I hadn't heard Trump say it. I was referencing Nixon. Except that in this case it seems to largely apply. I may have gone too far saying, "whatever he damn well pleases," but it's true with regard to disclosing classified information.
I wasn't talking so much about him disclosing classified info (especially since, as I don't believe this happened, you can't classify information that doesn't exist) but rather his tweeting habits as a whole. It took a bullet in 1914 to start World War I. What can a tweet start in 2017?
You damn well can't just say whatever you want, because at best it can cost people money. Worst case, it can cost people their lives.
You say that as if you think Trump actually gives a shit about costing other people money or their lives. I think Trump loves the fact that he can move markets with nothing more than a fact free tweet from the toilet.
That's the point I am trying to make. Trump either doesn't know or doesn't care. And the problem is a President has to know and has to care.
How does that mean he can't tweet "whatever he wants." The point was there's no higher power stopping from from speaking.
The higher power is his duty to faithfully represent the United States and guide its government.
Sure, but Trump only really cares about himself. This is probably true for most politicians, except they may also care about their party. The country and (most of) its people are way down on the list, just below corporations and rich people. I/we could probably list many examples on both sides of the aisle, but I'll simply refer to recent events since January 20th, like the newly released Republican formulated American Health Care Act.
/cynical
That's true, but most career politicians have had it ingrained in them to at least appear to adhere to a higher power and that they serve the people. Haven't you noticed how almost everyone (especially Republicans) magically find religion a couple years before they start running for a major office? Trump basically just said "Fuck it", and people are eating it up.
How does that mean he can't tweet "whatever he wants." The point was there's no higher power stopping from from speaking.
The higher power is his duty to faithfully represent the United States and guide its government. He's not tweeting things like "I hate Taco Tuesday", thereby preventing all Tex-Mex restaurants in the US from offering cheap tacos on Tuesday. He has directly tweeted accusations that the prior administration broke federal law and did something so unethical that Congress is required to investigate and, if true (which so far there is zero evidence of it being true), would shake the very foundation of American government-especially considering the hostile and adversarial political climate currently in the US. He has used tweets to lay blame for the effects of ill-conceived and horribly executed Executive orders not on his orders but on companies who were in no way involved (ie. the travel ban). He tweeted about cancelling the new Air Force One contract and Boeing's stock dropped immediately (in fairness it did recover once people realized he wouldn't actually do it). Presidents have Press Secretaries, speechwriters, and communications staffers precisely because his words carry so much weight that they have to be carefully considered, otherwise you risk very serious fallout or collateral damage. He's not a reality TV host anymore, or someone who just licenses his name to everything from belts to buildings: he represents 320 million people and the largest military spender in the world by far. Being an unfiltered loudmouth is the last thing you want to be in that situation.
The president enjoys authority over classified information, of course, but at a minimum it would be highly irregular to disclose an intelligence wiretap via Twitter.
A General Hayden explained on the Late Show the other night that the president can tweet whatever he damned well pleases
No, he can't. When the President tweets his every thought, any tweet can literally cost taxpayer money or affect domestic or foreign policy. Trump tweets these claims about wiretapping, and now Congress has to do an investigation. If he tweets some about say, Turkey, that the Turkish government doesn't like, they could expel diplomats or sever diplomatic ties. If he tweets something about North Korea that pisses them off, they might fire off a missile or 2, or shell a South Korean island. Hell, his tweets have actually affected the stock prices of companies when he tweets negative things about them (and has even blamed companies for problems caused by the travel ban in his tweets). As President every word you say, every statement you make, has the weight of the US government and military behind it. You damn well can't just say whatever you want, because at best it can cost people money. Worst case, it can cost people their lives.
A new survey reveals that a majority of IT executives believe investment in IT service management (ITSM) is important to gain the agility needed to compete in an era of global, cross-industry disruption and digital transformation.
Translation please? I don't have my buzzword translation chart handy.
All he is doing is assisting people in accessing programs that the US government has already decided to offer. If they don't want people to utilize those programs then they should cancel them. These are just immigration applications anyway. The government is free to reject those applications for any reasons it deems fit.
Socialist gov LOVE to give away money they rob from others...
Immigration is part of being a country. In fact this country was built on immigration, and American culture is like no other culture on the planet specifically because of immigration and how in most cases immigrants are fully assimilated within a generation or 2.
