Trump has had times when he's changed stances from day to day or even within the same speech so it's not a huge stretch to think he'll espouse more sane views. He'll just shout "build a wall" every so often to keep his base happy.
The big question in my mind is whether he'll actually give specifics on his plans now. During the primaries, his plans were of the "build a wall, Mexico pays" detail level. When you're in a general election, though, you'll get more scrutiny to *how* you plan on doing something not just that you *say* you'll do something.
That's what I'm planning to do (vote for Jill Stein). I live in NY and NY will inevitably fall into the Democrat camp (regardless of any declarations by Trump to the contrary). If, somehow, it looks remotely close, I might vote for Hillary, but my present plan is to vote for Jill Stein as a "I don't want Hillary or Trump" protest vote. Also because Jill matches better with my views on the issues. (And, as a bonus, it makes for a nice comeback for people who ask me why I won't support a woman for President - I will be supporting one!)
I'd say the chances for life being out there are very good given how big the Universe is. To quote Yakko Warner:
It's a great big universe And we're all really puny We're just tiny little specks About the size of Mickey Rooney. It's big and black and inky And we are small and dinky It's a big universe and we're not.
And we're part of a vast interplanetary system Stretching seven hundred billion miles long. With nine planets and a sun; we think the Earth's the only one That has life on it, although we could be wrong. Across the interstellar voids are a billion asteroids Including meteors and Halley's Comet too. And there's over fifty moons floating out there like balloons In a panoramic trillion-mile view.
And still it's all a speck amid a hundred billion stars In a galaxy we call the Milky Way. It's sixty thousand trillion miles from one end to the other And still that's just a fraction of the way. 'Cause there's a hundred billion galaxies that stretch across the sky Filled with constellations, planets, moons and stars. And still the universe extends to a place that never ends Which is maybe just inside a little jar!
Even if we limit ourselves to the Observable Universe, there are billions of galaxies each with billions of stars. If even one hundredth of one percent of those stars had planets, one hundredth of one percent of those planets harbored life, and one hundredth of one percent of those planets with life had intelligent life, we'd be talking about millions of civilizations. We might be so far away from one another that the chances of finding each other approach zero, but there's a very good chance (probability-wise) that other intelligent life is out there.
My oldest son (age 12) loves watching game play videos on YouTube. Sometimes it's because he's seeing what others are doing on a game he plays, sometimes it's to see if he wants a certain game, and sometimes it's just "this game looks cool but mom/dad aren't getting it for me so I'll watch the videos." The only problem I have with him watching these videos is that some of the people playing them will make comments that aren't appropriate for him to hear (or for his little brother to hear). So we have a strict rule of "let dad preview the YouTube channel first." There are some gamers who keep their comments PG and who I feel comfortable letting my boys watch. (Then there are some official channels like Disney has for Disney Infinity which are pretty much always allowed.)
When I was growing up, I preferred reading a book to interacting with people. I even had a "dealer" (my local library) who supplied me with a seemingly endless supply of free books to fuel my addiction. I rarely went out with friends to the movies and never went to hang out at a burger shop or the mall. (I half expected the author to cite declining "sock hop" participation." I turned out just fine (though nowadays I don't have the time to feed my book addiction as much as I'd like).
Well, we need that too. And it wouldn't hurt if we reformed the entire voting process and adopted something like instant runoff voting. I know it has its flaws, but it's better than "you get one chance so pick the lesser of these evils" voting.
Heck, even some Republicans have said they'd vote for Clinton over Trump.
I believe one of the Koch brothers have come out and said Hillary would be a better president than Donald. When you've alienated the huge ultra-conservative GOP donors so much that they consider Hillary Clinton a better choice then you know you're in trouble.
I'm a registered Democrat and prefer Sanders over Clinton. I realize, though, that Bernie's chance of being the nominee is quickly reaching zero. Since NY will likely go to Clinton (no matter what Trump proclaims), I'll probably cast my vote for a third party candidate. I know this candidate won't win, but it will be a protest vote saying that I don't like either nominee.
