Way to go Snowden - hiding in a country that has little/no freedom of press and attacking a country prosecuting an individual for releasing state secrets/classified information.
Did he defend his host in any way? No? Then the implied hypocrisy is bullshit. And that's before we get to the fact that he's only in Russia because we canceled his passport before he could leave Russia.
State secrets and classified information is needed for a country to function - otherwise you might as well just tear it apart and offer it up to whoever has the most muscle.
In what way is the country functioning now? Republicans are only interested in helping their party and destroying anyone outside their tribe. We have a president elected despite losing by 3 million votes. We're unable to agree with everyone else and a majority of our citizens that yes, healthcare is something that is important and yes, dumping excess carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is a bad thing. We don't have a functioning state department and are actively turning on our allies. Did a foreign power decide our election? Dunno, the unelected party is preventing any serious investigation.
The country is being fucked up by powerful people, it has nothing to do Reality.
You're drawing a false equivalence. You don't like the Clintons or Trump, fine. The Clintons made some mistakes, sure. What Trump is doing daily though is willfully weakening the US. It's not at all similar.
I don't think guns are an inalienable god-given right, as the right to medical autonomy is. It sounds like I'd favor slightly more restrictions than you would, I assume you're okay with the government banning private sales of grenade launchers, RPGs, etc...
Snowden was even more worried about detection, though I didn’t know it at the time. He expected to be quickly arrested and prevented from speaking for himself, and predicted that the government would use that silence to mischaracterize his intentions. To keep that from happening, Snowden decided to take a highly visible online stand against mass surveillance. Part of his plan included the petition website that he asked me to build.
Evidently, Winner should have first fled to... fuck, I dunno where.
Hopefully the next administration will be elected via actual democracy and can pardon her.
I think it's wildly naive to suspect the people fired weren't mainly "whiners" rather than the source of the problem.
There may have been one or two dudes fired who did harass. Fired of course for not realizing they weren't high up enough to get away with it like their bosses.
Dang. Found on the PDF scans even though you can't see them.
Lessons learned:
1. make sure to take really really low quality scans only of senstitive printouts.
2. Use someone else's printer
3. The "swamp" being drained is evidently people who are reporting on wildly unethical things the government is doing.
Obligatory yes the last guy did it too. STFU and focus on the current abomination in office, maligning the last guy doesn't help anything more than you losing sleep at night.
Wanna fight for pro-choice? Help create that consensus. Get people to think about "what is a person?"
I agree it's important to think about. However I disagree that a consensus is necessary, important, or even possible.
Look at climate change. That's not something that's based on opinion of something undefinable like when does life begin, it's pretty basic chemistry and physics. A few charlatans have been paid off to say "Nah, it's not real." Everyone with an open mind and a basic understanding of the facts agrees it is a problem that must be dealt with. But uninformed voters root for their "team" and point to the charlatans, they have way too much political power, so we get nothing.
You're telling me we should quit trying to demand abortion rights and try to get everyone on the same page first about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Bullshit, you're either being lazy or disingenuous. It'll never happen. The pro-life crowd must be opposed with legislative force, screw their beliefs. This matter will be settled either when a critical mass of pro-lifers die out or when we figure out how to explant an unwanted embryo and keep it alive.
Hell, the ruling party in the US clearly has an interest and no moral qualms about taking the vote away from minorities and women, see Kris Kobach's efforts. Rights need to be demanded and defended with force, not argued for.
We could kill Amazon or Walmart in a heart-beat by not buying things from them.
The oceans could all be drained in a heartbeat if all the water molecules decided to evaporate simultaneously. They won't of course, they have an extremely long history of not simply deciding to do that except when there's a lot of heat. Likewise, most people won't vote with their wallet against corporations, they have a long history of not voting against anything but the worst corporations when a lot of other stuff is going on.
It means that government is limited - that does not have a role in say wage and price freezes (rent control); that it's function is not to redistribute wealth; etc...
I think the problem is we all agree on "small government" and then assume everyone else is with us on the specifics. For me, "small government" means "Not restricting freedoms and rights." Like no laws against abortion.
I'd also argue that having your rights abridged by the government and having your rights abridged by a corporation are different only in that you got to vote for the government. To me, a government that is too small to regulate, say, comcast or health insurance agencies, that's really pretty similar to "big government."
Finally, with wealth inequality reaching the robber barron age, I can't fathom how people would still be saying "government shouldn't redistribute wealth." FFS the fastest way to a situation we'd all consider to be "big government" is through an oligarchy.
