There's nothing in the emails that conclusively shows crime, at least not that's been found yet. A lot of internal backstabbing, some very unguarded insults, but nothing criminal.
The excuse was a bit better than that: "Everyone does it." She isn't the first politician to be caught using a personal email account for work, and she won't be the last. There was no grounds for prosecution because her actions, though arguably unlawful, were no worse than others have gotten away with in the past - so any prosecution could only be driven by a political agenda..
" You can't even purchase a $5 piece of equipment you need for your job without filling out a bunch of forms and then waiting 6 months"
Same here in the UK, too - I've done just that when trying to purchase an audio isolation transformer. Lots of them available, but none from suppliers on our 'approved supplier' list. In the end I just spent my own money and got one off eBay. So long as the boss's boss doesn't find out, all is well.
I see them all the time - every TV in the country has one on!... in the country. I think I see why you don't recognise it.
It exists because it was introduced a very, very long time ago when precision machining was very expensive, and because it works almost perfectly. Yes, an F or BNC would lock better - but it's only used on stationary equipment, so the advantage that offers would be too small to justify the trouble of adaptor leads and replacing wall-mounted antenna sockets.
For new technology to replace old, it is not enough for the new to be better. It must be better by a margin sufficient to exceed the transition costs.
There are actually two sorts of bluetooth audio. SCO uses a very nasty lossy compression codec to carry low-quality mono audio - it was intended for phone calls, not music, and is responsible for the poor reputation of bluetooth audio quality as many early headsets used it. There is also A2DP, which still uses lossy compression, but at a much higher bitrate, stereo, and at 48KHz sampling - good quality audio, as the compression noise is below what human hearing can detect. That's what modern bluetooth headphones use.
But you've still got the issue you pointed out: There's not a lot of room in those headphones for decent transducers and electronics, so a lot of them sound like crap anyway, much like 99-pence earphones usually do. If you want quality sound, you have to pay a penalty in cost and in weight. The laws of physics are unforgiving.
The headphone jack interface is ancient. So is the Edison screw light bulb, but that fitting is still commonplace. Simply being old is not a good reason to abandon technology. The floppy drive was killed off not because it was old, but because superior alternatives were available. What is the superior alternative to the headphone jack? What else can offer the same convenience, low cost, universal compatibility, and reliability?
I think the Belling-Lee connector might have the record. Introduced in the 1920s, still in common use today. It just barely edges out the banana connector.
If you go back any further you're down to binding posts and clips to hold a bare wire - it's arguable if those count as connectors at all.
Until you can jack the interface directly into your brain, there must be an analog final stage. Even if you have to break open the some headphones, solder on to the transducers and calculate appropriate attenuation.
DRM doesn't work, because if just a single person is able to break it they'll soon have the de-DRMed media up on torrent sites.
" If someone's beliefs get in the way of doing their job then they need a new job."
You mean you are going to deny them employment for their religious beliefs? PERSECUTION!
Christian culture in the US has developed a really severe persecution complex. Every time their demands for special exemptions are not met, it's persecution. A good example is the recent case is that of Javier Chavez, a former security guard at Macy's, who took it upon himself to kick a transgender person off of store property - even though they had commited no crime or action in violation of store policy, and he had previously been made aware that the store owners had no objection to people using whatever restroom they felt comfortable in. He has now commenced legal action against his former employer, while the head of the Catholic League Bill Donohue has written a most annoying column accusing Macy's of "thought control." As he puts it, "For merely holding beliefs that are contrary to the store's policy, Chavez was fired. This is what totalitarian regimes do, not American commercial establishments."
That's the way they think: They have a right to expel whoever their God dislikes from their employer's property, and if they are fired then they are the victims of persecution.
Because if you work, you get to enjoy a much higher standard of living. You don't even have to work long hours. Or make a career of it - you can hold a job for a few months, then resign. That bit of extra work is all money for you to spend on luxury good and hobbies, so have a good time with it.
Don't knock Soviet tech: They were the second-most-advanced nation in the world. They had a space program. First object in orbit, first man in space, first craft landed on the moon. They had computers too - both of their own design, and clones of American models. They were ahead of the US technologically in some areas, and behind in others, but they were certainly capable of their own research.
Economic models do exist, and are about as useful as the weather forecast. Economies are subject to chaotic effects, and full of positive feedback loops. Easy enough to predict what the price of housing will be in a month, but good luck predicting it in a year. Even the process of modelling can invalidate the results.
That's just politicians in general. They'll say whatever it takes to get elected, even if they know they can't deliver. There are many honest politicians, they just never make it past local politics - you can't win in the big leagues if you won't play by their rules.
A lot of pro-life organisations oppose hormonal contraception because it can, under some circumstances, prevent implantation after conception.