Except that it may have done some good in showing the Republican party and their deep-pocket funders like the Koch brothers where a race to the bottom eventually gets them.
I'm hoping this election cycle results in the GOP splitting in two. The racists, fascists, and religious fundamentalists can be loaded into one party while the sane Republicans who don't mind working WITH people on the opposite side of the aisle to get things done can be in a second party. The Sane GOP can take their place as one of the two major parties while the "Crazy GOP" can provide us with a few laughs at their expense as they spiral into oblivion. (The Democrats have their own extremists that need to be purged, but I don't think it's gotten to "party splitting" level quite yet.)
If that meant destroying some of their produce, or standing out there with signs to chase everyone away, Or just making them very uncomfortable
To fight against this sort of bullying, we need the "Stand you ground" [wikipedia.org] laws — with the right to bear arms properly restored...
Sadly, all this might mean is that Mr. Rich CEO hires a bunch of goons... I mean security professionals to "have an informative chat" with the vendor. (Where they inform the vendor just how much of their produce will be destroyed if they don't relocate immediately.) If the vendor tries anything funny, the security professionals will be armed and will be able to outnumber/overpower the vendor. Even if the vendor manages to fight them off, he'll likely wind up being arrested. In any event, the CEO won't be personally involved, though he could hire lawyers to argue for his security professional s and against the vendor should any conflict arise.
In other words, adding guns to the mix doesn't equalize this rich vs poor conflict. The poor still get the short end of the stick because the rich can hire more guns than the poor can buy.
If they were breaking zoning laws and he was complaining about that, I don't think there would be as much outrage. He really crossed a line when he said it would be perfectly acceptable for him, personally, to harass the vendor or even destroy their produce until they left. If someone is breaking laws, you get the police to intervene. That's what they're paid for. This guy seems of the opinion that he can personally intervene even to the point of destroying private property and it's ok because he's rich and they're not. (He probably views the worst case scenario as: Throw some lawyers at the upset poor person so they either shut up or wind up losing what little they have.)
while dictating which deity you're allowed to pray to
Half-truth; Republicans don't care if you pray to Thor, so long as you say Merry Christmas and let Christian idiocy create laws.
Actually, the Christian Fundamentalists in the Republican party tend to want the country run as a Christian Theocracy. They repeatedly insist that the country was founded on Christianity and thus that Christianity should be the rule of law. Other religions might be tolerated at first, but only if they keep quiet about their beliefs. (Jews like me particularly infuriate them because we were supposed to have all converted to Christianity by now to get Jesus to come back. Our refusal to abandon our own religion for theirs puzzles and angers them.) Ideally, they'd love to be able to force conversions, but they would settle for just making Christianity a requirement for any public office. Want to run for Congress? How much do you accept (their version of) Jesus' teachings? This might not force people to convert, but it would make pleading your group's case that much harder if your group wasn't Christian.
There's also the question of profit. Gas stations typically don't make much money from the gas itself. That's why they have those mini-markets with junk food, sodas, etc. They make much of their profits on those sales. These "app-enabled mobile gas stations" are going to have to charge more for gas to get a profit*. I'll just stop by a gas station instead. It's not really that huge of a bother.
* Of course, this assumes "make a profit" is actually a goal of theirs instead of "work on a cool thing for a year or two and then sell it to someone so we can move onto another cool project with no long-term future.
Who says they'll "try to convince" you to unlock your phone with your fingerprint? Why not instead obtain your fingerprint from the dozen places you've left it (including possibly on your phone itself)? Once they have your fingerprint, it should be relatively easy to use it to fool the fingerprint sensor into thinking you've pressed your finger on it to unlock the phone.
Fingerprints are routinely taken upon arrest, even if the person is released without charges.
I've always wondered why people would think that fingerprints are a highly secured method of authentication. You leave the things around everywhere you go and you can't change them if they are compromised. Imagine if you dropped little strips of paper with your password (that could never be changed) written on it everywhere you went. How long would your "highly secured" password last if someone decided they wanted into your account? Especially if that person was the government?
