If the NSA wasn't the wrong hands, why didn't they cause this bug to be fixed years ago?
So as to be able to use it against an enemy, silly... Suppose for a second, people other than actual enemies (Italians and Germans) were using Enigma during WW2. Would you expect Alan Turing et al to publicize the fact, they found a way to break the code?
If you don't like, how the content is sold to you, then do not buy it. Very simple, eh?
But, no, as a good "Illiberal" — and you can't be one without an Authoritarian screaming inside you — you have to make sure, no one else can buy it either.
I take your question as a claim, that, if it is free (included in the ticket price), they can do whatever they want?
So, if a cable company gave you "free" Internet connectivity — in exchange for a raised price for cable TV and/or telephone — you would happily accept restrictions on that Internet-service, because it is "free"? Wow, I think, we have the solution for the telcos!
Although net neutrality is currently the law of the land, Amtrak's WiFi service blocks Apple's "apps upgrade" as well as Playboy.com — likely, some other sites as well.
Why is Amtrak allowed to do that today? Are some Internet service-providers — such as the government-owned ones — more equal than others?
Well, if you go back to when Net Neutrality wasn't yet a thing and everyone was outraged by the plans of telcos to hobble 3rd party site traffic over their networks unless they were paid a protection fee
For all the fear-mongering, no one has implemented such a thing. Not in the US, not anywhere in the world, as far as I know.
Just one more way to use an imaginary threat to expand government control...
It was the NSA who failed to properly secure and protect their "weapon" that could wreak havoc globally if it got into the wrong hands. It was and is their responsibility.
Yes, they were certainly negligent. A person, whose gun is stolen can be charged with negligence. But the murderer is still responsible for the murder — not the gun's hapless owner.
"headed by one Dr. Blumenthal, who has "chief health advisor to the Dukakis campaign" on his resume."
Dr. Blumenthal was not a party to this discussion. My point was to contradict the earlier assertion, that the data cited originated at Forbes. It did not — the Slashdot user who claimed so, we wrong.
"Do you have statistics for longevity â" and differences in longevity â" among Europeans? I'm listening..."
That alone was, obviously, insufficient to claim, that it is European's healthcare model, that's responsible for their longer lives. You are trying to win on a technicality, and failing even that. Because, as already explained, the longevity is not evidence of healthier life.
I get it, you said something stupid
Nope, you still don't get it. The cited numbers don't prove the stated assertion, namely: "You can have progressive taxation and universal healthcare or increasing inequality and more illness, fear, death and guns."
those 6+ troll mods you got on this topic.
Ha! If we go by moderation, the above-quoted nonsense from AC would've been a sentiment shared by the entire Slashdot. Which, of course, it is not (phew!). So, somehow, we got a bunch of illiberals in this thread resulting in a one-way moderation — incorrect moderation, by the way, for, right or wrong, I was certainly not trolling. Big deal — even though you chose to be a dick about it...
There are several ways, including, but not limited to, corrupting the count, gerrymandering, voter intimidation, blackmail, extortion, fraud, and systemic design flaws in the election process.
Well, these are well-known terms indeed, so why invent a new one — "hacking"? Such things happened since the founding of the Republic, but these means are also not particularly effective due to America's highly decentralized voting. A power would need to intimidate and extort a lot of people (including a lot of local election-officials) to make them vote a certain way or miscount the votes, so we would've heard by now from at least some of the victims... Especially, if the power were foreign...
Does that exclusivity matter?
Of course, it matters! If 2016 has seen about the same amount of undue interference as 2012 or 2008, why are the dissenters so loud only now?
I think every other country lacks the abomination of the Electoral College
Whatever you think of Electoral College, you are not accusing Putin of sneaking it upon us, are you?
There was no ad hominem attack. The poster I replied claimed something to be a fact — I demonstrated, that it was not.
I provided more sources and data
The CIA report you cited showed people in other countries living longer on average. That's not, what was claimed. DogDude claimed, Europeans have better health, he said — not live longer. And, no, the two are not quite the same...
A perfectly healthy 23 year-old may break his neck climbing a mountain — dragging his nation's average longevity down. Are there more Americans engaging in risky sports than Europeans? No one counted, but that's likely, because Americans are wealthier. We also die in auto-accidents a lot more often than even Canadians — which drags our average longevity further down, but has nothing to do with neither health nor "progressivism".
