First of all, did they report that Iraq has WMDs or that various intelligence agencies have stated that Iraq has WMDs? I'm betting it's the exclusively the latter. And how would the BBC or CNN verify the existence of WMDs in any case? Try to send a journalist to find and sneak into Iraq's secret military bases?
It seems wrong to blame the media for reporting lies governments told that could not be independently verified. CNN, BBC etc. don't have their own weapons inspectors. Do you blame them for repeating "no obstruction!" and "no collusion!" too?
Makes sense, some of the most heavily climate-denying areas have been hit with terrible hurricanes over the last few years. You can see how someone might stop denying the reality of global warming after it knocks their house down.
The problem with this NewsGuard extension is that the more likely someone is to need it, the less likely they are to want it (and the more likely they are to actively dislike the idea of it).
Yes who can forget the evil Linux megacorporation and their conniving CEO, Dr. Gnu Linux, charging their users so much that they can't afford to shave.
GP is greatly exaggerating (probably because he's a racist), but there was an interview where employees at these companies admitted to trolling racists by fudging the results with trace heritage to the ethnicity the racist didn't like, which is hilarious, awesome, and valuable:
The fact that these troublesome, privacy-eviscerting, upside-free license plates are priced out of reach of the lower and middle classes, and yet there are people buying them.
Well yes if you want to nitpick, I wasn't literally correct to say "no safety" if you compare the safety of a person installing any random app from inside vs. outside the app store, although that's not something a person will normally do. Similarly in my analogies, of course you'd be in more danger inside the lion cage or strapped to the outside of the submarine. If you assume a person would be stupid enough to go there, which they generally aren't.
Title nitpicking aside, you'd have a good argument if you had the scale of the malware problem in app stores correct. Which you didn't...you were at least a couple of orders of magnitude low:
Those aren't ridiculous exaggerations at all. The walled garden's security is just as broken as the flooding submarine or the lion's buffet zoo. But those analogies do fail to account for the downsides of using these things at all when they weren't necessary. It's as if to protect people's safety, we've replaced snorkeling with a submarine and walking in nature with a zoo, causing people to leave their lifevests and rifles respectively at home, only to suffer these terrible problems.
You activities, the walled garden, affect the service level of programmers and users everywhere. You can always opt in to a walled garden but it's not so easy to opt out. That's why you and me have a problem.
I don't see how the existence of a huge amount of malware outside of the walled garden suggests that the inside is safe because it has less, when that number is still enormous, and the primary security purpose is to be free of malware. That's like saying that a submarine that's half full of water has a good functioning hull because it has a much lower percentage of water than the outside ocean. It's like saying that a zoo with five lions running loose in the guest areas has good containment because there are dozens of lions inside the cages.
Well they damn well should've been ignoring Venezuela. As for the other two, they were specifically asked by the Trump administration to create invasion plans.
I think it's time to officially declare walled garden computing a failure from a security standpoint. Malware has had little trouble getting inside, and then the fact that it's inside the supposedly safe garden lulls users into a false sense of security. The only thing the walled garden has succeeded in doing is enriching the gatekeepers and disempowering the users.
Ah, the old "He's not a moron, he's just doing a really good job of pretending to be one for strategic reasons" argument. Well if he's pretending, he's really doing an amazing job:
Although I don't see any positive results from doing so. He may have come close to bringing NK to the table but instead he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory:
That's a lot of eloquent words to try to make that stupid-ass culture war bullshit sound less idiotic (and bigoted, again they weren't called racists, sexists etc without good reason). But to continue your analogy, the works they threw that molotov cocktail into was the utility room of the apartment building all Americans share. That's a form of protest only someone who's an idiot, evil, or an evil idiot would use.
Aaaand that's why he's so seriously considered invading Iran, North Korea, and fucking Venezuela that he's had the military put together plans for him?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trump would stumble into more wars than Hillary would enter on purpose, and I think it's been only luck and less-hot heads surrounding him that have prevented it. Now the less-hot heads are gone, and who knows when the luck will run out...
