What is even funner is that it is probably true. I would give a 99% chance, per each lost message, that message still exists somewhere.
If nowhere else, then in the Outbox / outgoing and Incoming mail mail archives Of every person who corresponded with Hillary over E-mail.
Gain access to the e-mail archives of 100% of the people who corresponded with her, then you can probably recover 99% of the messages.
And if not: Probably 50/50 odds for each message that it is in the hands of the Russians, and if not them Iran, or some other countries' intelligence department, or some random independent cybercriminal in one of those countries......
The Trump campaign called for Hillary to be executed for mishandling email.
The Trump campaign could call for every Hillary supported to be shipped off to the moon if they wanted;
that does not mean there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Just wishful thinking or mindless politico-babbling on their part to hopefully capitalize on the anger against Hillary to drive
up their poll numbers.
Sounds like a form of Treason if true. Inviting a foreign nation tho cyber-attack America and/or Americans
Not treason. Gaining unauthorized access to systems and leaking information to the press is Not an "Attack" or comforting an enemy.
The state of Russia is not an enemy, and even if it were - Trump is probably addressing individuals, not the state --- and also merely speaking in favor of something happening is neither comfort nor aid, But it might be not presidential by traditional standards, and people may judge it as in incredibly poor taste.
An attack would be more like defeating gates and security, Trespassing on a company's boat being held by customs to pay Tea taxes due, And dumping the assets into Boston harbor.... And if some of those involved happened to not be locals....... now THAT would be a treasonous attack.
But this is a major party nominee calling for another country to commit cybercrime and violate our national security for his own political gain.
I'm not so sure that is what he is encouraging by suggesting that they "find the 30,000 missing E-mails"
If they DO manage to pull it off, then this would mean that someone in Russia probably already got them before Hillary destroyed the messages.
This could be equally a matter of "scrounging data" that was already leaked.
On the other hand, if hacking any system in the US COULD reveal those, then it will most likely reveal another more severe incident of lawbreaking than already occured.
Exposing information to the media is much less an offense than corrupt practices by officials and Willful non-compliance with court orders or public disclosure requirements, so it's a net positive if it happens: since it mitigates the damage from a more severe crime.
I would LOVE to pay 61 cents per Hour of Cable TV programming.
For $0.61/Hr...... Please give me the Pay-as-You-go plan with no monthly minimum and the meter that measures number of hours that
one or more TVs are turned on.
I did the calculation and worked out my average monthly rate
$55 for 30-Megabit internet Plus $66 for Cable TV + $10 for Cablecards = $131/Month
drops to $55 for internet Plus $12 for Cable TV + $10 = $77/Month
Based on the approximately ~20 hours a week; I get to watch TV.
In fact, it's still a good deal, even if I have nothing to do one weekend now and again, and make it 50 hours, instead.....
Why do you think the law won't require you to declare each wallet when you first create, fund, or acquire it?
Because governments are generally inefficient and require information reported to them through paper forms on a quarterly or annual basis.
Also, you don't ever necessarily actually create, fund, or acquire the Temporary wallet ID that generates the final spend.
Essentially.... you are concerned about the whole public knowing all your transactions, since Bitcoin transactions are public knowledge, and your Wallet IDs become a public record..... you spend BTC to a person or service provider located in another country who is not subject to the registration requirement.
Your service provider combines customer funds, then routes the final spend through a mixing service to protect your privacy from general scrutiny
by the public, and since your SP is outside the area required to register, the SP itself does not have to register its wallets, And
they only retain traceable info about the final destination Wallet ID spent to, not the source.
So declare your wallets as required, but fund each transaction when you go to make a spend by generating a batch of unique Wallet IDs, and then
spend the funds to the new Wallet IDs through one of the "Privacy mixing services"
Conclude a sequence of transactions resulting in the new wallet IDs having zero remaining, then after you confirmed the Balance is 0, and the Bitcoin network has 1000 confirmations, destroy your record of the now empty temporary wallet IDs.....
Next time you go to declare your wallets, those wallet IDs won't have any funds in them, and you disposed of the IDs, so they are not Wallets that you have anymore.
