20 years ago — in my younger and gospel-spreading days — I set up my parents' desktops to use FreeBSD.
Since then I would, once in a while, doubt, whether it was the right decision — especially, when they asked about things like Skype or Flash, which required certain hackery to get working. Was I right imposing my choice of the OS on folks, who just wanted to "use the Internet"?
But, looking at these near-daily mal/scamware reports targeting Windows, I sure am glad, their systems are immune. Yeah, once in a while an infected web-server may hijack their Firefox window with a message about an infection in "C:\Windows", but they already know to laugh about it...
Meanwhile a friend of mine supporting his parents on regular PCs has to keep anti-virus subscriptions up to date and is still forced to reinstall the OS for them about once a year...
If you want to go Kefedokhles, I haven't stated, Duke was never convicted of a crime either. I only invited readers to imagine, Trump stating so — even if it were true.
They were federal felonies, so I'd say that they were more significant than not.
The entire amounts in question are about 10 times less than just the donations of the schemer in TFA. What the schemer actually schemed out of his victims is, likely, several more orders of magnitude still.
Sharpton may or may not be a racist, but a lot of respectable people publicly engage with him
He is a racist — there is no "may or may not" about this. That "a lot of respectable people" engage with him despite this is exactly the hypocrisy I'm decrying here.
this is where the difference in media attention comes from
Duke was accused of telling supporters he was in financial straits, then misusing the money they sent him from 1993 to 1999. He was also accused of filing a false 1998 tax return claiming he made only $18,831 in 1998 when he really made more than $65,000.
He was a fucking congressman in the 90's for god sake
Oh, that's a good point. So was Charles Rangel. Oh, wait, he still is a Congressman, unlike Mr. Duke.
Now, unlike Duke, Representative Rangel's was cited for 11 ethics violations — yet Hillary Clinton not only wouldn't "repudiate" him upon learning of his endorsement, she actively campaigned with him in NYC.
But, at least, for all his faults and crookedness, Charles Rangel does not seem to be a racist personally. Unlike Al Sharpton, for another example — who is as bona-fide anti-Semitic as one can get in America. The riots he encouraged and personally participated in led to an actual killing of at least one man. And yet, Hillary Clinton not only welcomed Al Sharpton's support this year, she gave a speech at his organization.
A well deserved storm because it's not often that presidential candidate defends probably the most famous racist in the country
Maybe, if Trump went to give a speech at a KKK-organized conference — and campaigned together with Mr. Duke on the streets — it would've been comparable... As things are, you can't even see your own hypocrisy jumping in front of you and screaming into your ear...
I seem to remember, Donald Trump being called "racist" over an unsolicited endorsement from a former "KKK"-member. For a while every interviewer kept asking him to "repudiate" it...
Meanwhile the Democratic Party is getting not mere endorsements, but hefty donations from convicted criminals — without anybody asking the inconvenient questions about repudiation. Yeah, they eventually refunded the monies he got for them — but only after the man was convicted — despite "weeks of reports about Hsu's controversial history and murky business practices" and a 15 year-old outstanding warrant for him...
Imagine Trump pointing out, David Duke has never been convicted of any crime — only he did not even know, who the man was... No, he was supposed to know all about David Duke (who, it turns out, quit KKK in 1980).
(Should you choose to reply insisting, Trump really is racist, be sure, your response condemns "Black Lives Matter" as an inherently racist idea, which started with a lie.)
Why wouldn't he simply codify his preferences? I hear, he still holds some sway among Linux developers — once a particular style is accepted by consensus, it becomes easier to convince folks to follow it...
Interestingly, the style Mr. Torvalds prefers has been part of BSD's style(9)
manual for decades.
Maybe, he should leave children's to children and join a real OS-project...
I can do a better job than you of making up arguments to defend Israel. And I know they're bogus.
Yours may be. Mine are indisputable — which is why you are admitting defeat:
I'll never convince you.
Surrender accepted.
you won't even condemn the murder of a 3-year-old child.
I said, it may have been a horrible war crime. Without knowing more than an obviously-biased Internet-poster would claim, it is impossible to offer a stronger condemnation.
