Pretty much as described: News that is fake. It includes, but is not limited to, propaganda. It usually refers to completely fabricated or distorted beyond recognition stories written to maximise revenue by drawing in readers - what happens when clickbait drops any attempt at honesty. It's been around forever (Feddie Starr ate my hamster!), but the internet made it a lot more common as such stories can go viral easily and cost almost nothing to produce. It doesn't have to be for political purposes, and even if it appears political that might just be because that story is going down well as time of writing - prior to the election, completely false scandals about both Hillary and Trump were sure to bring in a profit, because the opposing camp could be counted upon to share them widely.
I'd expect he's been few a few weeks of grilling to extract every bit of information they can, including the things he doesn't know he knows. But it would probably be a polite grilling: Russian officials know that he is much more valuable to them if they treat him well, because by demonstrating their gratitude and willingness to shelter him they increase the temptation for any future leakers to follow in his footsteps, and he in turn must know this and recognise that full cooperation will lead to the best outcome for him.
I'm sure Russian intelligence would be happy to break out the implements of torture if they thought doing so would be to their long-term benefit, but happy Snowden on television talking about how great life is for him is a lot more useful than unhappy Snowden sitting in a cell with half his fingers missing.
I'm not at all familiar with the Pentagon papers, but the Climategate ones were really overplayed. There's nothing juicy in there - no evidence of a cover-up or efforts to falsify data. Just scientists doing their science thing. There were a few quotes which sound incriminating when taken out of context, and that was enough for it to earn the gate-suffix: People saw what they wanted to see. Or read a re-blog of an opinion column that claimed to be revealing the truth of the vast UN-lead conspiracy to destroy the energy industry.
I don't know if anyone can be blamed. That election was not normal. Conventional politics did not apply. If the Democrats made a mistake, it was in failing to realize this.
Because this isn't just an executive action: It's a power that was specifically granted to the president by act of congress. It'll take an act of congress to reverse, and that is going to be politically troublesome. It could be done, but it won't be fast.
It'd leave a big hole, but it's not even close to a nuke. If you can aim it well enough, it's still good for precision strikes when you just want to blow up a single facility without having to deal with air defense.
"Any buyers who want the filter lifted after purchasing a computer or device would have to pay a $20 fee, after verifying they are 18 or older. “If an end user buys an apparatus, a computer, and they want access to that, they would have to pay to have that filter removed,” Chumley said."
This would mean a manufacturer could no longer just sell a device and be done with it - they would have to maintain a customer service division dedicated to verifying the age of purchasers, collecting money and going through the procedure of disabling the software. This also means the filter would have to be designed in such a way that the end user could not just turn it off themselves, otherwise it would defeat the age verification requirements. Anyone can purge unwanted software from a PC, but this applies to phones too. So in practical terms this means that all phones would have to be sold with a pornography-blocking filter that could not be disabled without rooting the device, or else pay a $20 stealth tax.
"The bill also would prohibit access to any online hub that facilities prostitution and would require manufacturers or sellers to block any websites that facilitate trafficking, Chumley said."
The anti-pornography lobby claims that all prostitution and pornography facilitates human trafficking, because even if no trafficking was involved in creating the pornography it still creates a demand for prostitutes. So this is a provision that will either mean blocking all porn sites (good luck) or can be easily expanded to that in future. See example campaign at http://stoptraffickingdemand.c...
"The money collected from the fines and fees would go to the S.C. Attorney General’s Office's human trafficking task force, which works with law enforcement leaders, nonprofits and state advocates to find solutions to trafficking."
What nonprofits would those be? I have a suspicion that this may include anti-pornography pressure groups like the NSCE.
"According to the National Human Trafficking Hotline, South Carolina has had 1,330 calls to the hotline and reported 308 actual human trafficking cases since 2007."
And how many actual convictions? I don't trust these numbers.
"Chumley said the effort, co-sponsored by state Rep. Mike Burns, R-Greenville, would combat crimes against children and protect children from exposure to sexually explicit materials."
Ie, if you don't vote for this bill then you support child rape. You dirty pedo scum.
It has a link to the federal Human Trifficking Prevention Act, not the proposed South Caroline Human Trafficking Prevention Act. Same name, very different act.
It doesn't really matter what the bible says. What matters is what the believers think the bible says, and I have yet to find a Christian that doesn't pick-and-mix their favorite verses.
