It's not even that she wants vaccines that are proven to be 100% safe with no side-effects. She wants vaccines that she thinks is 100% safe with no side-effects. There is already significant medical evidence that vaccines are worth the cost-benefit analysis but she just thinks that doctors and big pharma are horrible folk who just want to rip her off.
The problem is that she's the face of the issue. She is not going on TV saying, "I'm Jenny the Playboy Playmate." She's saying, "I'm Jenny the mother who just knows that vaccines aren't what doctors say they are all cracked up to be." That makes her more pernicious than a crackpot who publishes a report saying that thimerosol causes autism. Basically, she's the Bill Nye the Science Guy of the anti-vaccination crowd.
Google doesn't have to make software in order to make money. About half of its revenue comes from advertising. All Google has to do is to grow the number of consumers who use the Internet. As long as Gmail, Google Search, and Android keep people using Google to search, then Google can sell ads, and then Google can make money. AdSense and AdWords are revolutionary. It's so easy to buy and sell ads using the Google system. The bottom line is to force the advance of Internet capable systems.
That's why Google fostered Android. You can hate Android, but you can't deny that it increased the number of mobile Internet devices, and that most of those users rely upon Google services. Chrome made web-browsing more consistent, which meant that webmasters could make better pages, which meant more advertising. So Google doesn't care who makes the smart phones so long as smart phones are being made.
It sounds like you're missing the part where you have to plug your vaunted HDMI cable into something. Perhaps you have a HTPC or a Plex Server. Who knows? But the Chromecast costs $35 (and was on sale for $25) so you can stream without having to set up a HTPC.
The problem with customs domains is that it created another attack vector that no one really thinks about. The attacker hijacked his mx records and directed his email away. Up until now, I was sitting pretty thinking that I was safe because I used LastPass to create a long fucking Google Apps password and Google Authenticator for two-factor security. I never considered the notion that someone could hijack my mx records. I'm going over to namecheap to enable two-factor authentication.
Wake up. The rest of the world spies on our industries as well. I'm not even talking about China I'm talking about. Read the Wiki articles on the topic. The French are our allies but are also pretty big industrial spies. It's also old news that the NSA spies for American industry. When Boeing was bidding on a Saudi deal, the other side offered a bribe. The NSA picked up on it and disclosed it to the Saudis.
That's not what first-to-file means. Even if Bitcoin is never patented, the Patent Office can still (and should) reject the JP Morgan application based on the Bitcoin prior art. First-to-file means that if JP Morgan files first, the Bitcoin people cannot obtain priority over JP Morgan, as JP Morgan filed first despite inventing second.
Seriously, if I had a secret compartment in my car, I would keep a copy of the King James Bible, a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and a registered handgun in there.
Electronics tend to have a bathtub failure curve. Like us, electronics tend to die in their infancy or of old age. When I get hardware for work, I still break them in before "putting them into production," i.e., use them.
The problem hasn't been one with material sciences. The Air Force had wanted to preserve the "through-the-canopy" ejection option in the T-38, where the crew is shot through the canopy during the eject sequence. This makes low-level ejections faster because you don't have to wait for the canopy to separate before firing the ejection motors. However, this clearly makes it harder to make the canopy resistant to bird strikes. Other TTC systems destroy the canopy with embedded det cord but in a high-speed trainer, you probably are okay with a regular ejection sequence.
I have a Ford Fusion that has the Assisted Parking Technology. The driver has to remain in the car, shift gears, and hit the gas and brake pedals. The new system takes care of all of that.
Apple isn't complaining that it costs $2.4 million a month to work around the patent or that there are 500,000 complaints after the workaround was instituted. The patent-holder brought up these facts to show that their patent should carry a hefty royalty payment because Apple could not work around them--not only do you have to pay $2.4 million a month you also have to lower quality to the extent where you have 500,000 complaints even after paying that money.
Did you read the decision? It sounds like you based your comment on a quick read of the summary. The decision focused on a very specific issue:
The ruling focused on a program under which the N.S.A. has been searching domestic Internet links for communications â" where at least one side is overseas â" in which there are âoestrong selectorsâ indicating insider knowledge of someone who has been targeted for foreign-intelligence collection. One example would be mentioning a personâ(TM)s private e-mail address in the body of an e-mail.