Now, for the benefit of anyone following this argument, I'll point out the central fact — Israel's detractors would not admit, Hamas is a terrorist organization.
Without warning, a third soldier emerged from inside the tank and started shooting at the three girls and then also at their grandmother.
This may or may not have been a horrible war crime, but it was not an Act of Terror. There is a fairly clear definition: civilians must be the targets (not bystanders) of calculated (not accidental or mistaken) violence for the purpose of intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.
The IDF refused to let an ambulance bring them to the hospital
Hamas has uses ambulances to transport troops and ammunition. They also use children for suicide attacks — a common practice by Islamists in Palestineand world-wide. Children are also used as human shields — because it works on impressionable useful idiots like yourself. Whether the women, who stepped out, were innocent, or were about to throw a tank-disabling bomb under the tracks, may not have been obvious.
But, again whether the IDF soldier had justifiable suspicions in his shooting of the family, or committed a war crime, it was not an act of terror.
And I did ask for three examples — certainly, a country labeled "terrorist" by detractors would have at least three acts of terror to its name...
Hamas averages dozens of such acts every year — their whole strategy is based on targeting Israeli civilians, because they are impotent at targeting IDF. And yet, you'd like to pretend, Israel is "worse" or "just as bad". Fail.
Because I do not fully understand the proposed improvements nor the mathematical proofs included with them — and so must take it on faith. Just as I was asked to take Tor on faith.
You state that Tor is "too difficult to break"
I made no such statement. Read carefully...
I might as well remind you Tor was actually developed by DARPA
I know that very well. I also know, US has spent considerable efforts to break it — and they can only do that in some cases and not reliably. The proposed changes may be just what's advertised, or they may be hiding some brilliantly-devised backdoor.
"For instance, messages from senders Alice, Bob, and Carol reach the first server in the order A, B, C, that server would send them to the second server in a different order -- say C, B, A."
The communication latency must be even suckier than that of Tor then... Oh, well...
Now, is it really a great new tool for privacy, or does it have inherent back doors and the announcements are to lure us away from Tor, which authorities have found too difficult to break? Will we even ever know?
Posting Israeli/US/UK propaganda is also evidence of their support for terrorism
Name three acts of terror committed by the State of Israel...
What's your point in singling out Hamas?
Hamas is distinguished by, for example, being designated "terrorist organization" by various governments — a diverse bunch from US to European Union to Egypt.
And not for nothing — whatever you may think of their goals, their methods are terroristic. By definition.
I suppose they also sued the phone company for aiding and abetting also?
Phone companies are Common Carriers and thus immune — they don't listen to conversations...
Facebook could've gone that way too, but instead they chose to actively publicize their censorship efforts. Every shutdown of "hate speech" is a result of deliberate action by a human employee of the company. That they allow Hamas-supporting pages to continue to stay up is evidence of their support for terrorism.
did they used to sue paper and pencil manufacturers for the same thing?
A better analogy would've been phone companies and then the Internet Service Providers.
And it would still have been an invalid analogy, because neither the phone companies nor the ISPs filter based on contents. You may be too young to remember, but this was frequently an argument over Usenet censorship during early-to-mid 1990ies — that by censoring some posts an ISP may lose their Common Carrier status and have to sensor all posts from then on.
Facebook went down that road anyway — either to position itself as "friendly" and "safe" or simply to facilitate Zuckerberg's own agenda — and is now paying the price...
DoJ had already said they would follow FBI's recommendation.
Yes, all part of the agreement achieved between Clintons, Obama and the AGE.
Are you saying FBI Director did not know DoJ had publicly announced this and the ball was in FBI's court?
It only makes sense to discuss, where the ball is, if the match is not fixed... It was fixed. Obama agreed to help Clinton for the sake of their Party and Comey was given a role to play — and played it. "The pikey goes down in the fourth," — said Bricktop in a movie-example of match-fixing...
There is no chance Hillary is getting anywhere close to winning, if he recommended prosecution
I wish this were true, but it is not. You are an example yourself — you would've voted for her even if she were indicted and attended the presidential debates with a tracking device on her ankle. You — and millions of others — would've dismissed all that, while hating on Trump for his preferring good-looking women over ugly ones. Indicted or not, she had a chance.