An extreme example is the organisation formerly known as Morality in Media. They used to be a laughing stock - conservatives loved them, but everyone else dismissed them out of hand because of their name, their preachyness and their frequent waving of the bible to justify their positions. Then they realised this, and went through some radical rebranding - they renamed the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, almost entirely dropped the subject of religion, and adopted the rhetoric of the left. Their actual positions haven't changed, but they gained a lot of credibility by switching from 'Jesus said to cover up our women' to 'Porngraphy harms women and children.'
But look at that $20 fee. Where's it going? This could be just a ploy to stealth-tax computer sales and send all the money directly to some anti-pornography pressure group.
I'm suspicious just what this effort might be - it sounds a lot like a trick to funnel lots of money to some anti-pornography or 'pro-family' pressure group.
I've read a lot of anti-pornography material, so I can answer that: They do not claim that the porn industry is rife with trafficking, but that exposure to pornography causes people to seek prostitutes.
Unfortunately, there is the Dunning-Kruger effect to contend with. Picture a hundred amateurs on youtube trying to draw graphs in Excel and reaching all sorts of crazy conclusions.
I've heard a similar story, but not of source code. The account I've heard passed down was of an inexperienced employee who, while teletyped in to a remote mainframe, mistyped a single character when executing a program: Rather than outputting to magnetic tape, he set it to output to an automated card punch machine. The truck, and the bill, arrived some days later.
Why would they? It's not a munition, or a surveillance drone. It's an ocean survey drone, gathering temperature and salinity measurements. There's nothing secret on it, the technology is well-known. It's just China asserting their authority in the South China Sea again: They have to occasionally do something like this just to remind the US that they claim ownership of that area and are willing to protect it with force.
Superpowers can't go to war directly. If they do, everyone loses in massive nuclear attack, and all sides know it. That's why the idea of a cold war was invented - a struggle for power by espionage and proxy wars.
They made a reasonable decision: Bernie looked unelectable. The American people loathe socialism in all it's forms, and his anti-corporate views would have crippled him in fundraising. If Bernie had won the nomination, it's all but certain he'd have lost too.
The wildcard here is Trump. To any sane person at the time, he looked like a joke candidate - someone who couldn't possibly win the Republican nomination, yet somehow did. Someone who couldn't possibly win the election, but somehow did. Time after time throughout election season he said things that surely would have killed any political career, yet none of it touched him. None of the usual rules of politics applied to Trump.
The best conspiracy theories have some truth in them.
Take Roswell, for example. A mysterious craft crash-lands in a small town. Locals find it, and many people witness the wreck. It's made of strange materials, so light they almost float on air, and elaborate machines like nothing ever seen with parts far beyond any technology they were familiar with. Before news spreads far, men from the government turn up with big guns - they load the wreck into a truck and take it away, never to be seen again. The witnesses are told never to speak of what they saw, threats of jail are made should they do so, and the local media are ordered to report it only as a crashed weather balloon.
All that is true. You can see where the conspiracy theory started: There really was a genuine conspiracy and cover-up. The only thing popular culture got wrong was the reason behind the conspiracy: It wasn't an alien craft, but a high-altitude military balloon used for long-distance detection of Soviet nuclear tests. Super-advanced (for the 40s) military technology, but not alien.
Area 51 is another good case. Secret base, top-secret-classified to the point the government barely even acknowledges it exists, lots of heavily armed men guarding it (mostly again UFO-hunters trying to sneak in), good fodder for a conspiracy theory because there is a genuine conspiracy. It even has stories of strange and alien-seeming craft seen in the area, including a few flying saucers - and stories of the military trying to silence the witnesses with threats of imprisonment. But again, the conspiracy isn't really aliens: Area 51 is an experimental aircraft testing and development site.
There's also a separate and rather too-plausible conspiracy theory that Area 51 has been seriously violating environmental law by burning all sorts of toxic substances in open-air fires rather then go through proper disposal methods, and in doing so caused damage to the health of contractors at the base, then hiding behind top-secret classification in order to block any attempts at investigation or legal action against the government. The lawsuit was abandoned due to lack of evidence, because all records of the alleged incident are classified and so could not be used in court.
You underestimate how hot that plasma is. It's past just being regular plasma like I can make in my microwave, and into exotic physics territory. You don't even model heat exchange using the standard laws of thermodynamics, because each individual particle impact is a high-energy collision. Even with the best cooling systems physically possible, your containment vessel is going to melt, and then become plasma itsself. Plus even if you could keep it cool enough, you'd be creating a temperature gradient in the reactor that is going to make it impossible to sustain the temperature required for fusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much as described: News that is fake. It includes, but is not limited to, propaganda. It usually refers to completely fabricated or distorted beyond recognition stories written to maximise revenue by drawing in readers - what happens when clickbait drops any attempt at honesty. It's been around forever (Feddie Starr ate my hamster!), but the internet made it a lot more common as such stories can go viral easily and cost almost nothing to produce. It doesn't have to be for political purposes, and even if it appears political that might just be because that story is going down well as time of writing - prior to the election, completely false scandals about both Hillary and Trump were sure to bring in a profit, because the opposing camp could be counted upon to share them widely.
