“I’d love to defend Ben because he has been described as a bomb maker and he’s not a bomb maker,” [Reverend] Marsden said. “He wasn’t a recluse as some have said he is. He was far from that.”
This. He died making explosives. We don't (yet) know whether he was making a bomb.
I expect there will be an investigation that will seek his motives and mind-set -- interviewing friends and family, examining his posts on social media, and so on. For now, we have the supposition (until proven otherwise) of officials that he was making bombs, and the opinion of a reverend (who supposedly knew him) that he was not.
I wonder what's the future for this executive. I mean, many future employer may see him as someone that isn't loyal.
On the other hand, future employers may see him as honest, and that will count for something. Some employers actually do want to know when something unethical or illegal is going on in their company.
He also has a positive review from an industry publication. (See TFS.)
Sure he may sue them unjustified lay-off, but f whistleblower lead to a massive lawsuit, I think they should receive a share of the dollar.
Interesting point. IANAL, but I'm not sure I agree. Strictly speaking, he wasn't harmed by what the company did that he reported. Rather, he was harmed by the company firing him for reporting it. So maybe his complaint should be in a separate lawsuit?
In a race to the bottom? Where the winner gets to take all? Say it isn't so!
Walmart's ruthlessness and unethicality are legendary. It's not a stretch to imagine they'd do something like this.
Huynh went to work for them knowing what they were like. Oh puhleeze, don't try to tell us he didn't know.
Yes, no doubt he was aware of their history. But his supposed a priori awareness is irrelevant.
And then he complains because he got caught in it?
No, he is complaining because he claims he got fired for whistle-blowing. Internal whistle-blowing. Allegedly, he kept his concerns inside the organization, and was rewarded with termination.
Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.
Correct, Mueller's 13 are among the 19 individuals sanctioned. Five organizations also were targeted in the sanctions.
But note that the administration is acting on an authority granted by Congress last summer, with a congressionally-mandated deadline to act by early February, a month and a half ago. Mueller's indictments occurred after that deadline passed.
And now Trump acts. To say he was reluctant is putting it mildly.
If by "accountability" you mean that they'll have to pay a fine that's a fraction of the money they stole
They can't pay more because the money they stole is gone.
Irrelevant. A defendant's ability to pay has (or should have) nothing to do with the amounts of judgements against them.
... and not face any actual jail time, then yes.
Jail/prison should only be used for violent people that are physically dangerous. For everyone else, there are more constructive punishments.
Prison is not just a place to keep dangerous people away from the rest of us. It is also a deterrent, for white-collar crimes as well as violent ones.
Granted, many studies have shown that it is not the level of punishment, but the certainty of receiving it, that acts as a deterrent to crime. Nevertheless, you don't want white-collar criminals to think that they can just buy themselves out of trouble, as though it were the cost of doing business. Jail is a just punishment for all serious crimes.
She raised $700m from investors but is only penalized $500k? I wonder what her net-worth is now? Probably still paid her self a ton during her tenure....
It's in TFS, for crying out loud:
Holmes will have to pay a $500,000 fine and return 18.9 million shares in Theranos that she owned, as well as downgrading her super-majority equity into common stock. The CEO is now barred from serving as the officer or director of a public company for 10 years. In addition, if Theranos is liquidated or acquired, Holmes cannot profit from her remaining shareholding unless $750 million is handed back to defrauded investors.
But since it pushed a desired narrative, it wasn't questioned.
It's being questioned now. Isn't that good enough for you?
It already has been questioned (by Uber), the researchers issued a me culpa, and they're re-doing their analysis to fix it. And yes, that's good enough for anyone -- except the OP.
Fake news is written by fake reporters. It is a deliberate fabrication, intended to cause fear, anger, or confusion. It is never (well, rarely) retracted by its author after it is debunked. It is not the same as editorial commentary. It is not the same as news with errors that get corrected. It is not even the same as news reported with a bias. Fake news is fake.
Forgive me, but I suppose you spent only a short time in Canada as a kid? Canadians usually say "hydro" rather than "mains" (as Brits do?) because so much of the electricity in Canada is generated hydroelectrically.
The really high-end audiophile turntables avoid AC altogether. They use a DC motor powered by a heavily-filtered power supply or a battery. The last thing these folks want is a 60 Hz signal leaking into their system, either from EM noise, or vibration from the motor.
Can I make a request? If someone down-votes a post, I'd like the down-voter's user id to be added to a list of down-voters for that post. Then if you move your mouse over the post's score (ex: "Score:0"), I'd like the list of that post's down-voters to appear in a small pop-up window.
