Not even fifteen minutes after the story is posted and already every top post response is Trump supporters spewing crap about the Hillary emails even though they were not mentioned.
I doubt this is about the DNC emails. This is most likely about the social media and email spamming before the election with fake news that might have used stolen state election information.
I read through each pretty thoroughly. The only numbers anywhere close to yours are for a single party affiliation, as I said.
Meanwhile, the two links you posted are referencing the same survey that includes a huge number of countries, including China, which has an incredibly amount of censorship so of course no on trusts the media there and India which has an absolute joke of a 4th estate, but also a pretty low sampling rate. That said, neither article presents any numbers for polls of people's trust of the media. The second says "government and media", which in my opinion is an odd thing to lump together when asking people since one would most likely cause distaste of the other.
Sort of like asking someone "Do you like the taste of cat urine and chocolate together?" The person answering would most likely love chocolate but the mere thought of cat urine would make them say no. It's called asking a loaded question. The person asking it phrases the question or qualifies it for what they want the answer to be.
That said, the company those numbers are originating from for both articles is a marketing firm (Edelman) which is not exactly a very trustworthy source either, is it?
"Edelman is a leading global communications marketing firm that partners with many of the world’s largest and emerging businesses and organizations, helping them evolve, promote and protect their brands and reputations. Edelman owns specialty firms Edelman Intelligence (research) and United Entertainment Group (entertainment, sports, experiential), a joint venture with United Talent Agency."
Really getting tired of those supporting right wing causes lying out their asses.
Trust in the press in "most of the west" is not at the levels you suggest. Gallup and other independent agencies run polls regularly and have found the opposite:
Only members of a single party severely distrust the media and only because they are commanded to distrust the media by their party. That doesn't mean the press is un-trustworthy or a liberal bias, just that the conservatives regularly attack the media for reporting on just about anything that disagrees with what they are saying and their followers agree with the distrust without any effort of critical thought or even benefit of the doubt. When a story that has absolutely no political slant and only presents facts can be labeled as "liberal", as has been the case more than a dozen times in the last two years, it's pretty obvious that the right are not fighting any form of political slant but reality itself.
It's a matter of a significant portion of the population putting their party before fact or country and are willing to lie to support their causes and nothing to do with their opponents conspiring against them.
I should also mention that a particular country in the news a lot as of late has regularly used it's news agencies and intelligence agencies to also spread distrust of the US media.
This statement is a lie, pushed by Trump supporters:
"Amazon's founder has added $10.2 billion this year to his wealth and $7 billion since the global equities rally began following the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president on Nov. 8."
The equities rally began on November 7th, the day before the election and the Monday after a two day Federal Reserve meeting on November 1-2nd.
During the Fed meeting, stronger language was made to suggest interest rate hikes coming in the future.
You will notice if you look at the markets, the Dow lept more on the Monday than the Tuesday of the election and Wednesday after the election. The climb of the stock market is nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the fact the markets had been waiting in a holding pattern for confirmation of rate changes for months prior.
This is not a fair statement. Google and Facebook both still track you if websites have links to their sites or embedded functions (Adsense, logins, etc.). It takes a significant effort to avoid it (plug-ins, IP blocking, etc.), enough so that the average user is unlikely to do so.
Which is very similar to the issue with ISPs, where using Tor or a VPN would be the only way to hide your traffic from them.
I agree with the sentiment in the article. Online privacy should be made law in such a way that it affects all sources of abuse and not just targeting one or two major players.
Price of solar is about $3 a kilowatt/hour. So, a 45kw system would cost roughly $135k before subsidies.
It looks like he lives in the United Kingdom, which has subsidies at install and for production that could have cut the costs down below $100k om 2015 or 2016.
Also, there's no telling if any of his numbers are remotely accurate either considering his position on the matter.
Nice opposite-extreme strawman, but no where did I suggest they setup their own email systems.
I stated that email addresses from free-email accounts should never be trusted (and should be automatically scored worse by anti-spam systems) and that anyone that wants a trusted email account for their primary email address should pay for it on a non-free-email account domain.