You act like this chatbot is handing out free money. It's not. Only if applicants are admitted for immigration to they have the opportunity to get assistance: for food stamps "Qualified immigrant children, refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of deportation/removal, Cuban/Haitian entrants, certain Amerasian immigrants, Iraqi and Afghan special immigrants, survivors of trafficking, qualified immigrant veterans, active duty military, and their spouses and children, lawful permanent residents with credit for 40 quarters of work history, certain Native Americans, lawfully residing Hmong and Laotian tribe members, and immigrants receiving disability-related assistance are eligible regardless of their date of entry into the U.S. Qualified immigrant seniors who were born before August 22, 1931, may be eligible if they were lawfully residing in the U.S. on August 22, 1996. Other qualified immigrant adults, however, must wait until they have been in qualified status for five years before they can secure critical nutrition assistance." In fact, unless the immigrants meet one of those classes above, they are restricted for 5 years from receiving aid from "Medicaid (except for emergency care), CHIP, TANF, SNAP, and SSI." And that's only for qualified immigrants. Others, including illegal immigrants, aren't elligible for any type of federal assistance.
All he is doing is assisting people in accessing programs that the US government has already decided to offer. If they don't want people to utilize those programs then they should cancel them. These are just immigration applications anyway. The government is free to reject those applications for any reasons it deems fit.
It comes and goes. Amazon is looking to get into the brick and mortar department, Wal-Mart is booming, and Target isn't doing too bad.
Target has seen dropping sales for the past 6 quarters. So they are struggling too.
Oh, and off topic, but Slashdot, you are now serving an ad that takes you away from the comment box when you are typing. An ad is literally keeping people from participating in this site. You need to fix that. Now
The mere act of using a private email for government business is wrong and should be punished. However, let us not forget that the point of all of this anger isn't the fact that a personal email was used. The anger came about because of what was found on said personal email server. Let us compare between the two politicians:
Did Mike share top secret information over his personal email? No.
Did Mike use his personal email to share deleterious information about any of his campaigns? No.
Did Mike say or do anything particularly damning in his emails (pizza anyone)? No.
Did Mike scrub his email server hardware after the fact during an investigation? No.
Did Mike use his personal email to discuss P4P "donations" to a personal charity? No.
How do you know? He's had months to scrub the emails before he began archiving them. That's why politicians shouldn't use private accounts for official business whether it's illegal or not. Even if he didn't intend to, it gives the appearance of deception and clearly provides the opportunity to do so. Scandals are created and careers destroyed on the mere possibility of impropriety all the time. Look at Flynn.
The summary mentions that. However it's still an incredibly bad idea for an elected official to use a personal email for any type of official work as it provides an easy way to hide documents and correspondence that should be in the public record or at least archived. The fact that he only recently started archiving the work emails from his private account strongly suggests that he had no intentions to do so unless pressed for them. In light of the furor that Republicans built up after Hillary's email issue, the fact that someone high up in the current administration did essentially the same thing (no matter if it was allowed or not) smacks of hypocrisy.
And the mall owner shouldn't worry too much, I'm sure they will always find another cell phone store to plug that hole.
Mall owners are worrying too. Large retail/clothing stores like JC Penny, Macys, and Sears are closing up everywhere, and Amazon and other online retailers are taking a big bite out of the smaller stores that typically populate malls.
Actually, no. Reese clearly states that the first Terminators were easy to spot as they had rubber skin. It was only later models that had human skin which made it easier to infiltrate.
She definitely shouldn't have mixed the harassment and equal pay claims. That will only hurt her case. The "equal pay" claims will be impossible to prove anything and will make her just look like she nagging and therefore draw more skepticism into her harassment claims. The harassment, if true, is unacceptable. That kind of behavior is impossible to ever get away from completely, but management's reaction to it especially within a company that public, should be way better.
To be fair for Tesla, if the previous holders of the position she took over have extensive experience at other manufacturers it is quite possible that they qualified for a higher wage based on experience alone. I work with people that do the exact same job I do but have 30 more years with the company than I do. I would expect them to make more than me. Same job rarely equals same pay between people unless it is a very cookie-cutter and dead end job.
I've been flagging every as I could as "covering content".
You see ads? I have them all blocked and never see any. No I don't give a shit about slashdot's bad business model. I'd happily pay a subscription but they can't be bothered to give me the option. So fuck 'em and the ad networks they rode in on.
I block them with Noscript on my desktop. But I spend most of my time on my work-provided laptop which means no ad blockers.
I've been flagging every as I could as "covering content". I'm sure it does nothing, but at least it removes the ads (the one that you can close and report at least-that damn tikka masala ad from yesterday kept me from reading a few articles because it took up half the screen on my laptop and it wouldn't go away)
To me unwarranted means unpermitted. So no permit purchased from the city. No proof of inspections for wiring, water,gas, etc so you don't know the quality of the work. It also could mean that the house isn't assessed the correct amount of tax which the current owner could be liable for. Also if you purchase the house and the government finds out they could force you to demolish the work on your own dime even if the work was done by the previous owner. When we bought our house 2 years ago we didn't purchase a house almost solely because an undermined addition was added to the house and we didn't want any liability from it.
