The story is that for some reason the US public cares more about who gets screwed by the president in the bedroom than who gets screwed by him in office.
They were BOTH utterly unfit for office. And their running mates were what VP have been since Kennedy was shot: An assassination insurance, telling the assassin "if you shoot me, that goofball is president, do you really wanna do it?", so even putting a bullet in both their heads would not have made matters any better.
Trump was not a warning shot. Trump was sinking your own boat so it can't be boarded.
Frankly, whenever a political "discussion" (not so much in the classical sense of an exchange of ideas and debate, more akin to a Jerry Springer show) happens here on/., the only thing you can sensibly do is grab a bag of popcorn and watch both sides of the fence yell increasingly ridiculous bullshit at each other, and enjoy the growing amusement of how The Party managed to trick the population into going at each other's throat instead of addressing the problem.
The only thing that comes to my mind when it comes to US politics is this song.
Electing someone whose only redeeming feature is that he is "against establishment" is a bit like protesting gasoline prices by setting your car on fire. In the end, you're the one who loses most.
I once had a job that was basically reverse engineering well obfuscated software. One of the requirements of the job was also that you didn't have any police record. But... how do you learn to reverse engineer well obfuscated software, let alone how to use the various tools of the trade?
"Don't ask - don't tell" got a whole different meaning there...
And as long as you keep handing them 20% for being the last one on the route, you'll remain the last one on the route. If your behaviour doesn't change based on my behaviour, there is no reason for me to change my behaviour.
So this is going to lead to your ad filter having to filter more ads, because non-targeted ads are cheaper per impression and they need to show more of them to hit the target audiences.
Actually, I'm pretty sure those 840m is WAY more than could be generated by selling licensed content because only a tiny fraction of those copying content would actually even consider paying for it.
Nope, they got their cake and got to eat it too. You have to pay the blank media extortion fee (on anything that could remotely contain something copyrighted, including hard drives, ssds and USB sticks... I better shut up before they notice that you can use paper to print pictures) while still not being allowed to make any copies.
Essentially, what these con artists got away with was something banks would dream of: A fee they get to cash in on every gun and car because it could be used in a bank robbery, so everyone having and using one must compensate them for the damage done by those that actually use those things in such a fashion.
What? Why? That costs money! It's way cheaper to let the people who you want arrested pay for it, too, and let their government do the dirty work for you.
Privatize profits, socialize costs. That's how you get rich.
It's a given that you have to abide by the rules of countries you want to make business with. But abiding by rules of countries other than the one you want to land in?
So, technically, if Trump throws another hissy fit and wants you to call Mexico "Spicistan" from now on in your destinations, you'll comply?
Slashdot Mirror
Right, what computer illiterate idiot designed this system?
The story is that for some reason the US public cares more about who gets screwed by the president in the bedroom than who gets screwed by him in office.
They were BOTH utterly unfit for office. And their running mates were what VP have been since Kennedy was shot: An assassination insurance, telling the assassin "if you shoot me, that goofball is president, do you really wanna do it?", so even putting a bullet in both their heads would not have made matters any better.
Trump was not a warning shot. Trump was sinking your own boat so it can't be boarded.
Honest politicians are a bit like unicorns. There's been lots of talk about it but so far none have surfaced.
Frankly, whenever a political "discussion" (not so much in the classical sense of an exchange of ideas and debate, more akin to a Jerry Springer show) happens here on /., the only thing you can sensibly do is grab a bag of popcorn and watch both sides of the fence yell increasingly ridiculous bullshit at each other, and enjoy the growing amusement of how The Party managed to trick the population into going at each other's throat instead of addressing the problem.
The only thing that comes to my mind when it comes to US politics is this song.
Please don't. You know the old saying, dogs that bark don't bite, and presidents you keep occupied with toys can at least not do anything worse.
Knowing Trump, there's certainly some sort of adhesive contract where she'd lose everything if she left him.
You forgot to mention the part where you explain why I should give a shit who he fucks.
Electing someone whose only redeeming feature is that he is "against establishment" is a bit like protesting gasoline prices by setting your car on fire. In the end, you're the one who loses most.
So they're still the party of NO.
Well, they are after all a conservative party, and conservatives should be about consistency, so....
You should remember that Clinton's impeachment was for lying, while in office.
If that was true, we could as well fence off capitol hill and declare it a prison. Less work.
I once had a job that was basically reverse engineering well obfuscated software. One of the requirements of the job was also that you didn't have any police record. But ... how do you learn to reverse engineer well obfuscated software, let alone how to use the various tools of the trade?
"Don't ask - don't tell" got a whole different meaning there...
Forget the site, send the hookers, the booze and the card sharks over to me.
And as long as you keep handing them 20% for being the last one on the route, you'll remain the last one on the route. If your behaviour doesn't change based on my behaviour, there is no reason for me to change my behaviour.
So this is going to lead to your ad filter having to filter more ads, because non-targeted ads are cheaper per impression and they need to show more of them to hit the target audiences.
FTFY
I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty of explanations in the next couple days on YouTube.
Lemme guess, last Wednesday lightning struck the old records hall and it burned down?
And you will find all your tweets perpetually as the hottest and most interesting link.
Just like everyone else.
Especially considering that 9 out of 10 times the paywalled articles copy/paste from Wikipedia, and all they really add is the ads around it.
Hmm? The funniest one didn't even make the list, where UBIsoft infringed on the copyright of RELOADED?
Actually, I'm pretty sure those 840m is WAY more than could be generated by selling licensed content because only a tiny fraction of those copying content would actually even consider paying for it.
At this point, you'd be in less trouble if you shot a clerk at Best Buy to get the actual DVD.
Nope, they got their cake and got to eat it too. You have to pay the blank media extortion fee (on anything that could remotely contain something copyrighted, including hard drives, ssds and USB sticks... I better shut up before they notice that you can use paper to print pictures) while still not being allowed to make any copies.
Essentially, what these con artists got away with was something banks would dream of: A fee they get to cash in on every gun and car because it could be used in a bank robbery, so everyone having and using one must compensate them for the damage done by those that actually use those things in such a fashion.
What? Why? That costs money! It's way cheaper to let the people who you want arrested pay for it, too, and let their government do the dirty work for you.
Privatize profits, socialize costs. That's how you get rich.
It's a given that you have to abide by the rules of countries you want to make business with. But abiding by rules of countries other than the one you want to land in?
So, technically, if Trump throws another hissy fit and wants you to call Mexico "Spicistan" from now on in your destinations, you'll comply?