Most of the time, the system brings up single communications, like an e-mail or text message. But sometimes many messages are packaged and travel in a bundle that the N.S.A. calls âoemulti-communication transactions.â A senior intelligence official gave one example: a Web page for a private e-mail in-box that displays subject lines for dozens of different messages â" each of which is considered a separate communication, and only one of which may discuss the person who has been targeted for intelligence collection.
While Judge Bates ruled that it was acceptable for the N.S.A. to collect and store such bundled communications, he said the agency was not doing enough to minimize the purely domestic and unrelated messages to protect Americansâ(TM) privacy. In response, the N.S.A. agreed to filter out such communications and store them apart, with greater protections, and to delete them after two years instead of the usual five.
In short, the court was okay with most of the spying program and the intelligence architecture. The court was not that happy about specific details. That's kind of scary, isn't it, that a court thinks this program is mostly okay?
The spying program is supposed to spy on foreigners and Americans who talk to them. The "F" in the FISC and FISA stands for "Foreign". If you call someone in Pakistan, they're allowed to spy on you. But they are collecting everyone's phone call metadata. Is that spying? According to the US Supreme Court, no. Commonsense? Uh, probably.
When will people understand that the U.S. military loses these mock battle so they can demand more funding? American aircraft were outnumbered 3:1 at Cope Indian. But that allows us to say, "Oh, noes, we lost to Indians. We need $100 billion in new planes." From an article: "The Cope India exercise also seemingly shocked some in Congress and the Pentagon who used the event to renew the call for modernizing the U.S. fighter force with stealthy F/A-22s and F-35 Joint Strike Fighters."
It's really a matter of money, time, and process. I have referred to this article for years. Writing mission-critical code is about having a process in place that sets standards, guidelines, and checks and balances. These guys wrote code that had 420,000 lines and only one bug; commercial quality code of equivalent complexity would have 5,000 errors. They are one of four organizations in the world rated SEI Level 5.
The most important part is the constant red-teaming. Verifiers are allowed to go to town and challenge the coders. It is clear that the rest of NASA doesn't have this mentality. We have seen shuttles explode and crash and burn because some political guy told the engineers to go fuck themselves. Imagine if there were a red-team that could have went to HQ and said, "We're not launching because of blow-by on the O-rings, and it's too fucking cold for too fucking long for the O-rings to stay pliant."
If anyone in the organization can frustrate the purposes of the organization by unauthorized disclosure, that would constitute a veto under any real definition of the word. You can have every system in the world to address their grievances but sometimes, there are just nuts who cannot be placated. It is naive that loyalty is the only thing that works. But then you acknowledge that by saying that you have to chase down the "occasional psycho". That kills your entire thesis; loyalty is not enough.
That's why there are coercive laws against espionage and the like. The honor system is really just not going to work. You use data control measures in conjunction with investigations, audits, lie detector tests, legal action against leakers, etc. It's nuts to just say that you have to make everyone happy because you admitted that you cannot. How do you detect the occasional psycho and stop him or her from leaking unless you have data control systems and routine audits to detect them? Or unless you have laws to punish them to persuade them from stopping?
TL;DR: Honor or loyalty isn't enough; you need all of the above.
PRISM is supposedly not reading the contents of your mail. Forget the honor system; it's just that there isn't enough computing power to store and review all of it. (There are reports that England stores all domestic data for a rolling three day period, but I don't think the US can do it because of how fucking huge its portion of the Internet is.)
PRISM is supposed to build a spiderweb of everyone you talk to, and who they talk to, etc. out of every fucking sort of data system that the NSA can get their grubby little hands on. It is the overlay of these data nets that is so fucking scary. I am 100% certain that PRISM has access to banking information. You know how American Express calls you with a suspicious activity alert because they know you have never bought $50.00 in burritos from Chipotle before? Imagine that information, the link from the AMEX account to your personal email, the address, etc. etc. etc.
