting with the Russians with other, more senior Trump campaign officials — although some seemed to treat him warily.
"There's a significant difference between the Russians having dirt and offering that dirt, and someone asking the Russians to commit an illegal act to obtain that dirt," said Jacob Frenkel, a white-collar lawyer at Dickinson Wright who previously worked in the now-defunct Office of the Independent Counsel. "The latter likely would be prosecutable, and probably as a conspiracy to commit a computer crime or as a computer crime."
Papadopoulos's conversation about "emails of Clinton" took place a month after Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's email account was hacked and well before WikiLeaks released his messages. Also, it was not until June 2016 that The Washington Post reported that the Democratic National Committee's computer network had been breached.
But at that time, it was well known that Clinton had deleted tens of thousands of emails she deemed personal from her private server. Those messages were of great interest to Republicans who believed they might show something nefarious.
It was unclear to what emails the professor was referring or if he truly had access to any messages damaging to Clinton. Jonathan Biran, a former federal prosecutor now in private prac