It's newsworthy because the US President has been credibly accused of doing it. But yeah, wealthy people pay to have online polls spammed all the time, usually for relatively mundane business reasons.
The "other value" was "pwning the libs" over stupid-ass culture war bullshit. Which is why all Trump voters are idiots or evil. Or perhaps evil idiots.
There was no good or reasonably intelligent reason to vote for Trump. If you voted for Romney or McCain then I can still have respect for you and we can agree to disagree. Even if you voted for Bush Jr, or even one of the racebaiter presidents who impoverished Gen. Y, Bush Sr. or Reagan, I can give you the benefit of the doubt. But if you voted for that dimwitted clearly-racist pussygrabbing shitstain Trump, you are by definition at least as stupid and/or awful as he is, and you are worthy of nothing but scorn.
Choosing to buy services from someone you normally wouldn't can be a favor...especially if you also buy more service than you normally would, and apparently that's exactly what's been happening. It's hilarious and informative to hear the same Trumpkins that screeched about Hilary's charity foundation and Obama's post-term paid appearances simply whistle and look the other way from Trump's almost historically unprecedented self-dealing and bald-faced bribe-taking. It shows that any outrage they display based on supposed principles is always a farcical pantomime driven by simple tribalism.
Slashdot Mirror
Well he could try the same tactic: Explicitly lay out a plan on how the Martians will pay for it, and then act like he never did so and shut down the government until taxpayers pay for it (or more likely, until he gets bored, or people get so tired of his BS that they're ready for a political impeachment).
First of all, did they report that Iraq has WMDs or that various intelligence agencies have stated that Iraq has WMDs? I'm betting it's the exclusively the latter. And how would the BBC or CNN verify the existence of WMDs in any case? Try to send a journalist to find and sneak into Iraq's secret military bases?
It seems wrong to blame the media for reporting lies governments told that could not be independently verified. CNN, BBC etc. don't have their own weapons inspectors. Do you blame them for repeating "no obstruction!" and "no collusion!" too?
Makes sense, some of the most heavily climate-denying areas have been hit with terrible hurricanes over the last few years. You can see how someone might stop denying the reality of global warming after it knocks their house down.
The problem with this NewsGuard extension is that the more likely someone is to need it, the less likely they are to want it (and the more likely they are to actively dislike the idea of it).
There's no meaningful difference difference between a pointy stick and a man-portable gun to a modern military with killer robots.
Duuun Duuun Duuun, dun da dun, dun da dun
I for one do not welcome our new copyright maximalist, DRM-pushing overlords.
This should help get Firefox user numbers back up.
Yes who can forget the evil Linux megacorporation and their conniving CEO, Dr. Gnu Linux, charging their users so much that they can't afford to shave.
GP is greatly exaggerating (probably because he's a racist), but there was an interview where employees at these companies admitted to trolling racists by fudging the results with trace heritage to the ethnicity the racist didn't like, which is hilarious, awesome, and valuable:
http://www.cracked.com/persona...
The fact that these troublesome, privacy-eviscerting, upside-free license plates are priced out of reach of the lower and middle classes, and yet there are people buying them.
Well yes if you want to nitpick, I wasn't literally correct to say "no safety" if you compare the safety of a person installing any random app from inside vs. outside the app store, although that's not something a person will normally do. Similarly in my analogies, of course you'd be in more danger inside the lion cage or strapped to the outside of the submarine. If you assume a person would be stupid enough to go there, which they generally aren't.
Title nitpicking aside, you'd have a good argument if you had the scale of the malware problem in app stores correct. Which you didn't...you were at least a couple of orders of magnitude low:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/...
https://www.express.co.uk/life...
https://bgr.com/2015/09/21/ios... (In which a piece of software used by over half a billion people was infected, among many others).
So yes, there is a helluva lot of water getting through that submarine hull.