.
Worse than all of them are the congressvermin who grow rich on what would be insider trading for anyone else and then still find a way to use up all their wealth on wine and vacations to places with very un-American legal opinions about forced prostitution.
They don't pay for those vacations, we do. And they prefer to call them "fact-finding" missions.
You chose to live and work out there. Meanwhile, here in metro Atlanta (which has a pretty decent tech scene itself, although it's not my field), I own a house and have 2 paid off cars on a combined income of 90k between me and my wife. This even includes paying off student loans every month and putting money away into savings. My wife's sister's family makes it on my brother-in-law's $80-90k a year salary at Redstone with 3 kids. You can get by just fine on less than 100k in NC near the research triangle as well (and Charlotte is big with banking if working in the financial sector is your thing). There's more to the country than just SF/SV and NYC
Why should I be someone's guinea pig for new features when this phone meets 99% of my needs.
Out of curiosity, assuming you are doing a payment plan and not paying for the phone outright, if the phone meets 99% of your needs why are you upgrading every 2-3 years as soon as you get your old device paid off? With the 2 year upgrade cycle people are locking themselves into perpetual device payments.
There is pent-up demand for a new iPhone, even if it does not offer breakthrough technologies
No, not really. As long as it gets security updates and still works, why bother upgrading? I just replaced the battery in my iPhone and expect to get at least a couple more years out of it.
My wife finally replaced her iPhone 4 last year. With one of my parents' old iPhone 5 that they had laying around since they both now have work provided phones. Even phones that are 2 generations old are still plenty good enough these days. I was using my S5 until last week when it got smashed in my car door to the point the display was shot. It's the only reason I now have an S7, but I was planning to hold on to my S5 for at least another couple years.
Slashdot Mirror
The question is: was the surveillance legitimate? Or was it done for political purposes?
No, the question is: did this actually happen in the first place? Only once that has been established does your question come into play.
I hadn't heard Trump say it. I was referencing Nixon. Except that in this case it seems to largely apply. I may have gone too far saying, "whatever he damn well pleases," but it's true with regard to disclosing classified information.
I wasn't talking so much about him disclosing classified info (especially since, as I don't believe this happened, you can't classify information that doesn't exist) but rather his tweeting habits as a whole. It took a bullet in 1914 to start World War I. What can a tweet start in 2017?
You damn well can't just say whatever you want, because at best it can cost people money. Worst case, it can cost people their lives.
You say that as if you think Trump actually gives a shit about costing other people money or their lives. I think Trump loves the fact that he can move markets with nothing more than a fact free tweet from the toilet.
That's the point I am trying to make. Trump either doesn't know or doesn't care. And the problem is a President has to know and has to care.
How does that mean he can't tweet "whatever he wants." The point was there's no higher power stopping from from speaking.
The higher power is his duty to faithfully represent the United States and guide its government.
Sure, but Trump only really cares about himself. This is probably true for most politicians, except they may also care about their party. The country and (most of) its people are way down on the list, just below corporations and rich people. I/we could probably list many examples on both sides of the aisle, but I'll simply refer to recent events since January 20th, like the newly released Republican formulated American Health Care Act.
That's true, but most career politicians have had it ingrained in them to at least appear to adhere to a higher power and that they serve the people. Haven't you noticed how almost everyone (especially Republicans) magically find religion a couple years before they start running for a major office? Trump basically just said "Fuck it", and people are eating it up.
How does that mean he can't tweet "whatever he wants." The point was there's no higher power stopping from from speaking.
The higher power is his duty to faithfully represent the United States and guide its government. He's not tweeting things like "I hate Taco Tuesday", thereby preventing all Tex-Mex restaurants in the US from offering cheap tacos on Tuesday. He has directly tweeted accusations that the prior administration broke federal law and did something so unethical that Congress is required to investigate and, if true (which so far there is zero evidence of it being true), would shake the very foundation of American government-especially considering the hostile and adversarial political climate currently in the US. He has used tweets to lay blame for the effects of ill-conceived and horribly executed Executive orders not on his orders but on companies who were in no way involved (ie. the travel ban). He tweeted about cancelling the new Air Force One contract and Boeing's stock dropped immediately (in fairness it did recover once people realized he wouldn't actually do it). Presidents have Press Secretaries, speechwriters, and communications staffers precisely because his words carry so much weight that they have to be carefully considered, otherwise you risk very serious fallout or collateral damage. He's not a reality TV host anymore, or someone who just licenses his name to everything from belts to buildings: he represents 320 million people and the largest military spender in the world by far. Being an unfiltered loudmouth is the last thing you want to be in that situation.
