I would agree that our gatekeepers have proven themselves untrustworthy, which makes it harder to know much of anything for sure. However, it is plausible that they might have innocently had overlap with their logo and changed it when they found out that they had a pedo symbol for their logo. It's similar to how a building was actually a swastika, but apparently nobody noticed. Hanlon's razor, after all.
It probably doesn't help that she pretty clearly lied about her stance on TPP (among other things), which we have extensive documentation about, thanks to Wikileaks. If they correctly identify Clinton as a horrible human being, it's much easier to get something to stick even without evidence.
The problem is that Jon Stewart was literally the most trusted name in news despite being a comedic take on current events. If that's the best the fourth estate has, of course democracy is going to fail.
And also, the Saudis had a lot more ties to it than we were initially led to believe. That's not a truth that's in any conspiracy theory I'm aware of, but it does mean that the conventional narrative was deeply flawed.
What we need is resources and their distribution, not jobs. Universal Basic Income and a significantly shorter work week would likely be how we stop all the money going to the top and many people being without their basic needs.
I don't see a strong compelling reason why not. You can while all day about free riders, but I'd rather just take pride in my country doing better research than try to hoard information.
It's a bit more complex than that, depending on how the harm effects them. If, for example, a drug caused someone to be unable to work, but only has a negligible effect on life expectancy, they would be taking just as much out (maybe even more if they have more costs) while contributing less. But, your reasoning would say that we should let seniors do speedballs as much as they want.
The traitors are the people Snowden and Manning exposed. Neither did anything to harm national security, as our national security was already compromised to the point that it was a net negative.
The UK has enough libel tourism due to restrictive legal views on speech that it's okay to say that the UK doesn't have freedom of speech (unless you live in the UK, of course).
Politicians like Clinton don't let things like 'being a war criminal' stand in the way of her friends and proud endorsements, so are pedophiles really all that much worse?
8th biggest US site (according to Alexa rankings) altering user comments isn't newsworthy? If I'm an investor, I might be concerned that the CEO is trolling in a way that could endanger safe harbor provisions.
And the ideal that BOTH of them could be involved with pedophiles is nuts, right? It's not as if they have spent significant amounts of time together, or that they both belong to the status of elites that can basically get away with murder (somewhat literally in the case of Ted Kennedy). Show me a billionaire or politician that ISN'T a pervert and you've got an actual news story.
Yeah, we know that they used phishing to get the emails. If you believe that only the Kremlin is capable of phishing, then I've know a Nigerian prince that has some money to send you.
It's probably because the NSA has likely had a 'vacuum everything up' approach for its entire existence. If they've always got more data than they can sort through, it's going to be easy to sneak something out. The NSA probably scoops up that much data in a day.
Spies know that spies have always been morons, which is why things like "For a while you wondered whether the fools were pretending to be fools as some kind of deception, or whether there was a real efficient service somewhere else.
Later in my fiction, I invented one.
But alas the reality was the mediocrity. Ex-colonial policemen mingling with failed academics, failed lawyers, failed missionaries and failed debutantes gave our canteen the amorphous quality of an Old School outing on the Orient express. Everyone seemed to smell of failure.." was said. I understand their decisions, but they are bad decisions. FBI director Comey admitted as much, until public pressure led to him taking back. And I have autism, so I have done quite a bit of research on theory of mind. It doesn't change the fact that they are morons.
And as for averages, they are worse than average because they operate in the shadows, allowing idiocy to go longer without getting checked.
And we also know that spies have always been morons. The US is especially moronic because at least large parts won't hire people that smoke weed, and the FBI director admitted as such. Also, the official government claim is that only the top levels of the Kremlin could have done something like this, when we know security was a nightmare.
So, the fact that the effective leader of the Democratic party, the one that will have the most influence on foreign policy, the one that keeps a shitlist on anyone that defies her family, loves war isn't relevant to the discussion?
Because Assange and Wikileaks have been shown to be effective at vetting information. Probably because they hire people that are talented instead of well connected morons. And yes, Russia is incompetent. The CIA is incompetent. Spies have always been incompetent.
I'm familiar with the quote, which is why I'm against the Patriot Act and PRISM. I'm also familiar with Acton. That's why we have separation of powers, the fourth estate, the 22nd Amendment, and want as much transparency as possible, so too much power doesn't end up in too few hands. The fourth estate has failed us, due in large part to the 1996 Telecommunications Act allowing for greater media consolidation. That was signed by Bill. Wikileaks has largely filled that role in their absence.
Also, Wikileaks is doing very little editing. They might be selective on what they are releasing when, but they leave the archives untouched to the point that it does endanger some lives and still contain malware.
First of all, we don't unequivocally know that, and the claim that it could only come from the top of the government is obviously bullshit. Secondly, they can't release 'propaganda' if the DNC wasn't doing shady shit in the first place.
The best way to resolve the issue of Russia embarrassing the US government is for the US government to stop being an embarrassment. It would probably help with a lot of other things as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I would agree that our gatekeepers have proven themselves untrustworthy, which makes it harder to know much of anything for sure. However, it is plausible that they might have innocently had overlap with their logo and changed it when they found out that they had a pedo symbol for their logo. It's similar to how a building was actually a swastika, but apparently nobody noticed. Hanlon's razor, after all.