Those aren't ridiculous exaggerations at all. The walled garden's security is just as broken as the flooding submarine or the lion's buffet zoo. But those analogies do fail to account for the downsides of using these things at all when they weren't necessary. It's as if to protect people's safety, we've replaced snorkeling with a submarine and walking in nature with a zoo, causing people to leave their lifevests and rifles respectively at home, only to suffer these terrible problems.
You activities, the walled garden, affect the service level of programmers and users everywhere. You can always opt in to a walled garden but it's not so easy to opt out. That's why you and me have a problem.
I don't see how the existence of a huge amount of malware outside of the walled garden suggests that the inside is safe because it has less, when that number is still enormous, and the primary security purpose is to be free of malware. That's like saying that a submarine that's half full of water has a good functioning hull because it has a much lower percentage of water than the outside ocean. It's like saying that a zoo with five lions running loose in the guest areas has good containment because there are dozens of lions inside the cages.
Well they damn well should've been ignoring Venezuela. As for the other two, they were specifically asked by the Trump administration to create invasion plans.
I think it's time to officially declare walled garden computing a failure from a security standpoint. Malware has had little trouble getting inside, and then the fact that it's inside the supposedly safe garden lulls users into a false sense of security. The only thing the walled garden has succeeded in doing is enriching the gatekeepers and disempowering the users.
Ah, the old "He's not a moron, he's just doing a really good job of pretending to be one for strategic reasons" argument. Well if he's pretending, he's really doing an amazing job:
https://www.apnews.com/a3309c4...
Although I don't see any positive results from doing so. He may have come close to bringing NK to the table but instead he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory:
https://nationalpost.com/opini...
If you think that North Korea has changed course at all since Trump took power, then they've pulled the wool over your eyes just like Trump's:
https://www.theatlantic.com/in...
Also while pulling out of Syria was not a bad idea, the way he chose to announce it, as a surprise to everyone except himself, was idiotic:
https://www.theguardian.com/us...
That's a lot of eloquent words to try to make that stupid-ass culture war bullshit sound less idiotic (and bigoted, again they weren't called racists, sexists etc without good reason). But to continue your analogy, the works they threw that molotov cocktail into was the utility room of the apartment building all Americans share. That's a form of protest only someone who's an idiot, evil, or an evil idiot would use.
Aaaand that's why he's so seriously considered invading Iran, North Korea, and fucking Venezuela that he's had the military put together plans for him?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trump would stumble into more wars than Hillary would enter on purpose, and I think it's been only luck and less-hot heads surrounding him that have prevented it. Now the less-hot heads are gone, and who knows when the luck will run out...
Perhaps, but it's certainlry a less great social movement than the one to elect a boring pantsuit lady.
It's newsworthy because the US President has been credibly accused of doing it. But yeah, wealthy people pay to have online polls spammed all the time, usually for relatively mundane business reasons.
The "other value" was "pwning the libs" over stupid-ass culture war bullshit. Which is why all Trump voters are idiots or evil. Or perhaps evil idiots.
There was no good or reasonably intelligent reason to vote for Trump. If you voted for Romney or McCain then I can still have respect for you and we can agree to disagree. Even if you voted for Bush Jr, or even one of the racebaiter presidents who impoverished Gen. Y, Bush Sr. or Reagan, I can give you the benefit of the doubt. But if you voted for that dimwitted clearly-racist pussygrabbing shitstain Trump, you are by definition at least as stupid and/or awful as he is, and you are worthy of nothing but scorn.
Humanity can get along fine without implanted supercomputers, but they would make capitalism viable for longer.
Choosing to buy services from someone you normally wouldn't can be a favor...especially if you also buy more service than you normally would, and apparently that's exactly what's been happening. It's hilarious and informative to hear the same Trumpkins that screeched about Hilary's charity foundation and Obama's post-term paid appearances simply whistle and look the other way from Trump's almost historically unprecedented self-dealing and bald-faced bribe-taking. It shows that any outrage they display based on supposed principles is always a farcical pantomime driven by simple tribalism.
...And at the same moment, this news story comes out:
https://www.vox.com/2019/1/16/...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...