The president enjoys authority over classified information, of course, but at a minimum it would be highly irregular to disclose an intelligence wiretap via Twitter.
A General Hayden explained on the Late Show the other night that the president can tweet whatever he damned well pleases
No, he can't. When the President tweets his every thought, any tweet can literally cost taxpayer money or affect domestic or foreign policy. Trump tweets these claims about wiretapping, and now Congress has to do an investigation. If he tweets some about say, Turkey, that the Turkish government doesn't like, they could expel diplomats or sever diplomatic ties. If he tweets something about North Korea that pisses them off, they might fire off a missile or 2, or shell a South Korean island. Hell, his tweets have actually affected the stock prices of companies when he tweets negative things about them (and has even blamed companies for problems caused by the travel ban in his tweets). As President every word you say, every statement you make, has the weight of the US government and military behind it. You damn well can't just say whatever you want, because at best it can cost people money. Worst case, it can cost people their lives.
A new survey reveals that a majority of IT executives believe investment in IT service management (ITSM) is important to gain the agility needed to compete in an era of global, cross-industry disruption and digital transformation.
Translation please? I don't have my buzzword translation chart handy.
All he is doing is assisting people in accessing programs that the US government has already decided to offer. If they don't want people to utilize those programs then they should cancel them. These are just immigration applications anyway. The government is free to reject those applications for any reasons it deems fit.
Socialist gov LOVE to give away money they rob from others...
Immigration is part of being a country. In fact this country was built on immigration, and American culture is like no other culture on the planet specifically because of immigration and how in most cases immigrants are fully assimilated within a generation or 2.
You act like this chatbot is handing out free money. It's not. Only if applicants are admitted for immigration to they have the opportunity to get assistance: for food stamps "Qualified immigrant children, refugees, people granted asylum or withholding of deportation/removal, Cuban/Haitian entrants, certain Amerasian immigrants, Iraqi and Afghan special immigrants, survivors of trafficking, qualified immigrant veterans, active duty military, and their spouses and children, lawful permanent residents with credit for 40 quarters of work history, certain Native Americans, lawfully residing Hmong and Laotian tribe members, and immigrants receiving disability-related assistance are eligible regardless of their date of entry into the U.S. Qualified immigrant seniors who were born before August 22, 1931, may be eligible if they were lawfully residing in the U.S. on August 22, 1996. Other qualified immigrant adults, however, must wait until they have been in qualified status for five years before they can secure critical nutrition assistance." In fact, unless the immigrants meet one of those classes above, they are restricted for 5 years from receiving aid from "Medicaid (except for emergency care), CHIP, TANF, SNAP, and SSI." And that's only for qualified immigrants. Others, including illegal immigrants, aren't elligible for any type of federal assistance.
Source is https://www.nilc.org/issues/ec...
All he is doing is assisting people in accessing programs that the US government has already decided to offer. If they don't want people to utilize those programs then they should cancel them. These are just immigration applications anyway. The government is free to reject those applications for any reasons it deems fit.
It comes and goes. Amazon is looking to get into the brick and mortar department, Wal-Mart is booming, and Target isn't doing too bad.
Target has seen dropping sales for the past 6 quarters. So they are struggling too.
Oh, and off topic, but Slashdot, you are now serving an ad that takes you away from the comment box when you are typing. An ad is literally keeping people from participating in this site. You need to fix that. Now
The mere act of using a private email for government business is wrong and should be punished. However, let us not forget that the point of all of this anger isn't the fact that a personal email was used. The anger came about because of what was found on said personal email server. Let us compare between the two politicians:
Did Mike share top secret information over his personal email? No.
Did Mike use his personal email to share deleterious information about any of his campaigns? No.
Did Mike say or do anything particularly damning in his emails (pizza anyone)? No.
Did Mike scrub his email server hardware after the fact during an investigation? No.
Did Mike use his personal email to discuss P4P "donations" to a personal charity? No.
How do you know? He's had months to scrub the emails before he began archiving them. That's why politicians shouldn't use private accounts for official business whether it's illegal or not. Even if he didn't intend to, it gives the appearance of deception and clearly provides the opportunity to do so. Scandals are created and careers destroyed on the mere possibility of impropriety all the time. Look at Flynn.