I'd expect he's been few a few weeks of grilling to extract every bit of information they can, including the things he doesn't know he knows. But it would probably be a polite grilling: Russian officials know that he is much more valuable to them if they treat him well, because by demonstrating their gratitude and willingness to shelter him they increase the temptation for any future leakers to follow in his footsteps, and he in turn must know this and recognise that full cooperation will lead to the best outcome for him.
I'm sure Russian intelligence would be happy to break out the implements of torture if they thought doing so would be to their long-term benefit, but happy Snowden on television talking about how great life is for him is a lot more useful than unhappy Snowden sitting in a cell with half his fingers missing.
I'm not at all familiar with the Pentagon papers, but the Climategate ones were really overplayed. There's nothing juicy in there - no evidence of a cover-up or efforts to falsify data. Just scientists doing their science thing. There were a few quotes which sound incriminating when taken out of context, and that was enough for it to earn the gate-suffix: People saw what they wanted to see. Or read a re-blog of an opinion column that claimed to be revealing the truth of the vast UN-lead conspiracy to destroy the energy industry.
I don't know if anyone can be blamed. That election was not normal. Conventional politics did not apply. If the Democrats made a mistake, it was in failing to realize this.
Because this isn't just an executive action: It's a power that was specifically granted to the president by act of congress. It'll take an act of congress to reverse, and that is going to be politically troublesome. It could be done, but it won't be fast.
It'd leave a big hole, but it's not even close to a nuke. If you can aim it well enough, it's still good for precision strikes when you just want to blow up a single facility without having to deal with air defense.
"Any buyers who want the filter lifted after purchasing a computer or device would have to pay a $20 fee, after verifying they are 18 or older. “If an end user buys an apparatus, a computer, and they want access to that, they would have to pay to have that filter removed,” Chumley said."
This would mean a manufacturer could no longer just sell a device and be done with it - they would have to maintain a customer service division dedicated to verifying the age of purchasers, collecting money and going through the procedure of disabling the software. This also means the filter would have to be designed in such a way that the end user could not just turn it off themselves, otherwise it would defeat the age verification requirements. Anyone can purge unwanted software from a PC, but this applies to phones too. So in practical terms this means that all phones would have to be sold with a pornography-blocking filter that could not be disabled without rooting the device, or else pay a $20 stealth tax.
"The bill also would prohibit access to any online hub that facilities prostitution and would require manufacturers or sellers to block any websites that facilitate trafficking, Chumley said."
The anti-pornography lobby claims that all prostitution and pornography facilitates human trafficking, because even if no trafficking was involved in creating the pornography it still creates a demand for prostitutes. So this is a provision that will either mean blocking all porn sites (good luck) or can be easily expanded to that in future. See example campaign at http://stoptraffickingdemand.c...
"The money collected from the fines and fees would go to the S.C. Attorney General’s Office's human trafficking task force, which works with law enforcement leaders, nonprofits and state advocates to find solutions to trafficking."
What nonprofits would those be? I have a suspicion that this may include anti-pornography pressure groups like the NSCE.
"According to the National Human Trafficking Hotline, South Carolina has had 1,330 calls to the hotline and reported 308 actual human trafficking cases since 2007."
And how many actual convictions? I don't trust these numbers.
"Chumley said the effort, co-sponsored by state Rep. Mike Burns, R-Greenville, would combat crimes against children and protect children from exposure to sexually explicit materials."
Ie, if you don't vote for this bill then you support child rape. You dirty pedo scum.
It has a link to the federal Human Trifficking Prevention Act, not the proposed South Caroline Human Trafficking Prevention Act. Same name, very different act.
It doesn't really matter what the bible says. What matters is what the believers think the bible says, and I have yet to find a Christian that doesn't pick-and-mix their favorite verses.
An extreme example is the organisation formerly known as Morality in Media. They used to be a laughing stock - conservatives loved them, but everyone else dismissed them out of hand because of their name, their preachyness and their frequent waving of the bible to justify their positions. Then they realised this, and went through some radical rebranding - they renamed the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, almost entirely dropped the subject of religion, and adopted the rhetoric of the left. Their actual positions haven't changed, but they gained a lot of credibility by switching from 'Jesus said to cover up our women' to 'Porngraphy harms women and children.'