They haven't been invaded any more than others. Poland, for example, had it much worse than Russia over the centuries. Also, Russia has done many more invasions of their own to compensate — including some very recent history...
If they can invade Ukraine and grab land because "it was always Russian", why can't they invade Finland under the same excuse? Finland used to be a Russian province too until 1917. If Kyiv fights them, Helsinki should too...
I always thought, Heaven and Paradise are interchangeable synonyms. Indeed, the dictionary seems to concur...
I must admit that I don't really understand why people act like they _know_ what happens after death
Clearly, you aren't religious. If you were, you would've known too. Religion — pretty much by definition — is not Science. Dogma is taken on faith, not because a reproducible experiment confirms it.
I suppose, the approach simplifies life greatly...
Are you saying FBI Director did not recommend prosecution because he did not think DoJ would prosecute
That is, how FBI's statement is worded. The real reason, of course, was a polite request from the White House. Clintons and Obamas hate each other and that's why the investigation was allowed to proceed as far as it did.
But, without any other credible options for Democrats come November, Obama held his nose and asked (ordered?) the FBI to stop it... For the good of the Party.
Couldnt he have just recommended prosecution and lay the blame on the DoJ then? Am I missing something?
He likely wanted to, but that was not deemed good enough for the ruling Democrats. Loretta Lynch is already known as a highly partisan figure in cahootswith Clintons. So Comey was asked to lend his credibility to the cause.
The entire Federal government is now pulling for Hillary — not only because she is the Government Party's candidate, but because she is a vindictive bitch — another fact known since the 1990ies. If she prevails and becomes President, those who opposed her will find themselves rather inconvenienced. Whereas if Trump wins, nothing bad will happen — Comey, for example, will likely retain his job.
There is no contradiction here. Some things are deemed so wrong, the bring about the ultimate punishment.
Should suicide be on the list along with murder? Consider the rest of the theology — while we are suffering here on Earth, life in Heaven is nothing but bliss. How do you discourage people from skipping the real-life's misery and escaping to Heaven en masse? You can't — not without turning such premature departure into a disqualification. There is nothing evil about it.
An alternative is that religious leaders didn't want people to commit suicide (can't blame them for that) and they made up a story to give people extra incentive not to.
Yes, you got it, congratulations.
One of his creations finds existing in the rest of his creation so unbearable
Just what was so "unbearable" in this case, one wonders? Midlife crisis?
Why the fuck do you think FBI decided not to prosecute then?
FBI made no such decision. DOJ did.
FBI did not recommend prosecution. And explained why — you don't have to ask my opinion:
our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case
The White House and the Department of Justice (which would've done the prosecution) are in the hands of the Democrats — until January. And Democrats do not prosecute Democrats.
Slashdot Mirror
20 years ago — in my younger and gospel-spreading days — I set up my parents' desktops to use FreeBSD.
Since then I would, once in a while, doubt, whether it was the right decision — especially, when they asked about things like Skype or Flash, which required certain hackery to get working. Was I right imposing my choice of the OS on folks, who just wanted to "use the Internet"?
But, looking at these near-daily mal/scamware reports targeting Windows, I sure am glad, their systems are immune. Yeah, once in a while an infected web-server may hijack their Firefox window with a message about an infection in "C:\Windows", but they already know to laugh about it...
Meanwhile a friend of mine supporting his parents on regular PCs has to keep anti-virus subscriptions up to date and is still forced to reinstall the OS for them about once a year...
If you want to go Kefedokhles, I haven't stated, Duke was never convicted of a crime either. I only invited readers to imagine, Trump stating so — even if it were true.
The entire amounts in question are about 10 times less than just the donations of the schemer in TFA. What the schemer actually schemed out of his victims is, likely, several more orders of magnitude still.
I can see Trump forgetting the name of an also-run from 15 years ago. Can you not?
This — preference for comely females — was the only thing, that the authors of the NY Times hit piece were able to come up with.
Charges of "racism" and "fascism" are entirely ridiculous...
Apologies (insincere) for having burst yours. Evidence of Hillary Clinton getting a very special treatment by the FBI keeps coming up...
He is a racist — there is no "may or may not" about this. That "a lot of respectable people" engage with him despite this is exactly the hypocrisy I'm decrying here.