You want to eliminate spam, you get people away from using free-email systems where the majority of spammers hide now.
"Data from the largest study of its kind in the U.S. reveal a 25 percent jump in the number of heart attacks occurring the Monday after we “spring forward” compared to other Mondays during the year – a trend that remained even after accounting for seasonal variations in these events. But the study showed the opposite effect is also true. Researchers found a 21 percent drop in the number of heart attacks on the Tuesday after returning to standard time in the fall when we gain an hour back."
It's a bit odd for the shift back and forth to be so closely correlated. Later in the study:
"Total daily admissions were adjusted for seasonal and weekday variation, as the rate of heart attacks peaks in the winter and is lowest in the summer and is also greater on Mondays and lower over the weekend."
A quick check in Excel tells me that for the period of the study (January 1, 2010 to September 15,2013), there is one more Friday, Saturday and Sunday than the rest of the week. There is no mention of this fact being adjusted in their results.
Then let's look at what day of the week the year starts:
Starting to notice something? 2012 was a leap year. No mention for any adjustment for that either. 2/29/12 was a Wednesday, by the way.
So, Mondays are statistically have the highest average heart attacks, most likely because there is one more weekend in the data and that one weekend is most likely in the winter (end of the year) when the number of heart attacks are lower. How much lower? A range of 12-18% lower would account for the 25% versus 21% in heart attack rates between springing forward and falling back.
There was a similar study several years ago that showed a similar correlated link of 10% between the day daylight savings movements as well:
But I could never find the study mentioned. I'm willing to bet there was also an extra winter weekend weekend or two they did not account for in their study as well.
Whenever you see correlations so tidy like that, there has to be something going on with the data.
You just linked a service that is essentially only used for huge companies and government entities. Even on that very same page is an explanation that Level 1, the level for the majority of credit card purchases via the average consumer, only passes minimum data like I stated. Level 2 is the old Level 3, where it offers sales tax and a unique customer code along with what Level 1 offers to help track the purchases in the card holder's accounting or ERP systems.
Level 3 requires an entire infrastructure of software on both sides, the credit card owner and the merchant, for it to work. I doubt many consumer-based merchants have Level 3 support, nor would any amount of fee reduction pay for the expense of it (and I would doubt many merchant merchants would survive had they agreed to doing this). This level of information is only used for large corporations buying from wholesalers and such so they can track the inventory they are purchasing from moment of purchase.
But nice try Googling something to feed your paranoia.
That's a really nice attempt at an apologist's view of Google's monopoly, except credit card companies can only track WHERE you spend money, not the specifics of what you actually bought. Whereas Google literally knows what sites you are browsing, what pages on that site you are browsing, even what parts of the page you read through it's AdSense product and then takes all of that to determine what parts of the Internet it wants to show you through it's Search product. Then there's the email product, and the social media, etc. etc.
No other entity has ever been able to get that much information in that detail on a "customer" (quotes intentional, since let's face it you're the product to Google, not the customer).
The fact that Google is pushing an internet standard that would require accepting the use of their invasive business practices to maintain a normal experience on the Internet is pretty abusive of their monopoly in my opinion.
Yep. I constantly need to do them because I have my browser locked down to stop tracking.
I have a feeling most of Google's new "invisible" method has more to do with the fact they are tracking you as a unique user and following your path to the page. If it looks legit, they don't challenge.
But if you're one of the many of us who actively fight being tracked, we're going to be relegated to second-hand internet user thanks to Google's monopoly.
Your reading comprehension skills are terrible. Very first sentence of the article:
"The NY Times reported that wiretaps of people on the Trump team"
TRUMP TEAM. No where in either article mentioned does it say that Trump himself or Trump Tower was wire tapped. It's like you people don't even read...at all. I mean, it's EVEN IN THE HEADLINE TOO.
Another AC spewing pro-Trump, pro-Putin lies. FSB running in over-drive.
I have never had this issue. Willing to bet you are leaving script-hungry webpages open that are causing memory issues. Most of them are probably trackers. Install Ublock and Ghostery, and maybe self-destructing cookies too. Then see how the memory works out.