I call bullshit. Like how the far right calls people "cucks" whose significant others have not cheated on them. It's just an insult such people find clever.
I missed the process for turning "someone who is opposed to facism" into an insult. But with God as my witness, I am leading the cool crowd on making "Someone who is repulsed by child molesting" into an insult. "Antipedos."
With the current US regime running it into the ground, how is it that we're still making tu quoque fallacies?
Even the GOP seems to be fatiguing of "Yeah well Hillary did something worse one time..."
What about those who call for the destruction of Palestine? If someone doesn't punish all perceived crimes equally, they shouldn't be able to punish any? Fuck off.
It is understandable in some respects, due to this being medicine...lives can be affected by errors, but the regulations aren't just targeted at direct patient interaction...but many other things.
Just to be clear, interactions with the patient are only a tiny slice of what can kill a patient. Making sure a drug companies' formulation facilities are bacterial-free is pretty far removed from patient interactions.
If you're making a test blood poisoning, that's never going to be put into a patient. You want to be sure the raw components are bacterial free though obviously or else the tests are going to be useless and doctors won't know if they're facing blood poisoning or something else. To make sure the raw components are bacterial free you want the facilities to be bacterial free. If you find bacteria, you need to shut down production while you sterilize everything. That's a huge cost.
If you're trying to start selling a cheaper test and you get a report saying you need to shut down production for a week, any sane business is going to say "Hmm... that will kill us... is it REALLY necessary to shut down if we have three bacterial colonies on a single plate? Lets talk to the undergrad who reported the test, ask him if he really wants everyone to lose their jobs? 'Isn't it maybe possible you accidentally sneezed on the plate?'"
Easy to justify: you know your facilities are clean, you spend a shit ton of money cleaning them. And that's just like the doors! That's not even the production vats! No way is the whole thing contaminated. Plus these aren't even going to go into people... You do testing of all the lots of blood tests, you'll know if they're compromised... And besides, any doctor worth his salt is going to be able to identify SEPSIS without a %100.00000000 accurate blood test, it's so common! Fire the kid and ship it.
Regulations are necessary especially when it's not directly interacting with a patient. Yes they are huge barriers to efficiency, granted, but healthcare is simply not a place the free market works at any level. The end result is not sales, it's literally life or death. Society simply does not tolerate that. Investors who get into healthcare and deceive themselves into thinking it is a free market deserve to lose their money. Politicians and pundits who try to reform healthcare towards "free market" are deceiving themselves and or the public, and deserve to be thrown out of their jobs hard. If they try to exempt themselves from such "free market" solutions while subjecting everyone else to it, they deserve literal crucifixion even if they do claim it's just a reconciliation loophole they'll totally close later.
A modern EV motor the size of a canteloupe can replace the entire engine of a typical sedan with the same acceleration characteristics (see the stats on, say, the EMRAX series).
I don't understand. How many libraries of congress would that be?
Hey, give them a break, this is their first response. I'm sure they won't "fix it" for any of us in subsequent drafts. They'll realize they forgot to say "on calls to government bureaucracies not for cases of domestic harassment."
What's with the cargo cult thing? Is this the latest insult from infowars?
Looks like I touched a nerve, if you're immediately launching into a "muh data!" tirade.
Yes. You made a stupid argument that is based on arrogance, not any facts, and that particular argument is letting the rich hurt the country. That is annoying to me.
Boomers did vote for the shit that is hurting younger generations. That they themselves are hurt by the policies they approved is funny, but doesn't change the fact that they signed off on it. Boomers voted for Trump, repeal of financial regulations, repeal of environmental regulations, tax breaks for the wealthy (not millenials) and student aid cuts.
If you are making it on your own, great. If you're making it because you have rich parents, great. If you're making it because you have rich parents but are fooling yourself into thinking it's because of your own hard work... well, gear up to be president one day, you fucking moron.
Slashdot Mirror
Way to go Snowden - hiding in a country that has little/no freedom of press and attacking a country prosecuting an individual for releasing state secrets/classified information.
Did he defend his host in any way? No? Then the implied hypocrisy is bullshit. And that's before we get to the fact that he's only in Russia because we canceled his passport before he could leave Russia.
State secrets and classified information is needed for a country to function - otherwise you might as well just tear it apart and offer it up to whoever has the most muscle.
