In other words, they take these low interest loans and buy treasury notes with them. All the interest they earn from the Treasury Department ends up being their profit.
Seems like fourth largest bailout recipient, Royal Bank of Scotland Group received $64bn from the UK government as well. Must be nice to double-dip into the gravy boat.
I bet the recent Thailand floods were the result of top secret Taliban weather control technology. After all, hard-drives are the bigger enablers of porn.
you're saying the executive branch inherently has the power to target and attack some kind of infrastracture of other sovereign nation states?
Yes, the executive branch can bomb other sovereign nation states without the approval of congress. This has happened more than a dozen times since WWII.
But guess what, that kind of activity - even if not done under declaration of war - still involves Congress.
No, it does not. Kosovo didn't involve congress. Libya didn't involve congress.
For instance, there are limitations to how long the President can do such things before getting Congressional approval
The limit is 60 days, but that didn't stop Obama, now did it?
there are budgets that Congress must approve
Like I said before: "There's also no way for congress to cut funding for cyber-warfare since all the computers and networks are already paid for, and there's very little operational costs to waging a cyber war."
You HAVE to know this, surely you *at least* took a high school U.S. Government class?
Let's drop the charade. If robotic aerial bombardment doesn't constitute "war", then sending strings of ones and zeros through a series of tubes certainly doesn't count as "war". There is effectively no congressional oversight because cyber-warfare does not fall under the purview of "war" according to the executive branch. There's also no way for congress to cut funding for cyber-warfare since all the computers and networks are already paid for, and there's very little operational costs to waging a cyber war.
Yes, mandatory vaccination is violation of individual liberty. But just imagine the benefits of completely eradicating HIV. For one, no one will have to be vaccinated against it ever again.
When "...common side effects may include: itching, rash, diarrhea, constipation, shortness of breath, nausea, inability to urinate, hair falling out, unusual hair growth, erections lasting longer than four hours, seizure, coma, or death..."
I stand corrected. My apologies for making a gross overgeneralize without checking the facts first.
People make mistakes, but seriously, after your first made-up claim made it to +5, couldn't you take your winnings and run?
I care about knowing the facts and being right, not some integer counter on/.'s server. If I didn't reply then I wouldn't have been enlightened to the truth, now would I?
Even though lot of exceptions exist, I think my point is still valid. The number of copyright infringement cases in criminal courts dwarfs the number of all other intellectual property violation cases in criminal courts.
There are actually quite a few exceptions to my claim. France and Austria have criminal penalties for wanton patent infringement for example.
But I think my point still stands: out of all the criminal prosecutions for intellectual property infringements, the vast majority of them are copyright infringements.
Even if every row is individually encrypted the number of rows and the table layouts can still be leaked. Also by encrypting each row you've basically disabled all the relational operations.
If you meant encrypting the entire database with one key then when the database is compromised all your data is compromised. With CryptDB only the data of currently logged-in users are compromised.
There's really no point in teaching someone the "imminent lawless action" test when they still believe the "clear and present danger" test is still in effect. There's even less point when they can't even quote the "clear and present danger" test properly. GP was trolling, simple as that. He's not interested in learning the boundaries of free speech in the US so I didn't bother enlightening him.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, they take these low interest loans and buy treasury notes with them. All the interest they earn from the Treasury Department ends up being their profit.
This is nothing more than common theft really.
Seems like fourth largest bailout recipient, Royal Bank of Scotland Group received $64bn from the UK government as well. Must be nice to double-dip into the gravy boat.
It’s one thing to say that the Federal Reserve is an independent institution. It’s another thing to say that it can keep us all in the dark.
I bet the recent Thailand floods were the result of top secret Taliban weather control technology. After all, hard-drives are the bigger enablers of porn.
you're saying the executive branch inherently has the power to target and attack some kind of infrastracture of other sovereign nation states?
Yes, the executive branch can bomb other sovereign nation states without the approval of congress. This has happened more than a dozen times since WWII.
But guess what, that kind of activity - even if not done under declaration of war - still involves Congress.
