has now been strongly linked with more attacks on refugees in Germany
Do we really have to go to Germany for examples of Facebook helping violent racists spread their message? A homegrown Kill Whitey is right here, whatever they are about, their name is certainly encouraging racial hatred. Which needs no encouraging.
But, at least, Facebook have got Alex Jones off, so they have that going for them, which is nice.
I believe by online, the poster means using a web interface rather then downloading mail like I do with pop
"Online" and "using web-interface" are very different things. Indeed, the concept of being "online" predates that of "web" by quite some years. For example, your Netflix client is, most certainly, operating "online" — but not inside a web-browser.
IMAP4 has largely replaced POP — but even the old POP-only mail programs usually allowed interactive manipulation of e-mail. If you wish to discuss the features and capabilities of Thunderbird further, please, state affirmatively, that you have used it yourself — in the last 5 years.
public safety customers have access to plans that do not have data throughput limitations
suggesting a plan that costs $99.99 for the first 20GB and $8 per gigabyte thereafter.
Yeah, this may be a cheaper one for the department, based on their actual usage — which only spikes when there is a massive fire.
Either way, they knew their options long ago but stuck with a $38/month plan.
And, again, none of this has anything to do with Net Neutrality:
Even when net neutrality rules were in place, all major carriers imposed some form of throttling on unlimited plans when customers used more than a certain amount of data.
The firefighters are to blame, if the facts reported in TFA are, indeed, facts:
While fire department personnel thought they were already paying for "truly" unlimited data, Verizon said they weren't.
"The short of it is, public safety customers have access to plans that do not have data throughput limitations," Buss told Prziborowski. "However, the current plan set for all of SCCFD's lines does have data throttling limitations. We will need to talk about making some plan changes to all lines or a selection of lines to address the data throttling limitation of the current plan."
The firefighters f-ed up. They knew — at least, on June 29th, what will automatically happen to their connection. That they didn't change their subscription by July 27, when the Mendocino fire started, is nobody else's fault but their own. Spending tens of thousands on all of that firefighting equipment, they can't spend extra $60 for the truly unlimited data-plan?
Maybe, they expected the company to give them freebies, the way smaller business may be bullied into giving. Didn't work...
What does any of this have to do with "net neutrality" remains a mystery...
Yep. I symlinked ~/.mozilla/firefox as ~/.waterfox and the Waterfox-browser started right up. Things "just work" — the add-ons, which Firefox has earlier declared "obsolete", started to work again, etc.
The bridge's sorry state was known years ago. A certain political party used the "environmentalist" demagoguery to keep the status quo.
And now the same people are blaming the company that built and maintained the structure:
Transport Minister Danilo Toninelli, a member of the governing Five Star Movement (M5S), called for the immediate resignation of the company's top management Wednesday.
"First of all the top executives of Autostrade have to resign," he said in a message on Facebook. "If they can't manage the motorways, then the state will do it."
Because the government is so good at everything...
Unlike that of the USSR, who only supported foreign Leftists, Putin's Russia is non-partisan, looking for support and influence wherever they can find it. In Germany, for example, thay happen to be particularly successful among the Left (no doubt with the aid of the old Stasi files). In France they supported the supposed rightists.
Western societies aren't immune to corruption — if the price is right — and for years Putin could afford bribes on the scale of millions.
Likewise, their targeting computers of all political parties is not at all surprising. That the GOP runs a tighter ship is not surprising either...
So your solution would be complete cooperation with LEOs and voluntary backdoors?
The backdoor of automatic upgrades is already there. They just had to use it: put the phone on an isolated network with a fake upgrade-server and place the compromised "upgrade" on it signed by Apple's private key. There may be other methods too.
And they should have used it, when the government requested with the properly-obtained warrant issued in full adherence to the Constitution.
This is very important — usually such requests are fought on the basis that they are somehow illegitimate. That the cops have failed to dot some i or cross a t somewhere. What Apple — and its fan-bois — proved back then is that it is all about "fuck-da-phleace".
Why is Snowden — who we know to have given numerous secrets to Russia, and who is currently living in Russia — a hero to the same people, who denounce Trump as traitor because his son once met with a Russian lawyer?