AC is full of crap. Never had issues with Windows 10 and having a separate admin account (which is the best policy no matter the operating system).
As far as the article, I agree with Avecto's findings. On any computers I have setup for others, I have always setup a separate admin account from the working user account and made sure the latter did not have admin rights. For some people I simply made this account without a password or something very simple they could remember easily. In either case, simply requiring that extra 10 seconds of thought and the dialog not being a "yes/no" question will stop nasty stuff from happening.
If he's smart, since Apple's revenues have been losing momentum. The last quarter's numbers were pretty disappointing, after adjusting for the extra week.
Or frame by frame check-sums encrypted into the video feed in real-time when recorded. I know it takes more processing power in the body camera but it needs to happen.
Um, almost all cases you show were annexations or territory gained from actual open, official conflicts (meaning a declaration of war was sent by one or both sides).
Russia was not at war with Ukraine when it annexed Crimea (or at least won't admit it openly). They invaded the Ukraine, rounded up any opposition, scuttled Ukraine's fleet and faked an election to support the annexation.
We're talking Nazi Germany kind of stunts, not like any of the cases you state.
Slashdot Mirror
Not even fifteen minutes after the story is posted and already every top post response is Trump supporters spewing crap about the Hillary emails even though they were not mentioned.
I doubt this is about the DNC emails. This is most likely about the social media and email spamming before the election with fake news that might have used stolen state election information.
I read through each pretty thoroughly. The only numbers anywhere close to yours are for a single party affiliation, as I said.
Meanwhile, the two links you posted are referencing the same survey that includes a huge number of countries, including China, which has an incredibly amount of censorship so of course no on trusts the media there and India which has an absolute joke of a 4th estate, but also a pretty low sampling rate. That said, neither article presents any numbers for polls of people's trust of the media. The second says "government and media", which in my opinion is an odd thing to lump together when asking people since one would most likely cause distaste of the other.
Sort of like asking someone "Do you like the taste of cat urine and chocolate together?" The person answering would most likely love chocolate but the mere thought of cat urine would make them say no. It's called asking a loaded question. The person asking it phrases the question or qualifies it for what they want the answer to be.
That said, the company those numbers are originating from for both articles is a marketing firm (Edelman) which is not exactly a very trustworthy source either, is it?
"Edelman is a leading global communications marketing firm that partners with many of the world’s largest and emerging businesses and organizations, helping them evolve, promote and protect their brands and reputations. Edelman owns specialty firms Edelman Intelligence (research) and United Entertainment Group (entertainment, sports, experiential), a joint venture with United Talent Agency."
Really getting tired of those supporting right wing causes lying out their asses.
Trust in the press in "most of the west" is not at the levels you suggest. Gallup and other independent agencies run polls regularly and have found the opposite:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/195...
http://www.journalism.org/2016...
https://www.americanpressinsti...
Only members of a single party severely distrust the media and only because they are commanded to distrust the media by their party. That doesn't mean the press is un-trustworthy or a liberal bias, just that the conservatives regularly attack the media for reporting on just about anything that disagrees with what they are saying and their followers agree with the distrust without any effort of critical thought or even benefit of the doubt. When a story that has absolutely no political slant and only presents facts can be labeled as "liberal", as has been the case more than a dozen times in the last two years, it's pretty obvious that the right are not fighting any form of political slant but reality itself.
It's a matter of a significant portion of the population putting their party before fact or country and are willing to lie to support their causes and nothing to do with their opponents conspiring against them.
I should also mention that a particular country in the news a lot as of late has regularly used it's news agencies and intelligence agencies to also spread distrust of the US media.
https://www.rt.com/usa/340124-...
This statement is a lie, pushed by Trump supporters:
"Amazon's founder has added $10.2 billion this year to his wealth and $7 billion since the global equities rally began following the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president on Nov. 8."
The equities rally began on November 7th, the day before the election and the Monday after a two day Federal Reserve meeting on November 1-2nd.
https://www.federalreserve.gov...