In what way is the country functioning now? Republicans are only interested in helping their party and destroying anyone outside their tribe. We have a president elected despite losing by 3 million votes. We're unable to agree with everyone else and a majority of our citizens that yes, healthcare is something that is important and yes, dumping excess carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is a bad thing. We don't have a functioning state department and are actively turning on our allies. Did a foreign power decide our election? Dunno, the unelected party is preventing any serious investigation.
The country is being fucked up by powerful people, it has nothing to do Reality.
So would this be the "shooting the messenger" part of the cycle or the "blame the victim" part? I'm confused....
You're drawing a false equivalence. You don't like the Clintons or Trump, fine. The Clintons made some mistakes, sure. What Trump is doing daily though is willfully weakening the US. It's not at all similar.
Yeah, that's not what Hillary did.
She took an oath to uphold our national security and compromised it to cause political mischief.
I would like to hear more on this subject sir.
Way to go Reality. You really made a big difference.
LOL
I don't think guns are an inalienable god-given right, as the right to medical autonomy is. It sounds like I'd favor slightly more restrictions than you would, I assume you're okay with the government banning private sales of grenade launchers, RPGs, etc...
Heck, even under the relatively sane last administration, Snowden didn't seem to have much hope of remaining covert. He seems to have been extremely meticulous, careful, and well versed in remaining secret online, but still understood he would be caught once it dropped no matter what.
Snowden was even more worried about detection, though I didn’t know it at the time. He expected to be quickly arrested and prevented from speaking for himself, and predicted that the government would use that silence to mischaracterize his intentions. To keep that from happening, Snowden decided to take a highly visible online stand against mass surveillance. Part of his plan included the petition website that he asked me to build.
Evidently, Winner should have first fled to... fuck, I dunno where.
Hopefully the next administration will be elected via actual democracy and can pardon her.
I think it's wildly naive to suspect the people fired weren't mainly "whiners" rather than the source of the problem.
There may have been one or two dudes fired who did harass. Fired of course for not realizing they weren't high up enough to get away with it like their bosses.
Who are likely still working there for the moment, having used this as an excuse to purge the undesirables.
Dang. Found on the PDF scans even though you can't see them. Lessons learned:
1. make sure to take really really low quality scans only of senstitive printouts.
2. Use someone else's printer
3. The "swamp" being drained is evidently people who are reporting on wildly unethical things the government is doing.
Obligatory yes the last guy did it too. STFU and focus on the current abomination in office, maligning the last guy doesn't help anything more than you losing sleep at night.
I agree with you there. "When does life begin" Something like three billion years ago. Definitely there should be 9-billionth trimester abortions.
Wanna fight for pro-choice? Help create that consensus. Get people to think about "what is a person?"
I agree it's important to think about. However I disagree that a consensus is necessary, important, or even possible.
Look at climate change. That's not something that's based on opinion of something undefinable like when does life begin, it's pretty basic chemistry and physics. A few charlatans have been paid off to say "Nah, it's not real." Everyone with an open mind and a basic understanding of the facts agrees it is a problem that must be dealt with. But uninformed voters root for their "team" and point to the charlatans, they have way too much political power, so we get nothing.
You're telling me we should quit trying to demand abortion rights and try to get everyone on the same page first about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Bullshit, you're either being lazy or disingenuous. It'll never happen. The pro-life crowd must be opposed with legislative force, screw their beliefs. This matter will be settled either when a critical mass of pro-lifers die out or when we figure out how to explant an unwanted embryo and keep it alive.
Hell, the ruling party in the US clearly has an interest and no moral qualms about taking the vote away from minorities and women, see Kris Kobach's efforts. Rights need to be demanded and defended with force, not argued for.
We could kill Amazon or Walmart in a heart-beat by not buying things from them.
The oceans could all be drained in a heartbeat if all the water molecules decided to evaporate simultaneously. They won't of course, they have an extremely long history of not simply deciding to do that except when there's a lot of heat. Likewise, most people won't vote with their wallet against corporations, they have a long history of not voting against anything but the worst corporations when a lot of other stuff is going on.
It means that government is limited - that does not have a role in say wage and price freezes (rent control); that it's function is not to redistribute wealth; etc...
I think the problem is we all agree on "small government" and then assume everyone else is with us on the specifics. For me, "small government" means "Not restricting freedoms and rights." Like no laws against abortion.