It's not supposed to work that way, but it can. If a dose is missed, or hormones naturally fluctuate in the right way, ovulation can still occur. But there's no uterine lining in place to accept the blastocyst. The women wouldn't even be aware conception occurred. So the only way to be sure is not to use hormonal contraception.
They also oppose condoms, but for another reason: Condoms make casual fornication possible, and as the pro-life movement is almost entirely composed of religious groups they frown heavily upon anything that enables sin.
Conservative: "Small government and personal freedom! Except for drugs, and pornography, and dirty words on TV - those all need to be illegal. Oh, and we need the government to keep the restrooms segregated. And to issue proclamations telling every American that Jesus is Lord and that it is their patriotic duty to worship him. Also a favourable tax structure to make sure people get married. But other than that, small government and personal freedom!"
Abortion rights supporters also generally support access to and education on contraception. They really wish abortion were not sometimes required, but they also don't live in some fantasy land where every fetus is perfectly healthy and God will put food on the table with the power of love.
There are a few dirty tricks that can be tried yet. One idea is to pass state 'religious freedom' acts that say no government official may be required to recognise gay marriage, or penalised for not doing so.
You can go to get married, but if none of the clerks will process your paperwork... well, Jesus says 'Fuck you.' And then every time you want to do your taxes or claim benefits you again have to hunt down someone who will feel sympathetic enough to help.
Remember that the majority of voters - probably the vast majority, I'd expect - made up their mind before the primaries. They are going to vote for the D or the R, regardless of candidate.
Winning the election is about winning the few undecided voters, and making sure your supporters turn out to vote at a higher rate than the opposing party's supporters.
That means Trump could easily win, not because Republican voters really support him, but because they really hate Hillary - and he knows that. He is using it. That's why his acceptance speech was full of attacks upon her. My favourite was the bit where he claimed she had taken bribes from foreign governments. If he can stir up a powerful enough hate among Republicans, and inspire enough dislike of Hillary among Democrats that many do not bother to vote, he could easily win on turnout alone.
And let's face it: Hillary does not have the personality of a cult leader. She is bland. She does not inspire fanatical mobs the way Trump can.
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing in the emails that conclusively shows crime, at least not that's been found yet. A lot of internal backstabbing, some very unguarded insults, but nothing criminal.
The excuse was a bit better than that: "Everyone does it." She isn't the first politician to be caught using a personal email account for work, and she won't be the last. There was no grounds for prosecution because her actions, though arguably unlawful, were no worse than others have gotten away with in the past - so any prosecution could only be driven by a political agenda..
" You can't even purchase a $5 piece of equipment you need for your job without filling out a bunch of forms and then waiting 6 months"
Same here in the UK, too - I've done just that when trying to purchase an audio isolation transformer. Lots of them available, but none from suppliers on our 'approved supplier' list. In the end I just spent my own money and got one off eBay. So long as the boss's boss doesn't find out, all is well.
I see them all the time - every TV in the country has one on! ... in the country. I think I see why you don't recognise it.
It exists because it was introduced a very, very long time ago when precision machining was very expensive, and because it works almost perfectly. Yes, an F or BNC would lock better - but it's only used on stationary equipment, so the advantage that offers would be too small to justify the trouble of adaptor leads and replacing wall-mounted antenna sockets.
For new technology to replace old, it is not enough for the new to be better. It must be better by a margin sufficient to exceed the transition costs.
"I can't wait to hear how Apple spins this as being a good thing at the next iPhone announcement in a few months here."
Thinnest iPhone ever!
Legacy free!
Water resistant!
Don't forget to buy your Apple certified earphones ($49.99).
There are actually two sorts of bluetooth audio. SCO uses a very nasty lossy compression codec to carry low-quality mono audio - it was intended for phone calls, not music, and is responsible for the poor reputation of bluetooth audio quality as many early headsets used it. There is also A2DP, which still uses lossy compression, but at a much higher bitrate, stereo, and at 48KHz sampling - good quality audio, as the compression noise is below what human hearing can detect. That's what modern bluetooth headphones use.
But you've still got the issue you pointed out: There's not a lot of room in those headphones for decent transducers and electronics, so a lot of them sound like crap anyway, much like 99-pence earphones usually do. If you want quality sound, you have to pay a penalty in cost and in weight. The laws of physics are unforgiving.
The headphone jack interface is ancient. So is the Edison screw light bulb, but that fitting is still commonplace. Simply being old is not a good reason to abandon technology. The floppy drive was killed off not because it was old, but because superior alternatives were available. What is the superior alternative to the headphone jack? What else can offer the same convenience, low cost, universal compatibility, and reliability?
I think the Belling-Lee connector might have the record. Introduced in the 1920s, still in common use today. It just barely edges out the banana connector.
If you go back any further you're down to binding posts and clips to hold a bare wire - it's arguable if those count as connectors at all.