We already knew about PRISM since 2006. Or rather, we knew about the giant government wiretapping program that worked in conjunction with telecoms to steal our data. There was a lawsuit and a documentary about the whole thing.
Snowden isn't a hero. If he only revealed PRISM, I'd root for him, but his disclosures about Stuxnet, hacking against China, etc. make me think that the guy is just a deluded, self-important loon who gives zero shits about America.
This is a very naive and unrealistic worldview. You cannot run any sort of organization if everyone gets a right to veto. Keep in mind that workers with ministerial duties such as secretaries and janitors have access to secure zones and informations. Thus, loyalty will definitely not work because not everyone in an organization of any sort can be loyal, especially when there are third parties paying millions to get this information.
In a perfect world, the CIA, NSA, and other guys don't need to keep secrets. But they do. Your solution is the honor system? LOL. Anyway, Edward Snowden swore a vow that he intended to break. He has no honor or personal ethics. Note that in 2009, Edward Snowden was perfectly fine with government espionage and wiretapping, and excoriated the NY Times and Wikileaks for divulging that information.
I love the notion that every single country is exactly the same, and the racist notion that you seem to have that all Muslims are the same. Pakistan and Iran are not the same country despite both being Muslim. Iran was run by a psycho who kept on talking about the elimination of countries. Now, that's not to say that Pakistan didn't proliferate nuclear technology or talk shit, but Iran was much more provocative than Pakistan, and you shouldn't just bundle them together because they're Muslim.
It's doubtful that Russia and the United States will discuss a reduction in deployed arms with such naivete that it can be bypassed by keeping the inactive warheads in fire-ready condition. A certain level of "stockpiled" warheads is necessary to support the level of "deployed" warheads due to testing, maintenance, and verification. A reduction in deployed warheads will eventually lead to a reduction in stockpiled arms once we built up the political will to dismantle the suckers.
You're also incorrect when you conclude that just because we have stealth bombers and fighters with global reach, any stockpiled weapon can be deployed right away. There's absolutely no reason to do that when you already have fire-ready warheads cocked and ready to go. Unless, of course, if we already fired all of the 2000 or so deployed warheads and we have to go picking at the bottom of the barrel. More important, we have most of our deterrents stuck in missiles and cruise missiles. We are not going to deliver 2000 nuclear warheads by plane anytime soon.
I did a couple of internet searches, watched some videos and an hour later I was standing in the now unlocked utility room looking at a VERY adjustable thermostat which then got set to 75 for the rest of the winter. When it got too hot we'd just open a window.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not even that she wants vaccines that are proven to be 100% safe with no side-effects. She wants vaccines that she thinks is 100% safe with no side-effects. There is already significant medical evidence that vaccines are worth the cost-benefit analysis but she just thinks that doctors and big pharma are horrible folk who just want to rip her off.
The problem is that she's the face of the issue. She is not going on TV saying, "I'm Jenny the Playboy Playmate." She's saying, "I'm Jenny the mother who just knows that vaccines aren't what doctors say they are all cracked up to be." That makes her more pernicious than a crackpot who publishes a report saying that thimerosol causes autism. Basically, she's the Bill Nye the Science Guy of the anti-vaccination crowd.
Google doesn't have to make software in order to make money. About half of its revenue comes from advertising. All Google has to do is to grow the number of consumers who use the Internet. As long as Gmail, Google Search, and Android keep people using Google to search, then Google can sell ads, and then Google can make money. AdSense and AdWords are revolutionary. It's so easy to buy and sell ads using the Google system. The bottom line is to force the advance of Internet capable systems.
That's why Google fostered Android. You can hate Android, but you can't deny that it increased the number of mobile Internet devices, and that most of those users rely upon Google services. Chrome made web-browsing more consistent, which meant that webmasters could make better pages, which meant more advertising. So Google doesn't care who makes the smart phones so long as smart phones are being made.
It sounds like you're missing the part where you have to plug your vaunted HDMI cable into something. Perhaps you have a HTPC or a Plex Server. Who knows? But the Chromecast costs $35 (and was on sale for $25) so you can stream without having to set up a HTPC.