The users who were tricked to sharing a password aren't necessarily the ones who broke the law, per se, although (I suppose) that argument could be made too, since they "Dealt in means of access" with intent.
However, the Pop Star faces more serious trouble for phishing passwords out of followers and accessing their accounts.
You might even be considered an "unauthorized user" from twitter's perspective but by giving you their password, the end-user has made you the defacto authorized
This is like handing the keys to your rental car to a stranger on the street and telling them to "have at it". Chances are the rental agreement doesn't allow this, and if they're pulled over driving when you're not there, they can be jailed. Unless you're a high-ranking employee or agent of Twitter, then nothing grants you the right to authorize someone for access to Twitters' systems.
Twitter's servers are not your property, nor is the Account you created on Twitter's systems.
That which is not specifically authorized is unauthorized.
A user can be made authorized ONLY with Twitter's consent; usually this occurs when signing up for an account. If the password sharing was specifically admonished against by Twitter, you can imply that to be the Opposite of consent.
That's irrelevant. That only makes it against their TOS, giving them grounds to terminate the account/service.
It's also against their TOS to login using someone else's credentials, and violating the TOS in that manner may be deemed Wire Fraud under the Act, and Has been before.
See, the Netflix case, where sharing passwords resulted in Jail time, and the Federal Appeals court upheld the password sharing as a Computer Fraud and Abuse Act violation.
small government Republicans screw up big time in response to a terrorist attack that took place on their watch
No.... both parties screwed up. This was a bipartisan action. An occasional screwup is to be expected, but you have to own your mistake, or recognize your predecessors' mistake and fix them promptly, otherwise, should be fired... out of a canon... into the sun.
and your reaction is to blame the other party for golf games?
No. My reaction is to blame Obama for golf games. Last I checked, Obama is just one person.
Obama's inaction and lack of concern rests primarily with Obama, nobody else is responsible; This does not generalize to the party as a whole... I don't know why you would think it does....
Well, except possibly for folks responsible for investigating and presenting diligence to the public.... the Media, for doing an awful job identifying potential problems.
You might blame the party leadership for corruption for allowing a candidate get nominated who would turn out to be flaky or inherently not properly reflect the goals of people in the public who are members of the party. tt.
Of course Obama can't get rid of it because if he does the people who created the problem in the first place will start screaming that he's "soft on terror"
*COUGH* Bullshit. People will scream, regardless.
You can't let the fear of rejection stop you doing your job; No excuses, If you are president: the buck stops right there.
If the buyer's stock drops too low then they may not ever be able give the amount of stock, or it could end up being 100% of the buyer
That's called an Inability to Pay for goods they want to purchase, so now they will be in default on their payments required for the acquisition.
That means they will have to either book it as an unpaid cash debt or continue to keep the acquisitions' accounting separate, and the original shareholders retain interest in the original company; The transaction changes from an Acquisition of the entire company, to Acquisition of the part they chose to pay for after subtracting from the acquired portion: substantial penalties for failure to complete the transaction.........
Then bad news comes out from either the acquirer or acquiree's latest earnings, key people leaving, etc and the stock falls some more.
So specify some extra requirements:
The price of the deal will be a dollar amount; the stock portion of the debt will be settled through payment to the shareholders of the acquired company by paying them shares worth 2 even dollar installments over the next 2 quarters, and a final payment of the remainder in cash, with the number of shares for each installment determined according to the average value at the date of the actual payment.
The previous installment will be adjusted by credit or debit against the next payment in 90 days to match the average stock price over all trading days in that period, and the next installment's dollar amount will be supplemented by or decreased by the adjustment, assure alignment with the agreed acquisition price.
The shares transferred to make the installments have to be shares with an issue date before the deal was agreed.
No additional stock shares can be written until after the deal is completely settled and paid, and shareholders of the acquired company have had 30 days of additional time to sell their shares, in case they wanted to do so.
It's not running in the red; if they're getting the local governments to pay for the heavy digging.
I guess that explains why they are only coming to a few cities?
Google should start "tricking" existing service providers into thinking they might enter every market, then.....
Force their competitors to make that investment in EVERY potential market, to gain maximum leverage...