The summary mentions that. However it's still an incredibly bad idea for an elected official to use a personal email for any type of official work as it provides an easy way to hide documents and correspondence that should be in the public record or at least archived. The fact that he only recently started archiving the work emails from his private account strongly suggests that he had no intentions to do so unless pressed for them. In light of the furor that Republicans built up after Hillary's email issue, the fact that someone high up in the current administration did essentially the same thing (no matter if it was allowed or not) smacks of hypocrisy.
And the mall owner shouldn't worry too much, I'm sure they will always find another cell phone store to plug that hole.
Mall owners are worrying too. Large retail/clothing stores like JC Penny, Macys, and Sears are closing up everywhere, and Amazon and other online retailers are taking a big bite out of the smaller stores that typically populate malls.
I believe this was how the Terminator started..
Actually, no. Reese clearly states that the first Terminators were easy to spot as they had rubber skin. It was only later models that had human skin which made it easier to infiltrate.
She definitely shouldn't have mixed the harassment and equal pay claims. That will only hurt her case. The "equal pay" claims will be impossible to prove anything and will make her just look like she nagging and therefore draw more skepticism into her harassment claims. The harassment, if true, is unacceptable. That kind of behavior is impossible to ever get away from completely, but management's reaction to it especially within a company that public, should be way better.
To be fair for Tesla, if the previous holders of the position she took over have extensive experience at other manufacturers it is quite possible that they qualified for a higher wage based on experience alone. I work with people that do the exact same job I do but have 30 more years with the company than I do. I would expect them to make more than me. Same job rarely equals same pay between people unless it is a very cookie-cutter and dead end job.
I've been flagging every as I could as "covering content".
You see ads? I have them all blocked and never see any. No I don't give a shit about slashdot's bad business model. I'd happily pay a subscription but they can't be bothered to give me the option. So fuck 'em and the ad networks they rode in on.
I block them with Noscript on my desktop. But I spend most of my time on my work-provided laptop which means no ad blockers.
I've been flagging every as I could as "covering content". I'm sure it does nothing, but at least it removes the ads (the one that you can close and report at least-that damn tikka masala ad from yesterday kept me from reading a few articles because it took up half the screen on my laptop and it wouldn't go away)
To me unwarranted means unpermitted. So no permit purchased from the city. No proof of inspections for wiring, water,gas, etc so you don't know the quality of the work. It also could mean that the house isn't assessed the correct amount of tax which the current owner could be liable for. Also if you purchase the house and the government finds out they could force you to demolish the work on your own dime even if the work was done by the previous owner. When we bought our house 2 years ago we didn't purchase a house almost solely because an undermined addition was added to the house and we didn't want any liability from it.
San Francisco is full of crappy little houses that sell for $1 million because there is so much demand for so little supply.
I love how that listing describes less than 1050 sq ft as "spacious".
. Worse than all of them are the congressvermin who grow rich on what would be insider trading for anyone else and then still find a way to use up all their wealth on wine and vacations to places with very un-American legal opinions about forced prostitution.
They don't pay for those vacations, we do. And they prefer to call them "fact-finding" missions.
You chose to live and work out there. Meanwhile, here in metro Atlanta (which has a pretty decent tech scene itself, although it's not my field), I own a house and have 2 paid off cars on a combined income of 90k between me and my wife. This even includes paying off student loans every month and putting money away into savings. My wife's sister's family makes it on my brother-in-law's $80-90k a year salary at Redstone with 3 kids. You can get by just fine on less than 100k in NC near the research triangle as well (and Charlotte is big with banking if working in the financial sector is your thing). There's more to the country than just SF/SV and NYC
$29.5 million? Think how many Manbearpig hunting expeditions that could fund!
Don't forget Bombardier has the C-Series which is designed as a competitor to the 320/321 and 737 as well.
Why should I be someone's guinea pig for new features when this phone meets 99% of my needs.
Out of curiosity, assuming you are doing a payment plan and not paying for the phone outright, if the phone meets 99% of your needs why are you upgrading every 2-3 years as soon as you get your old device paid off? With the 2 year upgrade cycle people are locking themselves into perpetual device payments.
There is pent-up demand for a new iPhone, even if it does not offer breakthrough technologies
No, not really. As long as it gets security updates and still works, why bother upgrading? I just replaced the battery in my iPhone and expect to get at least a couple more years out of it.
My wife finally replaced her iPhone 4 last year. With one of my parents' old iPhone 5 that they had laying around since they both now have work provided phones. Even phones that are 2 generations old are still plenty good enough these days. I was using my S5 until last week when it got smashed in my car door to the point the display was shot. It's the only reason I now have an S7, but I was planning to hold on to my S5 for at least another couple years.