The difference comes from the vast majority of journalists being Democrats.
And now to recall — Trump did not seek Duke's endorsement, and didn't campaign with him, whereas Hillary has done both with figures far more negative.
I stand corrected. Thank you...
And yet, his crime:
is kinda smallish, don't you think?
Oh, that's a good point. So was Charles Rangel. Oh, wait, he still is a Congressman, unlike Mr. Duke.
Now, unlike Duke, Representative Rangel's was cited for 11 ethics violations — yet Hillary Clinton not only wouldn't "repudiate" him upon learning of his endorsement, she actively campaigned with him in NYC.
But, at least, for all his faults and crookedness, Charles Rangel does not seem to be a racist personally. Unlike Al Sharpton, for another example — who is as bona-fide anti-Semitic as one can get in America. The riots he encouraged and personally participated in led to an actual killing of at least one man. And yet, Hillary Clinton not only welcomed Al Sharpton's support this year, she gave a speech at his organization.
Maybe, if Trump went to give a speech at a KKK-organized conference — and campaigned together with Mr. Duke on the streets — it would've been comparable... As things are, you can't even see your own hypocrisy jumping in front of you and screaming into your ear...
I seem to remember, Donald Trump being called "racist" over an unsolicited endorsement from a former "KKK"-member. For a while every interviewer kept asking him to "repudiate" it...
Meanwhile the Democratic Party is getting not mere endorsements, but hefty donations from convicted criminals — without anybody asking the inconvenient questions about repudiation. Yeah, they eventually refunded the monies he got for them — but only after the man was convicted — despite "weeks of reports about Hsu's controversial history and murky business practices" and a 15 year-old outstanding warrant for him...
Imagine Trump pointing out, David Duke has never been convicted of any crime — only he did not even know, who the man was... No, he was supposed to know all about David Duke (who, it turns out, quit KKK in 1980).
(Should you choose to reply insisting, Trump really is racist, be sure, your response condemns "Black Lives Matter" as an inherently racist idea, which started with a lie.)
Why wouldn't he simply codify his preferences? I hear, he still holds some sway among Linux developers — once a particular style is accepted by consensus, it becomes easier to convince folks to follow it...
Interestingly, the style Mr. Torvalds prefers has been part of BSD's style(9) manual for decades.
Maybe, he should leave children's to children and join a real OS-project...
Yours may be. Mine are indisputable — which is why you are admitting defeat:
Surrender accepted.
I said, it may have been a horrible war crime. Without knowing more than an obviously-biased Internet-poster would claim, it is impossible to offer a stronger condemnation.
Now, for the benefit of anyone following this argument, I'll point out the central fact — Israel's detractors would not admit, Hamas is a terrorist organization.
This may or may not have been a horrible war crime, but it was not an Act of Terror. There is a fairly clear definition: civilians must be the targets (not bystanders) of calculated (not accidental or mistaken) violence for the purpose of intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.
Hamas has uses ambulances to transport troops and ammunition. They also use children for suicide attacks — a common practice by Islamists in Palestine and world-wide. Children are also used as human shields — because it works on impressionable useful idiots like yourself. Whether the women, who stepped out, were innocent, or were about to throw a tank-disabling bomb under the tracks, may not have been obvious.
But, again whether the IDF soldier had justifiable suspicions in his shooting of the family, or committed a war crime, it was not an act of terror.
And I did ask for three examples — certainly, a country labeled "terrorist" by detractors would have at least three acts of terror to its name...
Hamas averages dozens of such acts every year — their whole strategy is based on targeting Israeli civilians, because they are impotent at targeting IDF. And yet, you'd like to pretend, Israel is "worse" or "just as bad". Fail.
Because I do not fully understand the proposed improvements nor the mathematical proofs included with them — and so must take it on faith. Just as I was asked to take Tor on faith.
I made no such statement. Read carefully...
I know that very well. I also know, US has spent considerable efforts to break it — and they can only do that in some cases and not reliably. The proposed changes may be just what's advertised, or they may be hiding some brilliantly-devised backdoor.
Because that might, accidentally, help make America great again... That just wouldn't do, would it?..