But it's stronger evidence than anything I've seen that indicate they are [dis]honest.
Had he been dishonest, would he really have bragged about it publicly? Please...
And for your second thought, you're right.
You've ignored my main point — which is that drastically different standard of evidence are applied to allegations of illegal voting and subverted machinery.
True certainty doesn't exist in this universe. But that doesn't mean you can't do your best.
You come off as splitting hairs. If you're not able to dump toxic waste into water systems, that is a regulation.
If I am unable to do it, because the Executive branch decided, I should not be able to — that's regulation.
If I am afraid to do it, because I may get sued by actual victims of my actions, who would successfully convince the jury that my actions have injured them — that's not "regulation".
It is not "splitting hairs" — it is the fundamental difference between Fascism and free-markets.
The "toxic dumps" are an easy poster-child, but other manifestations of the same Fascism are much harder for your to defend. The license-requirements are a product of the exact same mindset, for example.
You equate socialism with not free
No, I don't.
Many people like libraries, the post office, law enforcement, fire fighters, etc.
Law-enforcement can not be done privately. Libraries, mail-delivery, and fire-fighting can — and therefore should.
no, we're not on our way to mass murder.
Every time we succumb to the rhetoric like "This may inconvenience some, but is better for the Greater Good" we make a step in that direction. We may be further away from it, than Venezuela, who in turn is farther than North Korea, but that's the direction nonetheless.
We have a minimum wage because it was prophesied by Jefferson.
You aren't in front of a jury, lawyer, where such sniping may score points with those suffering from attention deficit.
about why we have one, what problems it was supposed to solve
That's your duty, if you wish to advocate for it.
"minimum wage is bad because it's not capitalist"
That's perfectly enough. Your attempts to re-spin a principled stand as being an ideologue does not change the underlying nature of the argument: the introduction of "minimum wage" reduced the Liberty and increased the role of Government in our lives. As Jefferson prophesied it will.
I still remember the President(?) of Diebold Systems promising to deliver the vote to the Republican candidate
He made that promise as a member of the State's GOP, not as the CEO of Diebold. Do you think, other makers of such equipment will have no employees with allegiances to one party or the other — even if they keep their mouths shut?
My point, however, remains. Why is it, that in the case of Diebold the mere possibility of corruption is accepted as evidence of the fact of corruption — without any citations of it actually happening "in the field" — but the same standards of evidence are not applied to the illegal voting? Which is not only just as possible, but actually happens (even if we don't know, how often)?
signed and checksummed
Ah, reliance on software — and the personal integrity of the programmers writing it...
When a process is demonstrated to be so flawed that compromise should be assumed, why is irrefutable proof even necessary?
Yes! Indeed! Which is exactly the logic, we should be applying to the phenomenon of illegal voting too.
It is easy, it happens — which is more than we can say (with citations) about the Diebold machines, actually.
But, for some reasons, any attempts to improve this demonstrably flawed process are struck down — because, it is said, on Slashdot and elsewhere, "there is no proof".
Like the diebold machines? You say this like it stands for anything.
Funny, any time one mentions voting fraud, a highly-moderated response will spring up claiming, such fraud is "miniscule" because no study has ever found anything bigger.
But Diebold can be the butt of FUD-spreading without any sort of proof it ever contributed to actual vote-corruption — and without challenges from the same sticklers to the "unproven therefore false" approach...
This will just become the next attack vector hackers use to compromise the systems.
You are absolutely correct. Instead of subverting many little different computers and/or corrupting a large number of officials, an enemy — be they foreign or domestic — only needs to subvert one system and/or corrupt one man.
Even if this big subversion/corruption is more difficult than any single smaller one, it is still easier, than many of those.
We are on the way from "greater or fewer" invalid results to "all or nothing". And, much as I like the "nothing" part, the "all" scares me much more than the "greater".
Why does a minimum wage exist? If we never needed one, then why do we have one?
Because, as Jefferson forewarned, "It is in the natural course of events that liberty recedes and government grows.”
There are historical reasons why we did things.