The problem with customs domains is that it created another attack vector that no one really thinks about. The attacker hijacked his mx records and directed his email away. Up until now, I was sitting pretty thinking that I was safe because I used LastPass to create a long fucking Google Apps password and Google Authenticator for two-factor security. I never considered the notion that someone could hijack my mx records. I'm going over to namecheap to enable two-factor authentication.
Wake up. The rest of the world spies on our industries as well. I'm not even talking about China I'm talking about. Read the Wiki articles on the topic. The French are our allies but are also pretty big industrial spies. It's also old news that the NSA spies for American industry. When Boeing was bidding on a Saudi deal, the other side offered a bribe. The NSA picked up on it and disclosed it to the Saudis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
These idiots probably designed those flyers on a Mac using Microsoft Office, and used Google to find all the facts and allegations in their flyers.
That's not what first-to-file means. Even if Bitcoin is never patented, the Patent Office can still (and should) reject the JP Morgan application based on the Bitcoin prior art. First-to-file means that if JP Morgan files first, the Bitcoin people cannot obtain priority over JP Morgan, as JP Morgan filed first despite inventing second.
Seriously, if I had a secret compartment in my car, I would keep a copy of the King James Bible, a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and a registered handgun in there.
Electronics tend to have a bathtub failure curve. Like us, electronics tend to die in their infancy or of old age. When I get hardware for work, I still break them in before "putting them into production," i.e., use them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve
The problem hasn't been one with material sciences. The Air Force had wanted to preserve the "through-the-canopy" ejection option in the T-38, where the crew is shot through the canopy during the eject sequence. This makes low-level ejections faster because you don't have to wait for the canopy to separate before firing the ejection motors. However, this clearly makes it harder to make the canopy resistant to bird strikes. Other TTC systems destroy the canopy with embedded det cord but in a high-speed trainer, you probably are okay with a regular ejection sequence.
I have a Ford Fusion that has the Assisted Parking Technology. The driver has to remain in the car, shift gears, and hit the gas and brake pedals. The new system takes care of all of that.
Apple isn't complaining that it costs $2.4 million a month to work around the patent or that there are 500,000 complaints after the workaround was instituted. The patent-holder brought up these facts to show that their patent should carry a hefty royalty payment because Apple could not work around them--not only do you have to pay $2.4 million a month you also have to lower quality to the extent where you have 500,000 complaints even after paying that money.
Dear Uneducated Citizen:
Our Founding Fathers were okay with slavery. Who really cares what they envisioned with regard to what's okay and what's not okay?
Yours,
An Educated Citizen
Did you read the decision? It sounds like you based your comment on a quick read of the summary. The decision focused on a very specific issue:
The spying program is supposed to spy on foreigners and Americans who talk to them. The "F" in the FISC and FISA stands for "Foreign". If you call someone in Pakistan, they're allowed to spy on you. But they are collecting everyone's phone call metadata. Is that spying? According to the US Supreme Court, no. Commonsense? Uh, probably.
When will people understand that the U.S. military loses these mock battle so they can demand more funding? American aircraft were outnumbered 3:1 at Cope Indian. But that allows us to say, "Oh, noes, we lost to Indians. We need $100 billion in new planes." From an article: "The Cope India exercise also seemingly shocked some in Congress and the Pentagon who used the event to renew the call for modernizing the U.S. fighter force with stealthy F/A-22s and F-35 Joint Strike Fighters."
It's really a matter of money, time, and process. I have referred to this article for years. Writing mission-critical code is about having a process in place that sets standards, guidelines, and checks and balances. These guys wrote code that had 420,000 lines and only one bug; commercial quality code of equivalent complexity would have 5,000 errors. They are one of four organizations in the world rated SEI Level 5.
The most important part is the constant red-teaming. Verifiers are allowed to go to town and challenge the coders. It is clear that the rest of NASA doesn't have this mentality. We have seen shuttles explode and crash and burn because some political guy told the engineers to go fuck themselves. Imagine if there were a red-team that could have went to HQ and said, "We're not launching because of blow-by on the O-rings, and it's too fucking cold for too fucking long for the O-rings to stay pliant."
