Blasphemy! Expecting the summary to not include information that can be found in any of the numerous links? How dare you expect people to learn to read on the internet!
Yeah, it is too bad that the whole UN, and all the US politicians bought it that Saddam was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors after being given a final ultimatum, it is too bad that he was giving speeches about gassing Iranians. It is just too bad that you are so hyper partisan that you can't even see that most of the world thought he had the WMD because he was acting like he did and was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors.
IT depends on your definition of affordable. WSUS is a free application, but it might require a Windows Server and/or Domain. But, that isn't the point, it is perfectly possible for a Windows machine to not show the Windows 10 update if it is on a domain, and/or using WSUS.
My Windows 7 machine never showed the update, I had to manually run it. But, that was because my Windows 7 machine was Pro, and joined to a domain.
When I was younger, I was taught that you don't use your real name online, it is basic security. Not sure why that would be a negative in any job, but I can't say I was ever asked for my Facebook or whatever social media account in any job interview.
I did have a C level at a small company I worked for friend me on Facebook, but that was because we were friendly towards each other, not to get all the juice about me. I don't actually use Facebook, I just have an account because it is expected in many circles.
I don't care if you disagree with me or not. Choosing to ignore links to evidence you don't agree with it freaking retarded and you should be ashamed of yourself.
At this point it is obvious you have no interest in actually understanding the issue, you would rather call it horseshit when someone confronts you on your lies instead of actually understanding the issues and reading up on them. It is your loss, not mine, as I defend the constitution, where you just claim to.
I am guessing that the ACs don't know that it is perfectly possible to not have it show, one way is to use WSUS which automagically blocks it from showing.
Wow, you really are retarded. I think you are the first Slashdot commenter I have come across with that condition. It is your choice to ignore evidence, claiming I don't think for myself because you are too stupid to click a link and look at an image is sad.
I'll summarize for you. The federal government owns >40% of every western state. They own 84.5% of Nevada. They seized the land from these ranchers to "manage" it, somehow they can manage it better than the ranchers who legally owned the land, even though it is being used for the same purpose and loaned back to the original owner.
Wikipedia is about the last source for good information as they are more slanted than any of the news stations.
Since Windows 7, Microsoft has included Windows Defender in the installation package. Windows Defender was a #1 virus scanner that MS bought out. Do you really need to disable Defender and install another virus scanner?
If they had proof of what the phone contained, they wouldn't need to search it. They need to search it as there is a high probability that they didn't plan the attack all on their own, and had outside help. How would you expect the FBI to discover the truth of this without searching the phone?
It isn't like the FBI is refusing to pay Apple for the patch either, this isn't expected to cost nothing.
Also, as the state is the owner of the phone, probable cause isn't needed, as complete permission was already obtained.
I am very confused about the damage a patch that is keyed to a specific phone could do, they can't reverse engineer the patch any more than they could create their own as it still wouldn't be signed by the Apple code signing key. Not sure how you leap from "make a patch for this specific phone" to damaging Apple's reputation worldwide.
It does cover it, however, it is a very specific case that is allowed, does this seizure count for that? If they are allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle on the property being seized, why did they even take the property in the first place?
The specific clause of the Fifth amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
So, how is it being taken for "public use" when the government isn't even using it for anything but allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle still? What "public use" is it being put to?
As far as I have heard, there was only one person involved in setting up the server, and he has agreed to give testimony as long as he is not prosecuted for it himself.
FYI, despite what the media keeps indicating, there are more than two political parties in the US. Last presidential election, I believe there were six total candidates that made it to the final ballot, not two. Therefore, Trump and Hillary are not the only selections for president (if they both win their nominations, which looks pretty likely today).
I expect that this election will have the highest rate of third party votes of any, as many people I talk to seem to feel the same way. I don't want to see either of them in office.
Slashdot Mirror
For those curious, I am guessing AC is refering to this:
http://ollydbg.de/Paperbak/
I'm so glad that I don't live in North Korea than.
Despite everything you read, the US isn't a police state.
I cannot attest for the accuracy as I didn't look into any of the sources:
http://www.redstate.com/aarong...
https://www.commentarymagazine...
http://lwv.org/blog/georgia-ex... (indicates it was people listed in the wrong district/going to the wrong district)
https://www.truthorfiction.com... (some claims true, most false, but the true ones are very interesting)
There have been districts with >100% voter turn out as recently as last election, but I guess the dead voting is normal to you.
http://www.thechumbystore.com/...
The funny thing is that the chumby store link has "new" Sony DASH units for $99.