Heck, if the government has your phone, chances are they have your fingerprint on your phone (or have access to somewhere you've been that you've left your fingerprints). Even if they don't have you in custody (and thus didn't fingerprint you), they can use those fingerprints to gain access to your phone.
I've actually been doing much more mobile gaming than anything else. My "gaming time" is very limited. I might have 10 minutes here or 20 minutes there. I can load up a game on my phone where ever I am, play a few rounds, and then close it out. I'll agree that many games are pure junk, but there are so many mobile games out there that it's inevitable that many wouldn't be good. There are some gems out there, though.
We cut cable over a year ago. Instead of cable TV, we get our video content from a combination of Netflix, Amazon VOD/Prime, Hulu, Google Play, OTA, DVD purchases, and DVD rentals from our local library. It's just as good as cable TV and we're saving about $700 a year. Netflix might not be a cable TV replacement by itself for most, but combined with other streaming services as well as other video options, cable TV can easily be replaced.
Also see the cable companies' reaction to Netflix and streaming videos in general. "Why would you want to pay $10 a month to stream everything whenever and wherever you want when you have have 10,000 channels of great content like Inane Reality Show Channel #50 and Shopping Network You'll Never Watch #12 for the low, low price of $200 a month? By the way, did you know that Netflix is really super-expensive. Sure, it's only because we imposed caps and overages on your Internet connection to keep you from streaming, but it's true now. So ditch that horrible streaming with it's great user interface and come back to your cable company!"
Thanks. Given that my boys are 8 and 12, it sounds like AppLock will still be good enough protection on their tablets. (The bigger issue will be if they guess my PIN - they've tried and failed miserably.)
Along those lines - and since I don't know everything about encryption - I wonder if it's possible to have an encrypted area that decrypts to your data if you enter one password and decrypts to an innocent looking set of data if you enter a second password. So the police arrest you and tell you to decrypt your drive. You type in "12345" and show them an innocent looking web browsing history and a boring set of family photos. You get home, type in your real password, and all your actual data gets displayed.
Would such a system be possible? Would it give any indications of having a second hidden layer?
And meanwhile not only is he being stuck in jail until he incriminates himself but any leak of his name (it looks like he hasn't been named yet) will lead to him being tarred and feathered even without a trial. All because one person says they saw bad stuff on his computer.
Yes, this stuff is bad but we can't let it become a root password to bypass our rights.
Slashdot Mirror
Trump has had times when he's changed stances from day to day or even within the same speech so it's not a huge stretch to think he'll espouse more sane views. He'll just shout "build a wall" every so often to keep his base happy.
The big question in my mind is whether he'll actually give specifics on his plans now. During the primaries, his plans were of the "build a wall, Mexico pays" detail level. When you're in a general election, though, you'll get more scrutiny to *how* you plan on doing something not just that you *say* you'll do something.
That's what I'm planning to do (vote for Jill Stein). I live in NY and NY will inevitably fall into the Democrat camp (regardless of any declarations by Trump to the contrary). If, somehow, it looks remotely close, I might vote for Hillary, but my present plan is to vote for Jill Stein as a "I don't want Hillary or Trump" protest vote. Also because Jill matches better with my views on the issues. (And, as a bonus, it makes for a nice comeback for people who ask me why I won't support a woman for President - I will be supporting one!)
I'd say the chances for life being out there are very good given how big the Universe is. To quote Yakko Warner:
It's a great big universe
And we're all really puny
We're just tiny little specks
About the size of Mickey Rooney.
It's big and black and inky
And we are small and dinky
It's a big universe and we're not.
And we're part of a vast interplanetary system
Stretching seven hundred billion miles long.
With nine planets and a sun; we think the Earth's the only one
That has life on it, although we could be wrong.
Across the interstellar voids are a billion asteroids
Including meteors and Halley's Comet too.
And there's over fifty moons floating out there like balloons
In a panoramic trillion-mile view.