With this kind of argument you can defend lots of things. I'll steer clear of the Godwin's Law, and use the example of Soviet Collectivization instead. Was it a good things just because it was done for some reasons — many of them "historical"?
It's when it's unregulated that it becomes a nightmare
No, it does not, kamrade.
I may be unable to keep an eye on cereal-ingredients myself, but that does not mean, the role belongs to government. Consumer Reports and the like organizations can take the FDA's role any day.
Slashdot Mirror
Do we really have to go to Germany for examples of Facebook helping violent racists spread their message? A homegrown Kill Whitey is right here, whatever they are about, their name is certainly encouraging racial hatred. Which needs no encouraging.
But, at least, Facebook have got Alex Jones off, so they have that going for them, which is nice.
"Online" and "using web-interface" are very different things. Indeed, the concept of being "online" predates that of "web" by quite some years. For example, your Netflix client is, most certainly, operating "online" — but not inside a web-browser.
IMAP4 has largely replaced POP — but even the old POP-only mail programs usually allowed interactive manipulation of e-mail. If you wish to discuss the features and capabilities of Thunderbird further, please, state affirmatively, that you have used it yourself — in the last 5 years.
One only available to public safety customers:
Yeah, this may be a cheaper one for the department, based on their actual usage — which only spikes when there is a massive fire.
Either way, they knew their options long ago but stuck with a $38/month plan.
And, again, none of this has anything to do with Net Neutrality:
According to TFA, they did get special consideration: "public safety customers have access to plans that do not have data throughput limitations".
The department just chose not to buy such a plan...
The firefighters are to blame, if the facts reported in TFA are, indeed, facts:
The firefighters f-ed up. They knew — at least, on June 29th, what will automatically happen to their connection. That they didn't change their subscription by July 27, when the Mendocino fire started, is nobody else's fault but their own. Spending tens of thousands on all of that firefighting equipment, they can't spend extra $60 for the truly unlimited data-plan?
Maybe, they expected the company to give them freebies, the way smaller business may be bullied into giving. Didn't work...
What does any of this have to do with "net neutrality" remains a mystery...
Though it has an offline mode too, you don't have to use it that way — and I don't, for example. The rest of your post is invalidated by this.
Yep. I symlinked ~/.mozilla/firefox as ~/.waterfox and the Waterfox-browser started right up. Things "just work" — the add-ons, which Firefox has earlier declared "obsolete", started to work again, etc.
Could it be, the switch is one of Google's condition for financing Mozilla? To make it easier for users to switch to Chrome?
The demotion of Thunderbird may be similarly explained by Google's influence, because the application competes with GMail's web-interface.
But, at least, they no longer have a homophobe running the show so they have that going for them, which is nice.
The bridge's sorry state was known years ago. A certain political party used the "environmentalist" demagoguery to keep the status quo.
And now the same people are blaming the company that built and maintained the structure:
Because the government is so good at everything...
Unlike that of the USSR, who only supported foreign Leftists, Putin's Russia is non-partisan, looking for support and influence wherever they can find it. In Germany, for example, thay happen to be particularly successful among the Left (no doubt with the aid of the old Stasi files). In France they supported the supposed rightists.
Western societies aren't immune to corruption — if the price is right — and for years Putin could afford bribes on the scale of millions.
Likewise, their targeting computers of all political parties is not at all surprising. That the GOP runs a tighter ship is not surprising either...
The backdoor of automatic upgrades is already there. They just had to use it: put the phone on an isolated network with a fake upgrade-server and place the compromised "upgrade" on it signed by Apple's private key. There may be other methods too.
And they should have used it, when the government requested with the properly-obtained warrant issued in full adherence to the Constitution.
This is very important — usually such requests are fought on the basis that they are somehow illegitimate. That the cops have failed to dot some i or cross a t somewhere. What Apple — and its fan-bois — proved back then is that it is all about "fuck-da-phleace".
But not Chinese police...
Why is Snowden — who we know to have given numerous secrets to Russia, and who is currently living in Russia — a hero to the same people, who denounce Trump as traitor because his son once met with a Russian lawyer?
Why is not Snowden ever portrayed performing oral sex on Putin?