That's a possibility- thanks for the suggestion. Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Yeah. Bad idea. It would breed retaliation.
Better to keep the moderators anonymous, and let meta-moderating take care of abusive moderators.
Also, the algorithm that awards mod-points can be adjusted to reflect someone's ratio of down-mods to up-mods.
No matter what kind of system you set up, there will be users who figure out how to "game" it. Maybe some sentiment analysis and machine learning could be used to find such users, and reduce their chance of moderating.
True, this is evidence that parties matter. But it's also evidence that opposition parties matter.
Even though the effort by the Democrats to call a vote is Quixotic, it puts both parties on record as to where they stand.
Both parties do this, and generally it's a good thing -- unless it's overdone. For example, Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare over 60 times, knowing full well it would never happen. That was abusive of the process.
I see where you're going with this, but I think your argument depends entirely on whether the granting of the FISA renewal was because of Page's denial of the Moscow meetings. I think it's pretty clear it wasn't -- the DOJ simply disclosed it, without making it part of their argument for the warrant. Besides, it doesn't pass the smell-test. How could a denial of an activity possibly be grounds for investigating someone about it?
Further: Even if they included Page's response to Steele's leaks published by Yahoo instead of using the Yahoo to corroborate Steele ( someone RTFM for me...is that part of the GOP claim rebutted?) that's still smells like fruit of the forbidden tree to me. If the cops are investigating you for something and leak to the press that you've done all sorts of crazy shit, then use your public denials as grounds for a warrant to search your house...that wouldn't hold water at trial, would it?
From page 7 of the Democratic memo (emphasis in the original):
In its Court filings, DOJ made proper use of news coverage. The Majority falsely claims that the FISA materials "relied heavily" on a September 23, 2016 Yahoo! News article by Michael Isikoff and that this article "does not corroborate the Steele Dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself." In fact, DOJ referenced Isikoff's article, alongside another article the Majority fails to mention, not to provide separate corroboration for Steele's reporting, but instead to inform the Court of Page's public denial of his suspected meetings in Moscow, which Page also echoed in a September 25, 2016 letter to FBI Director Comey. [remainder of paragraph is redacted.]
It was Steele, not the FBI or DOJ, who leaked Page's story to the press. Steele was fired by the FBI in October 2016 because of that. Is any subsequent investigation of Page fruit from a poison tree? I'd say no. Keep in mind that Page had been on the FBI's radar (and in FISA warrants) for a long time before Steele leaked anything to the press.
I wish I had mod points. Slashdot has become a leftist shithole. I've been here nearly 20 years. People here used to have conversations, but now it's just propaganda for the hard-left.
Since you have been here that long (so have I, and a bit more) you will have noticed that: (a) the political temperature on slashdot has risen steadily; and (b) the dominant side of the debate has shifted with current events and the perspectives of the posting editors.
For example, leading up to and during the 2016 US-election campaign, there was a very strong (I would say dominant) right-wing presence on this site. After Trump got elected, I think the righties went home.
Left or right, let's show up here with the facts and have, as you say, a conversation.
The NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. Nothing more nothing less
No, they're more than that. They're a heat shield for gun manufacturers. NRA VP Wayne LaPierre acts like a rodeo clown to distract public sentiment away from them.
The NRA is pretty much the only organization left sticking up for the Constitution, and I don't see anything in the Constitution giving an unelected body the power to regulate speech just because it's on computers.
Pai deserves a reward for sticking up for the Constitution and removing burdensome government regulation from the Internet.
Net Neutrality did not regulate speech. It stipulated rules that prevented internet providers from regulating it.
Never understood why DVDs and Blu-Rays come bundled with download codes.
The content is literally on the disc you purchased why bother to enter a code or download it from the Internet (I assume with strings attached) when you can just copy content of disc and play it on anything you want?
I've never actually used a download-code, but I imagine they are one-use-only. Whereas, if they let you copy the DVD/BluRay then I would assume someone could find a way to copy it an unlimited number of times.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. Thanks for the improvement. And let's wait to see what the investigation turns up.
Yuk yuk. Now let's look at TFA:
“I’d love to defend Ben because he has been described as a bomb maker and he’s not a bomb maker,” [Reverend] Marsden said. “He wasn’t a recluse as some have said he is. He was far from that.”
Emphasis mine.
This. He died making explosives. We don't (yet) know whether he was making a bomb.
I expect there will be an investigation that will seek his motives and mind-set -- interviewing friends and family, examining his posts on social media, and so on. For now, we have the supposition (until proven otherwise) of officials that he was making bombs, and the opinion of a reverend (who supposedly knew him) that he was not.