People are not going to spend thousands of dollars on a VHS where alternatives are much cheaper.
If they are selling 750,000 units a year, there is OBVIOUSLY still demand for them.
The only question is.... how strong will that demand be in the case of increasing prices?
I don't know the answer to the question. It would be helpful to know why people still want to buy VCRs.
If they have priceless home videos on VHS, then people may be willing to spend more than $1000 on a VCR, by the way,
just to be able to play their tapes back and convert them to MP4s.....
How about you take a 1-year hit to reduce your revenue to $1..... so you can be "in trouble for one year"
then gradually grow it back doubling every year over the next 25 years..... 100% growth, FTW!
See my Comment RE the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act, above.
The act prevents manufacturers voiding the warranty, But it doesn't require manufacturers to make the
technical information and diagnostic tools available, so you can use your own engineering knowhow, or hire
your own engineer to diagnose and repair.
The manufacturers leverage copyright and the DMCA, along with Potting/sealing components and using special
"Genuine/Counterfeit part detection" logic in software to prevent people from replacing simple components,
such as analog sensors.
These days they also started keeping their schematics secret, and if you share technical
information, the big company will use their lawyers and sue or threat of a suit to chill any dissemination of repair details
Apple, John Deere, alike, and other electronics manufacturers are increasingly becoming savvy as to how to use these kinds of
methods to make sure users of their product have to buy a new one when it breaks, Or go to the manufacturer for repair, which
provides a revenue stream for the manufacturer (So it's in manufacturers' interest to make the repair as expensive as possible,
after the initial 1 or 2 year warranty on equipment that would be expected to last 20s of years otherwise).....
Our federal government has One Job. Defend the public, and adhering to the constitution ensure the sacred institution of government for the people by the people remains as such.
Elections are fraught with voter fraud attempts.....
How is it that there are BILLIONS to throw away on the most absurd things..... and yet not a single Million$ or
two to spare to make sure there are eyes on every single polling place: and abuses or interferences are not occurring that could undermine election processes?
Slashdot Mirror
I really wish all of you millennial snowflakes would just go die in a fire.
SMOD2016 plans to make that happen in the upcoming Global mass-extinction event
What is even funner is that it is probably true. I would give a 99% chance, per each lost message, that message still exists somewhere. If nowhere else, then in the Outbox / outgoing and Incoming mail mail archives Of every person who corresponded with Hillary over E-mail. Gain access to the e-mail archives of 100% of the people who corresponded with her, then you can probably recover 99% of the messages.
And if not: Probably 50/50 odds for each message that it is in the hands of the Russians, and if not them Iran, or some other countries' intelligence department, or some random independent cybercriminal in one of those countries......
The Trump campaign called for Hillary to be executed for mishandling email.
The Trump campaign could call for every Hillary supported to be shipped off to the moon if they wanted; that does not mean there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Just wishful thinking or mindless politico-babbling on their part to hopefully capitalize on the anger against Hillary to drive up their poll numbers.
Sounds like a form of Treason if true. Inviting a foreign nation tho cyber-attack America and/or Americans
Not treason. Gaining unauthorized access to systems and leaking information to the press is Not an "Attack" or comforting an enemy. The state of Russia is not an enemy, and even if it were - Trump is probably addressing individuals, not the state --- and also merely speaking in favor of something happening is neither comfort nor aid, But it might be not presidential by traditional standards, and people may judge it as in incredibly poor taste.
An attack would be more like defeating gates and security, Trespassing on a company's boat being held by customs to pay Tea taxes due, And dumping the assets into Boston harbor.... And if some of those involved happened to not be locals....... now THAT would be a treasonous attack.
But this is a major party nominee calling for another country to commit cybercrime and violate our national security for his own political gain.
I'm not so sure that is what he is encouraging by suggesting that they "find the 30,000 missing E-mails"
If they DO manage to pull it off, then this would mean that someone in Russia probably already got them before Hillary destroyed the messages.
This could be equally a matter of "scrounging data" that was already leaked.
On the other hand, if hacking any system in the US COULD reveal those, then it will most likely reveal another more severe incident of lawbreaking than already occured.