But look at that $20 fee. Where's it going? This could be just a ploy to stealth-tax computer sales and send all the money directly to some anti-pornography pressure group.
I'm suspicious just what this effort might be - it sounds a lot like a trick to funnel lots of money to some anti-pornography or 'pro-family' pressure group.
I've read a lot of anti-pornography material, so I can answer that: They do not claim that the porn industry is rife with trafficking, but that exposure to pornography causes people to seek prostitutes.
Unfortunately, there is the Dunning-Kruger effect to contend with. Picture a hundred amateurs on youtube trying to draw graphs in Excel and reaching all sorts of crazy conclusions.
I've heard a similar story, but not of source code. The account I've heard passed down was of an inexperienced employee who, while teletyped in to a remote mainframe, mistyped a single character when executing a program: Rather than outputting to magnetic tape, he set it to output to an automated card punch machine. The truck, and the bill, arrived some days later.
There's nothing much in there worth getting. It's a survey drone.
Why would they? It's not a munition, or a surveillance drone. It's an ocean survey drone, gathering temperature and salinity measurements. There's nothing secret on it, the technology is well-known. It's just China asserting their authority in the South China Sea again: They have to occasionally do something like this just to remind the US that they claim ownership of that area and are willing to protect it with force.
Superpowers can't go to war directly. If they do, everyone loses in massive nuclear attack, and all sides know it. That's why the idea of a cold war was invented - a struggle for power by espionage and proxy wars.
They made a reasonable decision: Bernie looked unelectable. The American people loathe socialism in all it's forms, and his anti-corporate views would have crippled him in fundraising. If Bernie had won the nomination, it's all but certain he'd have lost too.
The wildcard here is Trump. To any sane person at the time, he looked like a joke candidate - someone who couldn't possibly win the Republican nomination, yet somehow did. Someone who couldn't possibly win the election, but somehow did. Time after time throughout election season he said things that surely would have killed any political career, yet none of it touched him. None of the usual rules of politics applied to Trump.
Here is a video of him asking Russia to release emails acquired by hacking Clinton's servers.
http://nyti.ms/2a06kW1
If you can still deny it after that, you're ready to run for office.
The election was very close - even a few percent change in the right states would have changed the outcome.
Chairman Canute's initiative, I assume?
The best conspiracy theories have some truth in them.
Take Roswell, for example. A mysterious craft crash-lands in a small town. Locals find it, and many people witness the wreck. It's made of strange materials, so light they almost float on air, and elaborate machines like nothing ever seen with parts far beyond any technology they were familiar with. Before news spreads far, men from the government turn up with big guns - they load the wreck into a truck and take it away, never to be seen again. The witnesses are told never to speak of what they saw, threats of jail are made should they do so, and the local media are ordered to report it only as a crashed weather balloon.
All that is true. You can see where the conspiracy theory started: There really was a genuine conspiracy and cover-up. The only thing popular culture got wrong was the reason behind the conspiracy: It wasn't an alien craft, but a high-altitude military balloon used for long-distance detection of Soviet nuclear tests. Super-advanced (for the 40s) military technology, but not alien.
Area 51 is another good case. Secret base, top-secret-classified to the point the government barely even acknowledges it exists, lots of heavily armed men guarding it (mostly again UFO-hunters trying to sneak in), good fodder for a conspiracy theory because there is a genuine conspiracy. It even has stories of strange and alien-seeming craft seen in the area, including a few flying saucers - and stories of the military trying to silence the witnesses with threats of imprisonment. But again, the conspiracy isn't really aliens: Area 51 is an experimental aircraft testing and development site.
There's also a separate and rather too-plausible conspiracy theory that Area 51 has been seriously violating environmental law by burning all sorts of toxic substances in open-air fires rather then go through proper disposal methods, and in doing so caused damage to the health of contractors at the base, then hiding behind top-secret classification in order to block any attempts at investigation or legal action against the government. The lawsuit was abandoned due to lack of evidence, because all records of the alleged incident are classified and so could not be used in court.
Coal and gas.
You underestimate how hot that plasma is. It's past just being regular plasma like I can make in my microwave, and into exotic physics territory. You don't even model heat exchange using the standard laws of thermodynamics, because each individual particle impact is a high-energy collision. Even with the best cooling systems physically possible, your containment vessel is going to melt, and then become plasma itsself. Plus even if you could keep it cool enough, you'd be creating a temperature gradient in the reactor that is going to make it impossible to sustain the temperature required for fusion.