I also don't buy it, but for another reason: The 2.5mm jack exists. If it was really about thinness, why not just use that?
The movies I download from that torrent site always play perfectly on my non-HDMI monitor.
Impossible.
Until you can jack the interface directly into your brain, there must be an analog final stage. Even if you have to break open the some headphones, solder on to the transducers and calculate appropriate attenuation.
DRM doesn't work, because if just a single person is able to break it they'll soon have the de-DRMed media up on torrent sites.
" If someone's beliefs get in the way of doing their job then they need a new job."
You mean you are going to deny them employment for their religious beliefs? PERSECUTION!
Christian culture in the US has developed a really severe persecution complex. Every time their demands for special exemptions are not met, it's persecution. A good example is the recent case is that of Javier Chavez, a former security guard at Macy's, who took it upon himself to kick a transgender person off of store property - even though they had commited no crime or action in violation of store policy, and he had previously been made aware that the store owners had no objection to people using whatever restroom they felt comfortable in. He has now commenced legal action against his former employer, while the head of the Catholic League Bill Donohue has written a most annoying column accusing Macy's of "thought control." As he puts it, "For merely holding beliefs that are contrary to the store's policy, Chavez was fired. This is what totalitarian regimes do, not American commercial establishments."
That's the way they think: They have a right to expel whoever their God dislikes from their employer's property, and if they are fired then they are the victims of persecution.
Because if you work, you get to enjoy a much higher standard of living. You don't even have to work long hours. Or make a career of it - you can hold a job for a few months, then resign. That bit of extra work is all money for you to spend on luxury good and hobbies, so have a good time with it.
Don't knock Soviet tech: They were the second-most-advanced nation in the world. They had a space program. First object in orbit, first man in space, first craft landed on the moon. They had computers too - both of their own design, and clones of American models. They were ahead of the US technologically in some areas, and behind in others, but they were certainly capable of their own research.
Because they suck.
Economic models do exist, and are about as useful as the weather forecast. Economies are subject to chaotic effects, and full of positive feedback loops. Easy enough to predict what the price of housing will be in a month, but good luck predicting it in a year. Even the process of modelling can invalidate the results.
That's just politicians in general. They'll say whatever it takes to get elected, even if they know they can't deliver. There are many honest politicians, they just never make it past local politics - you can't win in the big leagues if you won't play by their rules.
Four days to make one star system, then copy-paste the rest?
A lot of pro-life organisations oppose hormonal contraception because it can, under some circumstances, prevent implantation after conception.
It's not supposed to work that way, but it can. If a dose is missed, or hormones naturally fluctuate in the right way, ovulation can still occur. But there's no uterine lining in place to accept the blastocyst. The women wouldn't even be aware conception occurred. So the only way to be sure is not to use hormonal contraception.
They also oppose condoms, but for another reason: Condoms make casual fornication possible, and as the pro-life movement is almost entirely composed of religious groups they frown heavily upon anything that enables sin.
What Europeans call liberal, Americans call Communist.
What Americans call conservative, Europeans call insane.
Conservative: "Small government and personal freedom! Except for drugs, and pornography, and dirty words on TV - those all need to be illegal. Oh, and we need the government to keep the restrooms segregated. And to issue proclamations telling every American that Jesus is Lord and that it is their patriotic duty to worship him. Also a favourable tax structure to make sure people get married. But other than that, small government and personal freedom!"
Or "pro-least-worst-option."
Abortion rights supporters also generally support access to and education on contraception. They really wish abortion were not sometimes required, but they also don't live in some fantasy land where every fetus is perfectly healthy and God will put food on the table with the power of love.
There are a few dirty tricks that can be tried yet. One idea is to pass state 'religious freedom' acts that say no government official may be required to recognise gay marriage, or penalised for not doing so.
You can go to get married, but if none of the clerks will process your paperwork... well, Jesus says 'Fuck you.' And then every time you want to do your taxes or claim benefits you again have to hunt down someone who will feel sympathetic enough to help.
Remember that the majority of voters - probably the vast majority, I'd expect - made up their mind before the primaries. They are going to vote for the D or the R, regardless of candidate.
Winning the election is about winning the few undecided voters, and making sure your supporters turn out to vote at a higher rate than the opposing party's supporters.
That means Trump could easily win, not because Republican voters really support him, but because they really hate Hillary - and he knows that. He is using it. That's why his acceptance speech was full of attacks upon her. My favourite was the bit where he claimed she had taken bribes from foreign governments. If he can stir up a powerful enough hate among Republicans, and inspire enough dislike of Hillary among Democrats that many do not bother to vote, he could easily win on turnout alone.
And let's face it: Hillary does not have the personality of a cult leader. She is bland. She does not inspire fanatical mobs the way Trump can.
I'm in England, and I've never seen that term before. Maybe it's local?
We do eat a lot of curry though.
Because the media needs a snappy name.