Exposing information to the media is much less an offense than corrupt practices by officials and Willful non-compliance with court orders or public disclosure requirements, so it's a net positive if it happens: since it mitigates the damage from a more severe crime.
I would LOVE to pay 61 cents per Hour of Cable TV programming.
For $0.61/Hr...... Please give me the Pay-as-You-go plan with no monthly minimum and the meter that measures number of hours that one or more TVs are turned on.
I did the calculation and worked out my average monthly rate
$55 for 30-Megabit internet Plus $66 for Cable TV + $10 for Cablecards = $131/Month
drops to $55 for internet Plus $12 for Cable TV + $10 = $77/Month
Based on the approximately ~20 hours a week; I get to watch TV.
In fact, it's still a good deal, even if I have nothing to do one weekend now and again, and make it 50 hours, instead.....
Why do you think the law won't require you to declare each wallet when you first create, fund, or acquire it?
Because governments are generally inefficient and require information reported to them through paper forms on a quarterly or annual basis.
Also, you don't ever necessarily actually create, fund, or acquire the Temporary wallet ID that generates the final spend.
Essentially.... you are concerned about the whole public knowing all your transactions, since Bitcoin transactions are public knowledge, and your Wallet IDs become a public record..... you spend BTC to a person or service provider located in another country who is not subject to the registration requirement.
Your service provider combines customer funds, then routes the final spend through a mixing service to protect your privacy from general scrutiny by the public, and since your SP is outside the area required to register, the SP itself does not have to register its wallets, And they only retain traceable info about the final destination Wallet ID spent to, not the source.
So declare your wallets as required, but fund each transaction when you go to make a spend by generating a batch of unique Wallet IDs, and then spend the funds to the new Wallet IDs through one of the "Privacy mixing services"
Conclude a sequence of transactions resulting in the new wallet IDs having zero remaining, then after you confirmed the Balance is 0, and the Bitcoin network has 1000 confirmations, destroy your record of the now empty temporary wallet IDs.....
Next time you go to declare your wallets, those wallet IDs won't have any funds in them, and you disposed of the IDs, so they are not Wallets that you have anymore.
The users who were tricked to sharing a password aren't necessarily the ones who broke the law, per se, although (I suppose) that argument could be made too, since they "Dealt in means of access" with intent.
However, the Pop Star faces more serious trouble for phishing passwords out of followers and accessing their accounts.
You might even be considered an "unauthorized user" from twitter's perspective but by giving you their password, the end-user has made you the defacto authorized
This is like handing the keys to your rental car to a stranger on the street and telling them to "have at it". Chances are the rental agreement doesn't allow this, and if they're pulled over driving when you're not there, they can be jailed. Unless you're a high-ranking employee or agent of Twitter, then nothing grants you the right to authorize someone for access to Twitters' systems.
Twitter's servers are not your property, nor is the Account you created on Twitter's systems.
That which is not specifically authorized is unauthorized. A user can be made authorized ONLY with Twitter's consent; usually this occurs when signing up for an account. If the password sharing was specifically admonished against by Twitter, you can imply that to be the Opposite of consent.
That's irrelevant. That only makes it against their TOS, giving them grounds to terminate the account/service.
It's also against their TOS to login using someone else's credentials, and violating the TOS in that manner may be deemed Wire Fraud under the Act, and Has been before.
See, the Netflix case, where sharing passwords resulted in Jail time, and the Federal Appeals court upheld the password sharing as a Computer Fraud and Abuse Act violation.
small government Republicans screw up big time in response to a terrorist attack that took place on their watch
No.... both parties screwed up. This was a bipartisan action. An occasional screwup is to be expected, but you have to own your mistake, or recognize your predecessors' mistake and fix them promptly, otherwise, should be fired... out of a canon... into the sun.
and your reaction is to blame the other party for golf games?
No. My reaction is to blame Obama for golf games. Last I checked, Obama is just one person.
Obama's inaction and lack of concern rests primarily with Obama, nobody else is responsible; This does not generalize to the party as a whole... I don't know why you would think it does....
Well, except possibly for folks responsible for investigating and presenting diligence to the public.... the Media, for doing an awful job identifying potential problems.