And still it's all a speck amid a hundred billion stars
In a galaxy we call the Milky Way.
It's sixty thousand trillion miles from one end to the other
And still that's just a fraction of the way.
'Cause there's a hundred billion galaxies that stretch across the sky
Filled with constellations, planets, moons and stars.
And still the universe extends to a place that never ends
Which is maybe just inside a little jar!
Even if we limit ourselves to the Observable Universe, there are billions of galaxies each with billions of stars. If even one hundredth of one percent of those stars had planets, one hundredth of one percent of those planets harbored life, and one hundredth of one percent of those planets with life had intelligent life, we'd be talking about millions of civilizations. We might be so far away from one another that the chances of finding each other approach zero, but there's a very good chance (probability-wise) that other intelligent life is out there.
My oldest son (age 12) loves watching game play videos on YouTube. Sometimes it's because he's seeing what others are doing on a game he plays, sometimes it's to see if he wants a certain game, and sometimes it's just "this game looks cool but mom/dad aren't getting it for me so I'll watch the videos." The only problem I have with him watching these videos is that some of the people playing them will make comments that aren't appropriate for him to hear (or for his little brother to hear). So we have a strict rule of "let dad preview the YouTube channel first." There are some gamers who keep their comments PG and who I feel comfortable letting my boys watch. (Then there are some official channels like Disney has for Disney Infinity which are pretty much always allowed.)
When I was growing up, I preferred reading a book to interacting with people. I even had a "dealer" (my local library) who supplied me with a seemingly endless supply of free books to fuel my addiction. I rarely went out with friends to the movies and never went to hang out at a burger shop or the mall. (I half expected the author to cite declining "sock hop" participation." I turned out just fine (though nowadays I don't have the time to feed my book addiction as much as I'd like).
Well, we need that too. And it wouldn't hurt if we reformed the entire voting process and adopted something like instant runoff voting. I know it has its flaws, but it's better than "you get one chance so pick the lesser of these evils" voting.
I believe one of the Koch brothers have come out and said Hillary would be a better president than Donald. When you've alienated the huge ultra-conservative GOP donors so much that they consider Hillary Clinton a better choice then you know you're in trouble.
I'm a registered Democrat and prefer Sanders over Clinton. I realize, though, that Bernie's chance of being the nominee is quickly reaching zero. Since NY will likely go to Clinton (no matter what Trump proclaims), I'll probably cast my vote for a third party candidate. I know this candidate won't win, but it will be a protest vote saying that I don't like either nominee.
I'm hoping this election cycle results in the GOP splitting in two. The racists, fascists, and religious fundamentalists can be loaded into one party while the sane Republicans who don't mind working WITH people on the opposite side of the aisle to get things done can be in a second party. The Sane GOP can take their place as one of the two major parties while the "Crazy GOP" can provide us with a few laughs at their expense as they spiral into oblivion. (The Democrats have their own extremists that need to be purged, but I don't think it's gotten to "party splitting" level quite yet.)
Apparently, some people think that the first step towards being filthy rich is to treat people like garbage.
Sadly, all this might mean is that Mr. Rich CEO hires a bunch of goons... I mean security professionals to "have an informative chat" with the vendor. (Where they inform the vendor just how much of their produce will be destroyed if they don't relocate immediately.) If the vendor tries anything funny, the security professionals will be armed and will be able to outnumber/overpower the vendor. Even if the vendor manages to fight them off, he'll likely wind up being arrested. In any event, the CEO won't be personally involved, though he could hire lawyers to argue for his security professional s and against the vendor should any conflict arise.
In other words, adding guns to the mix doesn't equalize this rich vs poor conflict. The poor still get the short end of the stick because the rich can hire more guns than the poor can buy.
If they were breaking zoning laws and he was complaining about that, I don't think there would be as much outrage. He really crossed a line when he said it would be perfectly acceptable for him, personally, to harass the vendor or even destroy their produce until they left. If someone is breaking laws, you get the police to intervene. That's what they're paid for. This guy seems of the opinion that he can personally intervene even to the point of destroying private property and it's ok because he's rich and they're not. (He probably views the worst case scenario as: Throw some lawyers at the upset poor person so they either shut up or wind up losing what little they have.)