Blasphemy! Expecting the summary to not include information that can be found in any of the numerous links? How dare you expect people to learn to read on the internet!
Not sure what hospital you go to, but this is actually common practice in most hospitals in the US.
Yeah, it is too bad that the whole UN, and all the US politicians bought it that Saddam was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors after being given a final ultimatum, it is too bad that he was giving speeches about gassing Iranians. It is just too bad that you are so hyper partisan that you can't even see that most of the world thought he had the WMD because he was acting like he did and was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors.
IT depends on your definition of affordable. WSUS is a free application, but it might require a Windows Server and/or Domain. But, that isn't the point, it is perfectly possible for a Windows machine to not show the Windows 10 update if it is on a domain, and/or using WSUS.
My Windows 7 machine never showed the update, I had to manually run it. But, that was because my Windows 7 machine was Pro, and joined to a domain.
When I was younger, I was taught that you don't use your real name online, it is basic security. Not sure why that would be a negative in any job, but I can't say I was ever asked for my Facebook or whatever social media account in any job interview.
I did have a C level at a small company I worked for friend me on Facebook, but that was because we were friendly towards each other, not to get all the juice about me. I don't actually use Facebook, I just have an account because it is expected in many circles.
and use of encrypted communications is considered suspicious [alternet.org].
Man...that must be hell for all those people using online banking, email, or any other SSL/TLS encrypted communications stream.
I don't care if you disagree with me or not. Choosing to ignore links to evidence you don't agree with it freaking retarded and you should be ashamed of yourself.
At this point it is obvious you have no interest in actually understanding the issue, you would rather call it horseshit when someone confronts you on your lies instead of actually understanding the issues and reading up on them. It is your loss, not mine, as I defend the constitution, where you just claim to.
You really should install at least that definition update and the drivers. Unless you know the drivers won't work at least.
I am guessing that the ACs don't know that it is perfectly possible to not have it show, one way is to use WSUS which automagically blocks it from showing.
Wow, you really are retarded. I think you are the first Slashdot commenter I have come across with that condition. It is your choice to ignore evidence, claiming I don't think for myself because you are too stupid to click a link and look at an image is sad.
I'll summarize for you. The federal government owns >40% of every western state. They own 84.5% of Nevada. They seized the land from these ranchers to "manage" it, somehow they can manage it better than the ranchers who legally owned the land, even though it is being used for the same purpose and loaned back to the original owner.
Wikipedia is about the last source for good information as they are more slanted than any of the news stations.
Oh god no...I wouldn't be able to get to work for like a month...actually, that would be pretty nice.
http://bigthink.com/strange-ma...
Feel free to read up on it and enlighten yourself.
I will reply to you with the same thing I replied to the AC above you. Do you realize how much land we are talking about here?
http://bigthink.com/strange-ma...
So I am assuming you have zero clue how much land we are speaking of?
http://bigthink.com/strange-ma...
The majority of several states are owned by the federal government. This isn't a national park, it is a totally different system.
Since Windows 7, Microsoft has included Windows Defender in the installation package. Windows Defender was a #1 virus scanner that MS bought out. Do you really need to disable Defender and install another virus scanner?
If they had proof of what the phone contained, they wouldn't need to search it. They need to search it as there is a high probability that they didn't plan the attack all on their own, and had outside help. How would you expect the FBI to discover the truth of this without searching the phone?
It isn't like the FBI is refusing to pay Apple for the patch either, this isn't expected to cost nothing.
Also, as the state is the owner of the phone, probable cause isn't needed, as complete permission was already obtained.
I am very confused about the damage a patch that is keyed to a specific phone could do, they can't reverse engineer the patch any more than they could create their own as it still wouldn't be signed by the Apple code signing key. Not sure how you leap from "make a patch for this specific phone" to damaging Apple's reputation worldwide.
http://humanevents.com/2014/04...
It does cover it, however, it is a very specific case that is allowed, does this seizure count for that? If they are allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle on the property being seized, why did they even take the property in the first place?
The specific clause of the Fifth amendment:
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
So, how is it being taken for "public use" when the government isn't even using it for anything but allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle still? What "public use" is it being put to?
As far as I have heard, there was only one person involved in setting up the server, and he has agreed to give testimony as long as he is not prosecuted for it himself.
FYI, despite what the media keeps indicating, there are more than two political parties in the US. Last presidential election, I believe there were six total candidates that made it to the final ballot, not two. Therefore, Trump and Hillary are not the only selections for president (if they both win their nominations, which looks pretty likely today).
I expect that this election will have the highest rate of third party votes of any, as many people I talk to seem to feel the same way. I don't want to see either of them in office.