During the Fed meeting, stronger language was made to suggest interest rate hikes coming in the future.
You will notice if you look at the markets, the Dow lept more on the Monday than the Tuesday of the election and Wednesday after the election. The climb of the stock market is nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the fact the markets had been waiting in a holding pattern for confirmation of rate changes for months prior.
This is not a fair statement. Google and Facebook both still track you if websites have links to their sites or embedded functions (Adsense, logins, etc.). It takes a significant effort to avoid it (plug-ins, IP blocking, etc.), enough so that the average user is unlikely to do so.
Which is very similar to the issue with ISPs, where using Tor or a VPN would be the only way to hide your traffic from them.
I agree with the sentiment in the article. Online privacy should be made law in such a way that it affects all sources of abuse and not just targeting one or two major players.
Price of solar is about $3 a kilowatt/hour. So, a 45kw system would cost roughly $135k before subsidies.
It looks like he lives in the United Kingdom, which has subsidies at install and for production that could have cut the costs down below $100k om 2015 or 2016.
Also, there's no telling if any of his numbers are remotely accurate either considering his position on the matter.
Why is this labeled as "Insightful"? There's no proof of false flag, corruption or theft, nor any of the other assertions mentioned.
Stop up-modding unproven accusations.
They didn't. He's either lying or doesn't realize it's generating in kilowatts.
Nice opposite-extreme strawman, but no where did I suggest they setup their own email systems.
I stated that email addresses from free-email accounts should never be trusted (and should be automatically scored worse by anti-spam systems) and that anyone that wants a trusted email account for their primary email address should pay for it on a non-free-email account domain.
You want to eliminate spam, you get people away from using free-email systems where the majority of spammers hide now.
No free-email account system should be considered a trusted source of email, nor a primary account for anyone with half a brain.
You use free-email account systems for throw-away crap and as such any legitimate email service should be scoring emails from them lower.
Actually, the exact opposite happened in 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06...
The Supreme Court STRUCK DOWN an antitrust rule AGAINST minimum retail prices.
I have not seen many ads either. Maybe one ad for Onedrive and one for Edge, over two years.
Maybe it's the Home edition displaying a lot of ads? I'm running Pro.
Reading the study, it seems like the statistics are not so clear cut. Link: http://www.acc.org/about-acc/p...
"Data from the largest study of its kind in the U.S. reveal a 25 percent jump in the number of heart attacks occurring the Monday after we “spring forward” compared to other Mondays during the year – a trend that remained even after accounting for seasonal variations in these events. But the study showed the opposite effect is also true. Researchers found a 21 percent drop in the number of heart attacks on the Tuesday after returning to standard time in the fall when we gain an hour back."
It's a bit odd for the shift back and forth to be so closely correlated. Later in the study:
"Total daily admissions were adjusted for seasonal and weekday variation, as the rate of heart attacks peaks in the winter and is lowest in the summer and is also greater on Mondays and lower over the weekend."
A quick check in Excel tells me that for the period of the study (January 1, 2010 to September 15,2013), there is one more Friday, Saturday and Sunday than the rest of the week. There is no mention of this fact being adjusted in their results.
Then let's look at what day of the week the year starts:
1/1/2010 = Friday
1/1/2011 = Saturday
1/1/2012 = Sunday
1/1/2013 = Tuesday
Starting to notice something? 2012 was a leap year. No mention for any adjustment for that either. 2/29/12 was a Wednesday, by the way.
So, Mondays are statistically have the highest average heart attacks, most likely because there is one more weekend in the data and that one weekend is most likely in the winter (end of the year) when the number of heart attacks are lower. How much lower? A range of 12-18% lower would account for the 25% versus 21% in heart attack rates between springing forward and falling back.
There was a similar study several years ago that showed a similar correlated link of 10% between the day daylight savings movements as well:
https://www.uab.edu/news/innov...
But I could never find the study mentioned. I'm willing to bet there was also an extra winter weekend weekend or two they did not account for in their study as well.