There's also the question of profit. Gas stations typically don't make much money from the gas itself. That's why they have those mini-markets with junk food, sodas, etc. They make much of their profits on those sales. These "app-enabled mobile gas stations" are going to have to charge more for gas to get a profit*. I'll just stop by a gas station instead. It's not really that huge of a bother.
* Of course, this assumes "make a profit" is actually a goal of theirs instead of "work on a cool thing for a year or two and then sell it to someone so we can move onto another cool project with no long-term future.
Who says they'll "try to convince" you to unlock your phone with your fingerprint? Why not instead obtain your fingerprint from the dozen places you've left it (including possibly on your phone itself)? Once they have your fingerprint, it should be relatively easy to use it to fool the fingerprint sensor into thinking you've pressed your finger on it to unlock the phone.
I've always wondered why people would think that fingerprints are a highly secured method of authentication. You leave the things around everywhere you go and you can't change them if they are compromised. Imagine if you dropped little strips of paper with your password (that could never be changed) written on it everywhere you went. How long would your "highly secured" password last if someone decided they wanted into your account? Especially if that person was the government?
Heck, if the government has your phone, chances are they have your fingerprint on your phone (or have access to somewhere you've been that you've left your fingerprints). Even if they don't have you in custody (and thus didn't fingerprint you), they can use those fingerprints to gain access to your phone.
I've actually been doing much more mobile gaming than anything else. My "gaming time" is very limited. I might have 10 minutes here or 20 minutes there. I can load up a game on my phone where ever I am, play a few rounds, and then close it out. I'll agree that many games are pure junk, but there are so many mobile games out there that it's inevitable that many wouldn't be good. There are some gems out there, though.
We cut cable over a year ago. Instead of cable TV, we get our video content from a combination of Netflix, Amazon VOD/Prime, Hulu, Google Play, OTA, DVD purchases, and DVD rentals from our local library. It's just as good as cable TV and we're saving about $700 a year. Netflix might not be a cable TV replacement by itself for most, but combined with other streaming services as well as other video options, cable TV can easily be replaced.
Also see the cable companies' reaction to Netflix and streaming videos in general. "Why would you want to pay $10 a month to stream everything whenever and wherever you want when you have have 10,000 channels of great content like Inane Reality Show Channel #50 and Shopping Network You'll Never Watch #12 for the low, low price of $200 a month? By the way, did you know that Netflix is really super-expensive. Sure, it's only because we imposed caps and overages on your Internet connection to keep you from streaming, but it's true now. So ditch that horrible streaming with it's great user interface and come back to your cable company!"
Thankfully, you should be able to pay them with all the money from those dead Nigerian princes.
As a side note, is "Nigerian prince" the world's most hazardous job? They're constantly dying off!
Thanks. Given that my boys are 8 and 12, it sounds like AppLock will still be good enough protection on their tablets. (The bigger issue will be if they guess my PIN - they've tried and failed miserably.)
Along those lines - and since I don't know everything about encryption - I wonder if it's possible to have an encrypted area that decrypts to your data if you enter one password and decrypts to an innocent looking set of data if you enter a second password. So the police arrest you and tell you to decrypt your drive. You type in "12345" and show them an innocent looking web browsing history and a boring set of family photos. You get home, type in your real password, and all your actual data gets displayed.
Would such a system be possible? Would it give any indications of having a second hidden layer?
And meanwhile not only is he being stuck in jail until he incriminates himself but any leak of his name (it looks like he hasn't been named yet) will lead to him being tarred and feathered even without a trial. All because one person says they saw bad stuff on his computer.
Yes, this stuff is bad but we can't let it become a root password to bypass our rights.
Interesting. How did you get around it? In my tests, it ran on device startup so rebooting the device didn't present a vulnerability.