Finally, even if DogDude's claim was correct, and Europeans really are healthier — is it because, independent of, or despite their having a "single-payer" healthcare?
whilst everyone laughs at you
You are bringing up this "laughing at me" for the second time... I dread to learn any more about the emotional knot boiling inside your head, if you need to seek vindication from imaginary sympathizers in the imaginary audience...
Ah, that old trick of appealing to the audience... Must be, how you win all your arguments. You accused me of "ad hominem" — incorrectly, and you cited a source (CIA) claiming, it proves what you wanted to prove — also incorrectly. That's 2 out of 2 failures...
True or not, what does the statement mean? How would you — or anyone — "hack elections"? What has been done to us in 2016, that did not happen in 2012, for example, and does not happen in any free speech-country in a run-up to elections?
I'm assuming they have all the workers they need already hired.
First of all, why are you assuming that?
Perhaps even more importantly, that is simply an unachievable condition. Workers die. Workers marry and have children. Closer to the point, free people in a free market may choose a better-paying or otherwise more appealing employer. By having a semi-captive pool of workers at hand, the company will be able to not increase the salaries as fast in particular and not fight as hard to retain the workers in general.
Some homeless are that by choice or by some psychological inability to stay put. For others it is the problem of affordability. It only makes sense to offer permanent shelter to the last category — to people, who want a permanent place, but can not pay for it.
Now, why would not Amazon suggest to and outright push those people into jobs at Amazon? Warehouse workers make about $13/hour? And how will these shelters then be different from workers' dormitories?
Personally I don't see anything wrong with it — as long as no one is forced into these shelters, but that's just what might happen, if authorities start picking up homeless pushing them into such facilities to pretty-up the streets. Which would make these people into something unnervingly close to slaves...
I hope, you don't insist on it being done by drones, which Russia does not really have — and what it does have, it uses for intelligence-gathering and artillery-coordination only. But, here, I'll list a few:
You can also safely chalk up a sizeable fraction of American deaths in the Middle East to Russians — but we may not know the exact details of their coordinating ISIS and other terrorists against the US for decades...
Now, why is it indicative of anything? Why don't you list the Americans killed by American government — and we'll compare that to the Russians killed by Russia... Ah, you are an American — protected by these people you despise — and not worrying about what Russians do to others? Ok, do you suppose, all an enemy can do is kill? How about spying — on your country? How about lying online with millions of "voices" through hijacked accounts?
GTMO like prisons
Darling, GITMO is a tropical paradise compared to the installations run by the enterprise formerly known as GULAG.
Tell me about the Russian detention without charges + torture program.
Now explain why would you rather have the CIA on your stuff?
Because whatever abuse you may accuse CIA of was aimed at the sworn enemies of the US and our allies, not US citizens, however politically active and oppositiony...
So you prefer to use antivirus that lets NSA/CIA/etc viruses and spyware in instead, right?
Of course! Even if we stipulate, that NSA/CIA routinely access our computers, I'd certainly prefer that, however unpleasant, to a foreign power doing the same. And not just any foreign power, but Russia...
But, hey, do I understand you right, that you voted for Trump because he was beholden to Russia, rather than for Clinton, who was beholden to NSA/CIA?
Antifoidulus claimed, incorrectly, that Forbes is the source of the data — it was important to his argument, that the stats come not from a "liberal rag", as he put it, but a respectable publication. He was wrong, and I pointed it out — Forbes, whatever their credentials, did not put the data together themselves. They simply wrote about stats collected by a highly liberal organization.
I'm ambivalent about Forbes, but if you and Antifoidulus trust them so much, how come you ignored this little gem?
But that's not how statistics work - the numbers don't lie
And what was the result of that coercion? Millions of survivors with neither human rights nor material wealth. Nor health care, for that matter.
It is the deadliest school of thought known to humanity so far — even Hitler's peculiar variation of Fascism is a distant second. That is what's to learn from its failure.
Ah, but Socialism is not Communism, you'll say? Bullshit. Socialism is Communism-lite. And, besides, Bernie Sanders is an actual Communist, full monty, anyway.
We practiced Laissez-faire and it led to robber barons
Bullshit. None of it was worse, than what's happening in Venezuela today, for example.
I'd assume that the CIA takes care to make its statistics comparable, thus applying the same standards
How could they? They'd need to know all of the other information to do that.
As for the countries you cite, the CIA world fact book comes to different averages
The data I cited is from 2014, maybe, by now the numbers have changed. But the point is, too many factors affect the average longevity and declaring that "Government-paid healthcare" is the solution to all is incorrect.