I'd also argue that having your rights abridged by the government and having your rights abridged by a corporation are different only in that you got to vote for the government. To me, a government that is too small to regulate, say, comcast or health insurance agencies, that's really pretty similar to "big government."
Finally, with wealth inequality reaching the robber barron age, I can't fathom how people would still be saying "government shouldn't redistribute wealth." FFS the fastest way to a situation we'd all consider to be "big government" is through an oligarchy.
I call bullshit. Like how the far right calls people "cucks" whose significant others have not cheated on them. It's just an insult such people find clever.
but these Antifa types
I missed the process for turning "someone who is opposed to facism" into an insult. But with God as my witness, I am leading the cool crowd on making "Someone who is repulsed by child molesting" into an insult. "Antipedos."
With the current US regime running it into the ground, how is it that we're still making tu quoque fallacies?
Even the GOP seems to be fatiguing of "Yeah well Hillary did something worse one time..."
What about those who call for the destruction of Palestine? If someone doesn't punish all perceived crimes equally, they shouldn't be able to punish any? Fuck off.
It is understandable in some respects, due to this being medicine...lives can be affected by errors, but the regulations aren't just targeted at direct patient interaction...but many other things.
Just to be clear, interactions with the patient are only a tiny slice of what can kill a patient. Making sure a drug companies' formulation facilities are bacterial-free is pretty far removed from patient interactions.
If you're making a test blood poisoning, that's never going to be put into a patient. You want to be sure the raw components are bacterial free though obviously or else the tests are going to be useless and doctors won't know if they're facing blood poisoning or something else. To make sure the raw components are bacterial free you want the facilities to be bacterial free. If you find bacteria, you need to shut down production while you sterilize everything. That's a huge cost.
If you're trying to start selling a cheaper test and you get a report saying you need to shut down production for a week, any sane business is going to say "Hmm... that will kill us... is it REALLY necessary to shut down if we have three bacterial colonies on a single plate? Lets talk to the undergrad who reported the test, ask him if he really wants everyone to lose their jobs? 'Isn't it maybe possible you accidentally sneezed on the plate?'"
Easy to justify: you know your facilities are clean, you spend a shit ton of money cleaning them. And that's just like the doors! That's not even the production vats! No way is the whole thing contaminated. Plus these aren't even going to go into people... You do testing of all the lots of blood tests, you'll know if they're compromised... And besides, any doctor worth his salt is going to be able to identify SEPSIS without a %100.00000000 accurate blood test, it's so common! Fire the kid and ship it.
Regulations are necessary especially when it's not directly interacting with a patient. Yes they are huge barriers to efficiency, granted, but healthcare is simply not a place the free market works at any level. The end result is not sales, it's literally life or death. Society simply does not tolerate that. Investors who get into healthcare and deceive themselves into thinking it is a free market deserve to lose their money. Politicians and pundits who try to reform healthcare towards "free market" are deceiving themselves and or the public, and deserve to be thrown out of their jobs hard. If they try to exempt themselves from such "free market" solutions while subjecting everyone else to it, they deserve literal crucifixion even if they do claim it's just a reconciliation loophole they'll totally close later.
A modern EV motor the size of a canteloupe can replace the entire engine of a typical sedan with the same acceleration characteristics (see the stats on, say, the EMRAX series).
I don't understand. How many libraries of congress would that be?
Hey, give them a break, this is their first response. I'm sure they won't "fix it" for any of us in subsequent drafts. They'll realize they forgot to say "on calls to government bureaucracies not for cases of domestic harassment."
So "Yes."
Looks like I touched a nerve, if you're immediately launching into a "muh data!" tirade.
Yes. You made a stupid argument that is based on arrogance, not any facts, and that particular argument is letting the rich hurt the country. That is annoying to me.
Did I touch a nerve with the rich parents thing?
Boomers did vote for the shit that is hurting younger generations. That they themselves are hurt by the policies they approved is funny, but doesn't change the fact that they signed off on it. Boomers voted for Trump, repeal of financial regulations, repeal of environmental regulations, tax breaks for the wealthy (not millenials) and student aid cuts.
The data disagrees with your just world fallacy.
If you are making it on your own, great. If you're making it because you have rich parents, great. If you're making it because you have rich parents but are fooling yourself into thinking it's because of your own hard work... well, gear up to be president one day, you fucking moron.
Here is a shock: progress isn't inevitable.
When the financial incentives are as huge as they are for something that's already clearly possible as self-driving cars are? Yes it is.