If anyone in the organization can frustrate the purposes of the organization by unauthorized disclosure, that would constitute a veto under any real definition of the word. You can have every system in the world to address their grievances but sometimes, there are just nuts who cannot be placated. It is naive that loyalty is the only thing that works. But then you acknowledge that by saying that you have to chase down the "occasional psycho". That kills your entire thesis; loyalty is not enough.
That's why there are coercive laws against espionage and the like. The honor system is really just not going to work. You use data control measures in conjunction with investigations, audits, lie detector tests, legal action against leakers, etc. It's nuts to just say that you have to make everyone happy because you admitted that you cannot. How do you detect the occasional psycho and stop him or her from leaking unless you have data control systems and routine audits to detect them? Or unless you have laws to punish them to persuade them from stopping?
TL;DR: Honor or loyalty isn't enough; you need all of the above.
PRISM is supposedly not reading the contents of your mail. Forget the honor system; it's just that there isn't enough computing power to store and review all of it. (There are reports that England stores all domestic data for a rolling three day period, but I don't think the US can do it because of how fucking huge its portion of the Internet is.)
PRISM is supposed to build a spiderweb of everyone you talk to, and who they talk to, etc. out of every fucking sort of data system that the NSA can get their grubby little hands on. It is the overlay of these data nets that is so fucking scary. I am 100% certain that PRISM has access to banking information. You know how American Express calls you with a suspicious activity alert because they know you have never bought $50.00 in burritos from Chipotle before? Imagine that information, the link from the AMEX account to your personal email, the address, etc. etc. etc.
We already knew about PRISM since 2006. Or rather, we knew about the giant government wiretapping program that worked in conjunction with telecoms to steal our data. There was a lawsuit and a documentary about the whole thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
Snowden isn't a hero. If he only revealed PRISM, I'd root for him, but his disclosures about Stuxnet, hacking against China, etc. make me think that the guy is just a deluded, self-important loon who gives zero shits about America.
This is a very naive and unrealistic worldview. You cannot run any sort of organization if everyone gets a right to veto. Keep in mind that workers with ministerial duties such as secretaries and janitors have access to secure zones and informations. Thus, loyalty will definitely not work because not everyone in an organization of any sort can be loyal, especially when there are third parties paying millions to get this information.
In a perfect world, the CIA, NSA, and other guys don't need to keep secrets. But they do. Your solution is the honor system? LOL. Anyway, Edward Snowden swore a vow that he intended to break. He has no honor or personal ethics. Note that in 2009, Edward Snowden was perfectly fine with government espionage and wiretapping, and excoriated the NY Times and Wikileaks for divulging that information.
I love the notion that every single country is exactly the same, and the racist notion that you seem to have that all Muslims are the same. Pakistan and Iran are not the same country despite both being Muslim. Iran was run by a psycho who kept on talking about the elimination of countries. Now, that's not to say that Pakistan didn't proliferate nuclear technology or talk shit, but Iran was much more provocative than Pakistan, and you shouldn't just bundle them together because they're Muslim.
It's doubtful that Russia and the United States will discuss a reduction in deployed arms with such naivete that it can be bypassed by keeping the inactive warheads in fire-ready condition. A certain level of "stockpiled" warheads is necessary to support the level of "deployed" warheads due to testing, maintenance, and verification. A reduction in deployed warheads will eventually lead to a reduction in stockpiled arms once we built up the political will to dismantle the suckers.
You're also incorrect when you conclude that just because we have stealth bombers and fighters with global reach, any stockpiled weapon can be deployed right away. There's absolutely no reason to do that when you already have fire-ready warheads cocked and ready to go. Unless, of course, if we already fired all of the 2000 or so deployed warheads and we have to go picking at the bottom of the barrel. More important, we have most of our deterrents stuck in missiles and cruise missiles. We are not going to deliver 2000 nuclear warheads by plane anytime soon.
Way to think of the environment.