You might blame the party leadership for corruption for allowing a candidate get nominated who would turn out to be flaky or inherently not properly reflect the goals of people in the public who are members of the party. tt.
Of course Obama can't get rid of it because if he does the people who created the problem in the first place will start screaming that he's "soft on terror"
*COUGH* Bullshit. People will scream, regardless. You can't let the fear of rejection stop you doing your job; No excuses, If you are president: the buck stops right there.
If the buyer's stock drops too low then they may not ever be able give the amount of stock, or it could end up being 100% of the buyer
That's called an Inability to Pay for goods they want to purchase, so now they will be in default on their payments required for the acquisition.
That means they will have to either book it as an unpaid cash debt or continue to keep the acquisitions' accounting separate, and the original shareholders retain interest in the original company; The transaction changes from an Acquisition of the entire company, to Acquisition of the part they chose to pay for after subtracting from the acquired portion: substantial penalties for failure to complete the transaction.........
Probably, the FAA will be knocking on their door in 3.... 2.... 1.....
Then bad news comes out from either the acquirer or acquiree's latest earnings, key people leaving, etc and the stock falls some more.
So specify some extra requirements:
TSA was created by Bush as a knee jerk reaction to 9-11. I'm surprised Obama hasn't gotten rid of it.
He might; if Obama was not too busy playing golf.
It's not running in the red; if they're getting the local governments to pay for the heavy digging. I guess that explains why they are only coming to a few cities?
Google should start "tricking" existing service providers into thinking they might enter every market, then..... Force their competitors to make that investment in EVERY potential market, to gain maximum leverage...
You rarely find a card that does not contain such a star. It is associated with Judaism, ...."
Pokemon is a video game.... there are no cards....
Also, what is the deal with countries passing Anti-Semitic laws targeting to ban the practice of Judaism?
There should be a global embargo against such countries, which have no respect for human rights....
People are not going to spend thousands of dollars on a VHS where alternatives are much cheaper.
If they are selling 750,000 units a year, there is OBVIOUSLY still demand for them.
The only question is.... how strong will that demand be in the case of increasing prices?
I don't know the answer to the question. It would be helpful to know why people still want to buy VCRs.
If they have priceless home videos on VHS, then people may be willing to spend more than $1000 on a VCR, by the way, just to be able to play their tapes back and convert them to MP4s.....
How about you take a 1-year hit to reduce your revenue to $1..... so you can be "in trouble for one year" then gradually grow it back doubling every year over the next 25 years..... 100% growth, FTW!
See my Comment RE the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act, above.
The act prevents manufacturers voiding the warranty, But it doesn't require manufacturers to make the technical information and diagnostic tools available, so you can use your own engineering knowhow, or hire your own engineer to diagnose and repair.
The manufacturers leverage copyright and the DMCA, along with Potting/sealing components and using special "Genuine/Counterfeit part detection" logic in software to prevent people from replacing simple components, such as analog sensors.
These days they also started keeping their schematics secret, and if you share technical information, the big company will use their lawyers and sue or threat of a suit to chill any dissemination of repair details
Apple, John Deere, alike, and other electronics manufacturers are increasingly becoming savvy as to how to use these kinds of methods to make sure users of their product have to buy a new one when it breaks, Or go to the manufacturer for repair, which provides a revenue stream for the manufacturer (So it's in manufacturers' interest to make the repair as expensive as possible, after the initial 1 or 2 year warranty on equipment that would be expected to last 20s of years otherwise).....
But ONLY if they will support a Universal Right to Repair law.
Cars and Tractors should not be special. We should have the same rights to ALL DEVICES mechanical and electronic.
Our federal government has One Job. Defend the public, and adhering to the constitution ensure the sacred institution of government for the people by the people remains as such.
Elections are fraught with voter fraud attempts.....
How is it that there are BILLIONS to throw away on the most absurd things..... and yet not a single Million$ or two to spare to make sure there are eyes on every single polling place: and abuses or interferences are not occurring that could undermine election processes?
How should this be achieved without appearing anticompetitive?
Provide an On/Off switch to disable the feature. Either a physical DIP switch easily configured by the user by popping a cover, or a BIOS setting.