I wonder what's the future for this executive. I mean, many future employer may see him as someone that isn't loyal.
On the other hand, future employers may see him as honest, and that will count for something. Some employers actually do want to know when something unethical or illegal is going on in their company.
He also has a positive review from an industry publication. (See TFS.)
Sure he may sue them unjustified lay-off, but f whistleblower lead to a massive lawsuit, I think they should receive a share of the dollar.
Interesting point. IANAL, but I'm not sure I agree. Strictly speaking, he wasn't harmed by what the company did that he reported. Rather, he was harmed by the company firing him for reporting it. So maybe his complaint should be in a separate lawsuit?
In a race to the bottom? Where the winner gets to take all? Say it isn't so!
Walmart's ruthlessness and unethicality are legendary. It's not a stretch to imagine they'd do something like this.
Huynh went to work for them knowing what they were like. Oh puhleeze, don't try to tell us he didn't know.
Yes, no doubt he was aware of their history. But his supposed a priori awareness is irrelevant.
And then he complains because he got caught in it?
No, he is complaining because he claims he got fired for whistle-blowing. Internal whistle-blowing. Allegedly, he kept his concerns inside the organization, and was rewarded with termination.
Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.
Correct, Mueller's 13 are among the 19 individuals sanctioned. Five organizations also were targeted in the sanctions.
But note that the administration is acting on an authority granted by Congress last summer, with a congressionally-mandated deadline to act by early February, a month and a half ago. Mueller's indictments occurred after that deadline passed.
And now Trump acts. To say he was reluctant is putting it mildly.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15...
not prostate. I must read gooder.
Internet Rule 34. That is all. [*keyboard drop*]
If by "accountability" you mean that they'll have to pay a fine that's a fraction of the money they stole
They can't pay more because the money they stole is gone.
Irrelevant. A defendant's ability to pay has (or should have) nothing to do with the amounts of judgements against them.
... and not face any actual jail time, then yes.
Jail/prison should only be used for violent people that are physically dangerous. For everyone else, there are more constructive punishments.
Prison is not just a place to keep dangerous people away from the rest of us. It is also a deterrent, for white-collar crimes as well as violent ones.
Granted, many studies have shown that it is not the level of punishment, but the certainty of receiving it, that acts as a deterrent to crime. Nevertheless, you don't want white-collar criminals to think that they can just buy themselves out of trouble, as though it were the cost of doing business. Jail is a just punishment for all serious crimes.
She raised $700m from investors but is only penalized $500k? I wonder what her net-worth is now? Probably still paid her self a ton during her tenure....
It's in TFS, for crying out loud:
Holmes will have to pay a $500,000 fine and return 18.9 million shares in Theranos that she owned, as well as downgrading her super-majority equity into common stock. The CEO is now barred from serving as the officer or director of a public company for 10 years. In addition, if Theranos is liquidated or acquired, Holmes cannot profit from her remaining shareholding unless $750 million is handed back to defrauded investors.
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
Attributed, in various forms, to many (including Churchill, erroneously) but there is no clear indication of who the original author is.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/...
But since it pushed a desired narrative, it wasn't questioned.
It's being questioned now. Isn't that good enough for you?
It already has been questioned (by Uber), the researchers issued a me culpa, and they're re-doing their analysis to fix it. And yes, that's good enough for anyone -- except the OP.
Fake news is written by fake reporters. It is a deliberate fabrication, intended to cause fear, anger, or confusion. It is never (well, rarely) retracted by its author after it is debunked. It is not the same as editorial commentary. It is not the same as news with errors that get corrected. It is not even the same as news reported with a bias. Fake news is fake.
Thanks. Interesting post.
Forgive me, but I suppose you spent only a short time in Canada as a kid? Canadians usually say "hydro" rather than "mains" (as Brits do?) because so much of the electricity in Canada is generated hydroelectrically.
The really high-end audiophile turntables avoid AC altogether. They use a DC motor powered by a heavily-filtered power supply or a battery. The last thing these folks want is a 60 Hz signal leaking into their system, either from EM noise, or vibration from the motor.
Ask survey questions whose answers you already know. Get cover for policies you were going to make anyway, if you haven't already.
I'm not saying it's good or bad, I'm just saying I think this is what FB is doing.
Y'know, I was starting to feel such withdrawal that I would have welcomed beta, just to have my slashdot back.
(No, not really.)