The communication latency must be even suckier than that of Tor then... Oh, well...
Now, is it really a great new tool for privacy, or does it have inherent back doors and the announcements are to lure us away from Tor, which authorities have found too difficult to break? Will we even ever know?
Name three acts of terror committed by the State of Israel...
Hamas is distinguished by, for example, being designated "terrorist organization" by various governments — a diverse bunch from US to European Union to Egypt.
And not for nothing — whatever you may think of their goals, their methods are terroristic. By definition.
Phone companies are Common Carriers and thus immune — they don't listen to conversations...
Facebook could've gone that way too, but instead they chose to actively publicize their censorship efforts. Every shutdown of "hate speech" is a result of deliberate action by a human employee of the company. That they allow Hamas-supporting pages to continue to stay up is evidence of their support for terrorism.
A better analogy would've been phone companies and then the Internet Service Providers.
And it would still have been an invalid analogy, because neither the phone companies nor the ISPs filter based on contents. You may be too young to remember, but this was frequently an argument over Usenet censorship during early-to-mid 1990ies — that by censoring some posts an ISP may lose their Common Carrier status and have to sensor all posts from then on.
Facebook went down that road anyway — either to position itself as "friendly" and "safe" or simply to facilitate Zuckerberg's own agenda — and is now paying the price...
Now apply the same logic to voting...
Yes, all part of the agreement achieved between Clintons, Obama and the AGE.
It only makes sense to discuss, where the ball is, if the match is not fixed... It was fixed. Obama agreed to help Clinton for the sake of their Party and Comey was given a role to play — and played it. "The pikey goes down in the fourth," — said Bricktop in a movie-example of match-fixing...
I wish this were true, but it is not. You are an example yourself — you would've voted for her even if she were indicted and attended the presidential debates with a tracking device on her ankle. You — and millions of others — would've dismissed all that, while hating on Trump for his preferring good-looking women over ugly ones. Indicted or not, she had a chance.
They haven't been invaded any more than others. Poland, for example, had it much worse than Russia over the centuries. Also, Russia has done many more invasions of their own to compensate — including some very recent history...
If they can invade Ukraine and grab land because "it was always Russian", why can't they invade Finland under the same excuse? Finland used to be a Russian province too until 1917. If Kyiv fights them, Helsinki should too...
I always thought, Heaven and Paradise are interchangeable synonyms. Indeed, the dictionary seems to concur...
Clearly, you aren't religious. If you were, you would've known too. Religion — pretty much by definition — is not Science. Dogma is taken on faith, not because a reproducible experiment confirms it.
I suppose, the approach simplifies life greatly...
That is, how FBI's statement is worded. The real reason, of course, was a polite request from the White House. Clintons and Obamas hate each other and that's why the investigation was allowed to proceed as far as it did.
But, without any other credible options for Democrats come November, Obama held his nose and asked (ordered?) the FBI to stop it... For the good of the Party.
He likely wanted to, but that was not deemed good enough for the ruling Democrats. Loretta Lynch is already known as a highly partisan figure in cahoots with Clintons. So Comey was asked to lend his credibility to the cause.
The entire Federal government is now pulling for Hillary — not only because she is the Government Party's candidate, but because she is a vindictive bitch — another fact known since the 1990ies. If she prevails and becomes President, those who opposed her will find themselves rather inconvenienced. Whereas if Trump wins, nothing bad will happen — Comey, for example, will likely retain his job.
There is no contradiction here. Some things are deemed so wrong, the bring about the ultimate punishment.
Should suicide be on the list along with murder? Consider the rest of the theology — while we are suffering here on Earth, life in Heaven is nothing but bliss. How do you discourage people from skipping the real-life's misery and escaping to Heaven en masse? You can't — not without turning such premature departure into a disqualification. There is nothing evil about it.
Yes, you got it, congratulations.
Just what was so "unbearable" in this case, one wonders? Midlife crisis?
FBI made no such decision. DOJ did.
FBI did not recommend prosecution. And explained why — you don't have to ask my opinion:
The White House and the Department of Justice (which would've done the prosecution) are in the hands of the Democrats — until January. And Democrats do not prosecute Democrats.
— Joseph Heller, Catch-22