It probably doesn't help that she pretty clearly lied about her stance on TPP (among other things), which we have extensive documentation about, thanks to Wikileaks. If they correctly identify Clinton as a horrible human being, it's much easier to get something to stick even without evidence.
The problem is that Jon Stewart was literally the most trusted name in news despite being a comedic take on current events. If that's the best the fourth estate has, of course democracy is going to fail.
And also, the Saudis had a lot more ties to it than we were initially led to believe. That's not a truth that's in any conspiracy theory I'm aware of, but it does mean that the conventional narrative was deeply flawed.
What we need is resources and their distribution, not jobs. Universal Basic Income and a significantly shorter work week would likely be how we stop all the money going to the top and many people being without their basic needs.
I don't see a strong compelling reason why not. You can while all day about free riders, but I'd rather just take pride in my country doing better research than try to hoard information.
It's a bit more complex than that, depending on how the harm effects them. If, for example, a drug caused someone to be unable to work, but only has a negligible effect on life expectancy, they would be taking just as much out (maybe even more if they have more costs) while contributing less. But, your reasoning would say that we should let seniors do speedballs as much as they want.
The traitors are the people Snowden and Manning exposed. Neither did anything to harm national security, as our national security was already compromised to the point that it was a net negative.
The UK has enough libel tourism due to restrictive legal views on speech that it's okay to say that the UK doesn't have freedom of speech (unless you live in the UK, of course).
Politicians like Clinton don't let things like 'being a war criminal' stand in the way of her friends and proud endorsements, so are pedophiles really all that much worse?
8th biggest US site (according to Alexa rankings) altering user comments isn't newsworthy? If I'm an investor, I might be concerned that the CEO is trolling in a way that could endanger safe harbor provisions.
And the ideal that BOTH of them could be involved with pedophiles is nuts, right? It's not as if they have spent significant amounts of time together, or that they both belong to the status of elites that can basically get away with murder (somewhat literally in the case of Ted Kennedy). Show me a billionaire or politician that ISN'T a pervert and you've got an actual news story.
Yeah, we know that they used phishing to get the emails. If you believe that only the Kremlin is capable of phishing, then I've know a Nigerian prince that has some money to send you.
It's probably because the NSA has likely had a 'vacuum everything up' approach for its entire existence. If they've always got more data than they can sort through, it's going to be easy to sneak something out. The NSA probably scoops up that much data in a day.
Spies know that spies have always been morons, which is why things like "For a while you wondered whether the fools were pretending to be fools as some kind of deception, or whether there was a real efficient service somewhere else.
Later in my fiction, I invented one.
But alas the reality was the mediocrity. Ex-colonial policemen mingling with failed academics, failed lawyers, failed missionaries and failed debutantes gave our canteen the amorphous quality of an Old School outing on the Orient express. Everyone seemed to smell of failure.." was said. I understand their decisions, but they are bad decisions. FBI director Comey admitted as much, until public pressure led to him taking back. And I have autism, so I have done quite a bit of research on theory of mind. It doesn't change the fact that they are morons.
And as for averages, they are worse than average because they operate in the shadows, allowing idiocy to go longer without getting checked.
And we also know that spies have always been morons. The US is especially moronic because at least large parts won't hire people that smoke weed, and the FBI director admitted as such. Also, the official government claim is that only the top levels of the Kremlin could have done something like this, when we know security was a nightmare.
So, the fact that the effective leader of the Democratic party, the one that will have the most influence on foreign policy, the one that keeps a shitlist on anyone that defies her family, loves war isn't relevant to the discussion?
Clinton isn't left wing, and her record clearly shows she's a hawk.
Because Assange and Wikileaks have been shown to be effective at vetting information. Probably because they hire people that are talented instead of well connected morons. And yes, Russia is incompetent. The CIA is incompetent. Spies have always been incompetent.
I'm familiar with the quote, which is why I'm against the Patriot Act and PRISM. I'm also familiar with Acton. That's why we have separation of powers, the fourth estate, the 22nd Amendment, and want as much transparency as possible, so too much power doesn't end up in too few hands. The fourth estate has failed us, due in large part to the 1996 Telecommunications Act allowing for greater media consolidation. That was signed by Bill. Wikileaks has largely filled that role in their absence.
Also, Wikileaks is doing very little editing. They might be selective on what they are releasing when, but they leave the archives untouched to the point that it does endanger some lives and still contain malware.
First of all, we don't unequivocally know that, and the claim that it could only come from the top of the government is obviously bullshit. Secondly, they can't release 'propaganda' if the DNC wasn't doing shady shit in the first place.
Yeah, saving battery life by moving to bluetooth. Sounds like a great plan..
If you want to prevent Donald Trump, get Clinton to back down. You can nominate a ham sandwich and that will be enough to beat Trump.
You say that as if the entire US government shouldn't be in jail.
The best way to resolve the issue of Russia embarrassing the US government is for the US government to stop being an embarrassment. It would probably help with a lot of other things as well.