Had he been dishonest, would he really have bragged about it publicly? Please...
You've ignored my main point — which is that drastically different standard of evidence are applied to allegations of illegal voting and subverted machinery.
The best, in my opinion, is to use different means, procedures, and hardware (if any) — as we've been doing.
If I am unable to do it, because the Executive branch decided, I should not be able to — that's regulation.
If I am afraid to do it, because I may get sued by actual victims of my actions, who would successfully convince the jury that my actions have injured them — that's not "regulation".
It is not "splitting hairs" — it is the fundamental difference between Fascism and free-markets.
The "toxic dumps" are an easy poster-child, but other manifestations of the same Fascism are much harder for your to defend. The license-requirements are a product of the exact same mindset, for example.
No, I don't.
Law-enforcement can not be done privately. Libraries, mail-delivery, and fire-fighting can — and therefore should.
Every time we succumb to the rhetoric like "This may inconvenience some, but is better for the Greater Good" we make a step in that direction. We may be further away from it, than Venezuela, who in turn is farther than North Korea, but that's the direction nonetheless.
You aren't in front of a jury, lawyer, where such sniping may score points with those suffering from attention deficit.
That's your duty, if you wish to advocate for it.
That's perfectly enough. Your attempts to re-spin a principled stand as being an ideologue does not change the underlying nature of the argument: the introduction of "minimum wage" reduced the Liberty and increased the role of Government in our lives. As Jefferson prophesied it will.
He made that promise as a member of the State's GOP, not as the CEO of Diebold. Do you think, other makers of such equipment will have no employees with allegiances to one party or the other — even if they keep their mouths shut?
My point, however, remains. Why is it, that in the case of Diebold the mere possibility of corruption is accepted as evidence of the fact of corruption — without any citations of it actually happening "in the field" — but the same standards of evidence are not applied to the illegal voting? Which is not only just as possible, but actually happens (even if we don't know, how often)?
Ah, reliance on software — and the personal integrity of the programmers writing it...
Yes! Indeed! Which is exactly the logic, we should be applying to the phenomenon of illegal voting too.
It is easy, it happens — which is more than we can say (with citations) about the Diebold machines, actually.
But, for some reasons, any attempts to improve this demonstrably flawed process are struck down — because, it is said, on Slashdot and elsewhere, "there is no proof".
Funny, any time one mentions voting fraud, a highly-moderated response will spring up claiming, such fraud is "miniscule" because no study has ever found anything bigger.
But Diebold can be the butt of FUD-spreading without any sort of proof it ever contributed to actual vote-corruption — and without challenges from the same sticklers to the "unproven therefore false" approach...
You are absolutely correct. Instead of subverting many little different computers and/or corrupting a large number of officials, an enemy — be they foreign or domestic — only needs to subvert one system and/or corrupt one man.
Even if this big subversion/corruption is more difficult than any single smaller one, it is still easier, than many of those.
We are on the way from "greater or fewer" invalid results to "all or nothing". And, much as I like the "nothing" part, the "all" scares me much more than the "greater".
Because, as Jefferson forewarned, "It is in the natural course of events that liberty recedes and government grows.”
With this kind of argument you can defend lots of things. I'll steer clear of the Godwin's Law, and use the example of Soviet Collectivization instead. Was it a good things just because it was done for some reasons — many of them "historical"?
Look up "tort" (and I don't meant sweet cakes). If you are harmed by somebody's actions — such as toxic waste-dumping — you can sue them.
What do you want me to "see" in China? They aren't a free country...
None. The second you allow for the Glorious Collective to become more important than the Individual, you are on your way to mass murder.
Police — and courts — will.
Minimum wage, tovarysh Toshnilovka, is a Socialism invention. There should simply be no such thing.
While the society was distracted by the talk of imaginary "nazis", Communists — adherents of the far deadlier, indeed the deadliest, school of thought known to humanity — have crept in on us, and are even fielding national politicians already...
No, it does not, kamrade.
I may be unable to keep an eye on cereal-ingredients myself, but that does not mean, the role belongs to government. Consumer Reports and the like organizations can take the FDA's role any day.
This may be a valid counter-argument. The word "if" is not.