And then, of course, comes the revelation, that longevity does not even matter in the first place — because a shorter life in a loving, caring Socialist environment is preferable to longer one of hard work under KKKapitalizm.
Slashdot Mirror
Which part of the linked-to interview are you referring to?
So as to be able to use it against an enemy, silly... Suppose for a second, people other than actual enemies (Italians and Germans) were using Enigma during WW2. Would you expect Alan Turing et al to publicize the fact, they found a way to break the code?
Decades later, thanks to the heroic efforts, the entire Manhattan remains rodent-infested and overcrowded .
If you don't like, how the content is sold to you, then do not buy it . Very simple, eh?
But, no, as a good "Illiberal" — and you can't be one without an Authoritarian screaming inside you — you have to make sure, no one else can buy it either.
Of course. Why aren't they?
I take your question as a claim, that, if it is free (included in the ticket price), they can do whatever they want?
So, if a cable company gave you "free" Internet connectivity — in exchange for a raised price for cable TV and/or telephone — you would happily accept restrictions on that Internet-service, because it is "free"? Wow, I think, we have the solution for the telcos!
Although net neutrality is currently the law of the land, Amtrak's WiFi service blocks Apple's "apps upgrade" as well as Playboy.com — likely, some other sites as well.
Why is Amtrak allowed to do that today? Are some Internet service-providers — such as the government-owned ones — more equal than others?
For all the fear-mongering, no one has implemented such a thing. Not in the US, not anywhere in the world, as far as I know.
Just one more way to use an imaginary threat to expand government control...
Yes, they were certainly negligent. A person, whose gun is stolen can be charged with negligence. But the murderer is still responsible for the murder — not the gun's hapless owner.
Like any weapon, this one is dangerous (deadly!) in the wrong hands. It was not the NSA, who placed it into the wrong hands, however.
Dr. Blumenthal was not a party to this discussion. My point was to contradict the earlier assertion, that the data cited originated at Forbes. It did not — the Slashdot user who claimed so, we wrong.
That alone was, obviously, insufficient to claim, that it is European's healthcare model, that's responsible for their longer lives. You are trying to win on a technicality, and failing even that. Because, as already explained, the longevity is not evidence of healthier life.
Nope, you still don't get it. The cited numbers don't prove the stated assertion, namely: "You can have progressive taxation and universal healthcare or increasing inequality and more illness, fear, death and guns."
Ha! If we go by moderation, the above-quoted nonsense from AC would've been a sentiment shared by the entire Slashdot. Which, of course, it is not (phew!). So, somehow, we got a bunch of illiberals in this thread resulting in a one-way moderation — incorrect moderation, by the way, for, right or wrong, I was certainly not trolling. Big deal — even though you chose to be a dick about it...
Like every "executive order" issued by Trump, this one is racist and unconstitutional. If Clinton won and issued the same decree, that would've been most enlightened, of course.
Well, these are well-known terms indeed, so why invent a new one — "hacking"? Such things happened since the founding of the Republic, but these means are also not particularly effective due to America's highly decentralized voting. A power would need to intimidate and extort a lot of people (including a lot of local election-officials) to make them vote a certain way or miscount the votes, so we would've heard by now from at least some of the victims... Especially, if the power were foreign...
Of course, it matters! If 2016 has seen about the same amount of undue interference as 2012 or 2008, why are the dissenters so loud only now?
Whatever you think of Electoral College, you are not accusing Putin of sneaking it upon us, are you?
There was no ad hominem attack. The poster I replied claimed something to be a fact — I demonstrated, that it was not.
The CIA report you cited showed people in other countries living longer on average. That's not, what was claimed. DogDude claimed, Europeans have better health, he said — not live longer. And, no, the two are not quite the same...
A perfectly healthy 23 year-old may break his neck climbing a mountain — dragging his nation's average longevity down. Are there more Americans engaging in risky sports than Europeans? No one counted, but that's likely, because Americans are wealthier. We also die in auto-accidents a lot more often than even Canadians — which drags our average longevity further down, but has nothing to do with neither health nor "progressivism".
Finally, even if DogDude's claim was correct, and Europeans really are healthier — is it because, independent of, or despite their having a "single-payer" healthcare?
You are bringing up this "laughing at me" for the second time... I dread to learn any more about the emotional knot boiling inside your head, if you need to seek vindication from imaginary sympathizers in the imaginary audience...