Whenever you see correlations so tidy like that, there has to be something going on with the data.
You just linked a service that is essentially only used for huge companies and government entities. Even on that very same page is an explanation that Level 1, the level for the majority of credit card purchases via the average consumer, only passes minimum data like I stated. Level 2 is the old Level 3, where it offers sales tax and a unique customer code along with what Level 1 offers to help track the purchases in the card holder's accounting or ERP systems.
Level 3 requires an entire infrastructure of software on both sides, the credit card owner and the merchant, for it to work. I doubt many consumer-based merchants have Level 3 support, nor would any amount of fee reduction pay for the expense of it (and I would doubt many merchant merchants would survive had they agreed to doing this). This level of information is only used for large corporations buying from wholesalers and such so they can track the inventory they are purchasing from moment of purchase.
But nice try Googling something to feed your paranoia.
That's a really nice attempt at an apologist's view of Google's monopoly, except credit card companies can only track WHERE you spend money, not the specifics of what you actually bought. Whereas Google literally knows what sites you are browsing, what pages on that site you are browsing, even what parts of the page you read through it's AdSense product and then takes all of that to determine what parts of the Internet it wants to show you through it's Search product. Then there's the email product, and the social media, etc. etc.
No other entity has ever been able to get that much information in that detail on a "customer" (quotes intentional, since let's face it you're the product to Google, not the customer).
The fact that Google is pushing an internet standard that would require accepting the use of their invasive business practices to maintain a normal experience on the Internet is pretty abusive of their monopoly in my opinion.
Yep. I constantly need to do them because I have my browser locked down to stop tracking.
I have a feeling most of Google's new "invisible" method has more to do with the fact they are tracking you as a unique user and following your path to the page. If it looks legit, they don't challenge.
But if you're one of the many of us who actively fight being tracked, we're going to be relegated to second-hand internet user thanks to Google's monopoly.
Your reading comprehension skills are terrible. Very first sentence of the article:
"The NY Times reported that wiretaps of people on the Trump team"
TRUMP TEAM. No where in either article mentioned does it say that Trump himself or Trump Tower was wire tapped. It's like you people don't even read...at all. I mean, it's EVEN IN THE HEADLINE TOO.
Another AC spewing pro-Trump, pro-Putin lies. FSB running in over-drive.
The grenade attacks are from organized crime scaring people into protection schemes. You'll notice they started long before the refugees.
But nice Putin-defending strawman. Amazing how well people fall in line behind tyrants like sheep.
I have never had this issue. Willing to bet you are leaving script-hungry webpages open that are causing memory issues. Most of them are probably trackers. Install Ublock and Ghostery, and maybe self-destructing cookies too. Then see how the memory works out.
AC is full of crap. Never had issues with Windows 10 and having a separate admin account (which is the best policy no matter the operating system).
As far as the article, I agree with Avecto's findings. On any computers I have setup for others, I have always setup a separate admin account from the working user account and made sure the latter did not have admin rights. For some people I simply made this account without a password or something very simple they could remember easily. In either case, simply requiring that extra 10 seconds of thought and the dialog not being a "yes/no" question will stop nasty stuff from happening.
If he's smart, since Apple's revenues have been losing momentum. The last quarter's numbers were pretty disappointing, after adjusting for the extra week.
Ah, I see what you mean but the blockchain would have to be shared in real-time, right? So the body cameras would need to be network connected.
Which in my opinion should be necessary anyway, but might be considered a "cost concern" for police departments.
Or frame by frame check-sums encrypted into the video feed in real-time when recorded. I know it takes more processing power in the body camera but it needs to happen.
Nice. Thank you for posting.
Um, almost all cases you show were annexations or territory gained from actual open, official conflicts (meaning a declaration of war was sent by one or both sides).
Russia was not at war with Ukraine when it annexed Crimea (or at least won't admit it openly). They invaded the Ukraine, rounded up any opposition, scuttled Ukraine's fleet and faked an election to support the annexation.
We're talking Nazi Germany kind of stunts, not like any of the cases you state.