No, it does not. Kosovo didn't involve congress. Libya didn't involve congress.
For instance, there are limitations to how long the President can do such things before getting Congressional approval
The limit is 60 days, but that didn't stop Obama, now did it?
there are budgets that Congress must approve
Like I said before: "There's also no way for congress to cut funding for cyber-warfare since all the computers and networks are already paid for, and there's very little operational costs to waging a cyber war."
You HAVE to know this, surely you *at least* took a high school U.S. Government class?
I did not, for I am not an American.
LHC is 8.6km in diameter. A 1:50 scale model would still be 172 meters in diameter.
This guy built a 1:50 scale model of the ATLAS detector ; the first picture even has the inscriptions "ATLAS" in lego letters.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it passed both houses already. All that's missing is Obama's signature.
a Cyber militia
Wikileaks
and (2) the War Powers Resolution
Let's drop the charade. If robotic aerial bombardment doesn't constitute "war", then sending strings of ones and zeros through a series of tubes certainly doesn't count as "war". There is effectively no congressional oversight because cyber-warfare does not fall under the purview of "war" according to the executive branch. There's also no way for congress to cut funding for cyber-warfare since all the computers and networks are already paid for, and there's very little operational costs to waging a cyber war.
The military-industry complex isn't just war profiteering and lobbying; a warmongering populace is also a critical part of the complex.
You're at the back of line, leaving plenty of time get into shape.
But if they hired someone already in shape, that person would have plenty of time to get into even better shape.
I think you meant USPTO.
USPTO does actually have thousands of scientists and engineers who review the patents.
Yes, mandatory vaccination is violation of individual liberty. But just imagine the benefits of completely eradicating HIV. For one, no one will have to be vaccinated against it ever again.
Probably because the clinical trial will be conducted in the US.
A Korean pharmaceutical company developing a vaccine in its Canadian subsidiary and then conducting clinical trial in the US.
When "...common side effects may include: itching, rash, diarrhea, constipation, shortness of breath, nausea, inability to urinate, hair falling out, unusual hair growth, erections lasting longer than four hours, seizure, coma, or death..."
WHERE DO I SIGN UP?
I stand corrected. My apologies for making a gross overgeneralize without checking the facts first.
People make mistakes, but seriously, after your first made-up claim made it to +5, couldn't you take your winnings and run?
I care about knowing the facts and being right, not some integer counter on /.'s server. If I didn't reply then I wouldn't have been enlightened to the truth, now would I?
Please see my response here
Even though lot of exceptions exist, I think my point is still valid. The number of copyright infringement cases in criminal courts dwarfs the number of all other intellectual property violation cases in criminal courts.
Thank you, I did not know that before.
There are actually quite a few exceptions to my claim. France and Austria have criminal penalties for wanton patent infringement for example.
But I think my point still stands: out of all the criminal prosecutions for intellectual property infringements, the vast majority of them are copyright infringements.
Except, of course, those convicted of sodomy charges. There's the Federal no-ass-pounding prison for that.
Jokes aside, it's interesting how among all the different types of intellectual property, only copyright is settled in criminal courts.
Acknowledging that you can't understand someone through a thick accent doesn't make you a racist.
Implying that every Indian doctor have a thick accent is racist though.
Pssssst, Google. Use Morgan Freeman's voice. I promise you'll make trillions.
I don't see how that helps. Pig's physiology differs significantly from that of a human's.
It's been done more than 40 years ago.
Even if every row is individually encrypted the number of rows and the table layouts can still be leaked. Also by encrypting each row you've basically disabled all the relational operations.
If you meant encrypting the entire database with one key then when the database is compromised all your data is compromised. With CryptDB only the data of currently logged-in users are compromised.
There's really no point in teaching someone the "imminent lawless action" test when they still believe the "clear and present danger" test is still in effect. There's even less point when they can't even quote the "clear and present danger" test properly. GP was trolling, simple as that. He's not interested in learning the boundaries of free speech in the US so I didn't bother enlightening him.