Ah, that old trick of appealing to the audience... Must be, how you win all your arguments. You accused me of "ad hominem" — incorrectly, and you cited a source (CIA) claiming, it proves what you wanted to prove — also incorrectly. That's 2 out of 2 failures...
True or not, what does the statement mean? How would you — or anyone — "hack elections"? What has been done to us in 2016, that did not happen in 2012, for example, and does not happen in any free speech-country in a run-up to elections?
First of all, why are you assuming that?
Perhaps even more importantly, that is simply an unachievable condition. Workers die. Workers marry and have children. Closer to the point, free people in a free market may choose a better-paying or otherwise more appealing employer. By having a semi-captive pool of workers at hand, the company will be able to not increase the salaries as fast in particular and not fight as hard to retain the workers in general.
Some homeless are that by choice or by some psychological inability to stay put. For others it is the problem of affordability. It only makes sense to offer permanent shelter to the last category — to people, who want a permanent place, but can not pay for it.
Now, why would not Amazon suggest to and outright push those people into jobs at Amazon? Warehouse workers make about $13/hour? And how will these shelters then be different from workers' dormitories?
Personally I don't see anything wrong with it — as long as no one is forced into these shelters, but that's just what might happen, if authorities start picking up homeless pushing them into such facilities to pretty-up the streets. Which would make these people into something unnervingly close to slaves...
I hope, you don't insist on it being done by drones, which Russia does not really have — and what it does have, it uses for intelligence-gathering and artillery-coordination only. But, here, I'll list a few:
You can also safely chalk up a sizeable fraction of American deaths in the Middle East to Russians — but we may not know the exact details of their coordinating ISIS and other terrorists against the US for decades...
Now, why is it indicative of anything? Why don't you list the Americans killed by American government — and we'll compare that to the Russians killed by Russia... Ah, you are an American — protected by these people you despise — and not worrying about what Russians do to others? Ok, do you suppose, all an enemy can do is kill? How about spying — on your country? How about lying online with millions of "voices" through hijacked accounts?
Darling, GITMO is a tropical paradise compared to the installations run by the enterprise formerly known as GULAG.
What exactly would you like to know?
Because whatever abuse you may accuse CIA of was aimed at the sworn enemies of the US and our allies, not US citizens, however politically active and oppositiony...
Of course! Even if we stipulate, that NSA/CIA routinely access our computers, I'd certainly prefer that, however unpleasant, to a foreign power doing the same. And not just any foreign power, but Russia...
But, hey, do I understand you right, that you voted for Trump because he was beholden to Russia, rather than for Clinton, who was beholden to NSA/CIA?
I'm ambivalent about Forbes, but if you and Antifoidulus trust them so much, how come you ignored this little gem
Damn Forbes and their idiotic "infinite" article stream. The "gem" I was referring to is this: "The Myth of Americans' Poor Life Expectancy"
Antifoidulus claimed, incorrectly, that Forbes is the source of the data — it was important to his argument, that the stats come not from a "liberal rag", as he put it, but a respectable publication. He was wrong, and I pointed it out — Forbes, whatever their credentials, did not put the data together themselves. They simply wrote about stats collected by a highly liberal organization.
I'm ambivalent about Forbes, but if you and Antifoidulus trust them so much, how come you ignored this little gem?
People putting the numbers together lie all the time. Here is just one example of such lying.
Stipulating that's really true, is it because or despite government forcing citizens to pay for other people's healthcare?
-1 redundant.
And yet, you didn't...
Communism killed 94 million people in the 20th century directly — plus tens of millions deaths due to Communism-induced famines.
And what was the result of that coercion? Millions of survivors with neither human rights nor material wealth. Nor health care, for that matter.
It is the deadliest school of thought known to humanity so far — even Hitler's peculiar variation of Fascism is a distant second. That is what's to learn from its failure.
Ah, but Socialism is not Communism, you'll say? Bullshit. Socialism is Communism-lite. And, besides, Bernie Sanders is an actual Communist, full monty, anyway.
Bullshit. None of it was worse, than what's happening in Venezuela today, for example.
How could they? They'd need to know all of the other information to do that.
The data I cited is from 2014, maybe, by now the numbers have changed. But the point is, too many factors affect the average longevity and declaring that "Government-paid healthcare" is the solution to all is incorrect.
And then, of course, comes the revelation, that longevity does not even matter in the first place — because a shorter life in a loving, caring Socialist environment is preferable to longer one of hard work under KKKapitalizm.
Thank you for admitting, that longevity does not really matter to a Socialist — what's important is the triumph of Socialism.