Can I make a request? If someone down-votes a post, I'd like the down-voter's user id to be added to a list of down-voters for that post. Then if you move your mouse over the post's score (ex: "Score:0"), I'd like the list of that post's down-voters to appear in a small pop-up window.
That's a possibility- thanks for the suggestion. Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Yeah. Bad idea. It would breed retaliation.
Better to keep the moderators anonymous, and let meta-moderating take care of abusive moderators.
Also, the algorithm that awards mod-points can be adjusted to reflect someone's ratio of down-mods to up-mods.
No matter what kind of system you set up, there will be users who figure out how to "game" it. Maybe some sentiment analysis and machine learning could be used to find such users, and reduce their chance of moderating.
Volleyball shaped, with a simple face?
How is this NOT named Wilson?
Copyright. The MPAA would bankrupt IBM. Just sending the attorneys and judge to hear the case in the ISS's jurisdiction would cost a fortune.
Could have been worse. What if they had called it Mickey?
sewing hate
It's funny how people try to stitch negativity into everything they say
Only on some threads here.
True, this is evidence that parties matter. But it's also evidence that opposition parties matter.
Even though the effort by the Democrats to call a vote is Quixotic, it puts both parties on record as to where they stand.
Both parties do this, and generally it's a good thing -- unless it's overdone. For example, Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare over 60 times, knowing full well it would never happen. That was abusive of the process.
I see where you're going with this, but I think your argument depends entirely on whether the granting of the FISA renewal was because of Page's denial of the Moscow meetings. I think it's pretty clear it wasn't -- the DOJ simply disclosed it, without making it part of their argument for the warrant. Besides, it doesn't pass the smell-test. How could a denial of an activity possibly be grounds for investigating someone about it?
Further: Even if they included Page's response to Steele's leaks published by Yahoo instead of using the Yahoo to corroborate Steele ( someone RTFM for me...is that part of the GOP claim rebutted?) that's still smells like fruit of the forbidden tree to me. If the cops are investigating you for something and leak to the press that you've done all sorts of crazy shit, then use your public denials as grounds for a warrant to search your house...that wouldn't hold water at trial, would it?
From page 7 of the Democratic memo (emphasis in the original):
In its Court filings, DOJ made proper use of news coverage. The Majority falsely claims that the FISA materials "relied heavily" on a September 23, 2016 Yahoo! News article by Michael Isikoff and that this article "does not corroborate the Steele Dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself." In fact, DOJ referenced Isikoff's article, alongside another article the Majority fails to mention, not to provide separate corroboration for Steele's reporting, but instead to inform the Court of Page's public denial of his suspected meetings in Moscow, which Page also echoed in a September 25, 2016 letter to FBI Director Comey. [remainder of paragraph is redacted.]
It was Steele, not the FBI or DOJ, who leaked Page's story to the press. Steele was fired by the FBI in October 2016 because of that. Is any subsequent investigation of Page fruit from a poison tree? I'd say no. Keep in mind that Page had been on the FBI's radar (and in FISA warrants) for a long time before Steele leaked anything to the press.
I wish I had mod points. Slashdot has become a leftist shithole. I've been here nearly 20 years. People here used to have conversations, but now it's just propaganda for the hard-left.
Since you have been here that long (so have I, and a bit more) you will have noticed that: (a) the political temperature on slashdot has risen steadily; and (b) the dominant side of the debate has shifted with current events and the perspectives of the posting editors.
For example, leading up to and during the 2016 US-election campaign, there was a very strong (I would say dominant) right-wing presence on this site. After Trump got elected, I think the righties went home.
Left or right, let's show up here with the facts and have, as you say, a conversation.
The NRA is the lobby for gun manufacturers. Nothing more nothing less
No, they're more than that. They're a heat shield for gun manufacturers. NRA VP Wayne LaPierre acts like a rodeo clown to distract public sentiment away from them.
The NRA is pretty much the only organization left sticking up for the Constitution, and I don't see anything in the Constitution giving an unelected body the power to regulate speech just because it's on computers.
Pai deserves a reward for sticking up for the Constitution and removing burdensome government regulation from the Internet.
Net Neutrality did not regulate speech. It stipulated rules that prevented internet providers from regulating it.
Never understood why DVDs and Blu-Rays come bundled with download codes.
The content is literally on the disc you purchased why bother to enter a code or download it from the Internet (I assume with strings attached) when you can just copy content of disc and play it on anything you want?
I've never actually used a download-code, but I imagine they are one-use-only. Whereas, if they let you copy the DVD/BluRay then I would assume someone could find a way to copy it an unlimited number of times.