No you don't. You just don't realize that the people who fled here in the 17th century to avoid the oppressive regime in England created a whole new oppressive regime for the indigenous people. And it was so rampant into the 18th century that they wrote an entire constitution (that didn't apply to said indigenous people, or the slaves that were imported) to try and protect it. Then in the 19th century, half the country tried to repress the other half - destroying their entire way of life. By the 20 the century we were into your bedroom and your liquor cabinet trying to impose morality on the immoral. And we can't forget McCarthysim - oooh, that was a really good one, followed by the Hoover FBI.
Oppression is as much a part of humanity as humanity itself.
Think about it - always listening, always plugged into the grid where it could send the data back to the collectors on every street post in America.
Ever wonder why they strung telephone and power on the same pole? It's not for convenience - the two are horribly incompatible and terribly dangerous to mix. But both the FBI and the NSA needed a way to use power grid appliances to send data back to their servers, and once you hit a transformer it's hard to do that. By putting telephone on the poles, all the connections are right there together.
You're not paranoid; they've been listening in on your conversations continually for decades, even before the "internet." I, of course, have to put that in quotes because it was the internet as early as the 1940s, but it was a major leak that caused them to fabricate most of the documentation from DARPA to look like a new research project.
In fact, the moon landing wasn't actually as expensive as it was. They originally did plan to go to the moon, until the country-wide 24/7 surveillance plan (well, the network parts) were revealed. The moon landing had to be scrapped and faked because most of the money was siphoned off to re-do the entire way the surveillance was being run. We could have gone and come back if it weren't for the cover up, but we just couldn't hide that much money any other way.
How do I know? I was part of the project. I've got terminal cancer now, so it's not like I have anything to lose. All I can say is we busted our asses for near 5 years to reroute and deflect that we'd been doing 100% surveillance and monitoring since the early 40s. It was part of the WWII run up. It never ended. I don't even know all the ways they've tapped everyone now. I just know that most everybody at Ft. Meade has a huge laugh about the Google Now and Siri and now the Echo, because we don't even need that data - it's like our third tier backup. We don't even actively monitor that unless one of the others fails, and even then I don't think they've ever actually archived that stream.
No, the irony was entirely lost on her. It's hard to convey her intent and emotion in a post. She was really put out that she was being required to build something to code and that she was considering just avoiding the inspectors. She was also astonished that the inspections were so minimal that they missed a glaring error - or possibly that they didn't catch someone who didn't even apply for a permit previously. There was no connection between the two in her eyes, no "how come I have to do it but they didn't". The same people who were incompetent for not catching the first work were incompetent for keeping her from skirting the regs this time.
Also, she bought the house after the inferior work was done. She assumed it was done right because she assumed it was inspected by the town. She paid no money the "first time" for the inspection. In fact, it's unlikely there was any inspection the first time...it was before our town did much more than note that work was being done with a "permit" but no inspections were regularly made on residential work (or any work for that matter). So no inspection, bad work, owner mad. Today there's required inspection, guaranteed proper work, owner is mad.
Note that, had she tried to remove that post, the whole first floor would likely have sagged 1.5-3 inches almost immediately, if it didn't actually break/collapse. Since I see buildings fail (actually collapse) due to poor workmanship on a regular basis, I think I have a bit of a strong position to argue that this is not some expert hubris, but actual experience. There are some things in the building code which are of pretty limited value to most people. And the structural provisions don't really matter but once in 50 years (our design is for a 2% or 50 year return period storm/event), which is non-trivial for construction. However, most people I've encountered get pretty wrapped around the axle when they find a load of snow in their kitchen, or their front yard in their basement, or their garage on the ground in pieces after a thunderstorm.
Actually, they appear to have shown malleability in the belief of the subject in a problem based on whether the solution was favorable or unfavorable to their closely held beliefs.
I see it all the time in my job. I get called out to assess structural problems in peoples homes, and also to consult on renovations and modifications. Most of the time, people who find a fault in their home complain about why the local inspections office didn't catch the substandard building practice when it was built. Most people who have to pay me design a correctly engineered wall or beam are angry that the building department is making the process so difficult and expensive by requiring special design and inspections for a "simple" change.
I actually had a woman who was angry with me because I told here she'd need to install a beam if she took out a support post in her basement. The beam looked continuous from the wall, over the post, to the second post, and she was pretty sure it would be fine if they just removed it, but the building official said she couldn't make the change unless she had someone design a beam for it. She told me she probably wouldn't apply for a permit, since nobody would ever see the work getting done. As I was about to leave, she asked about a large crack in the basement wall of her addition that was put in about 10 years ago. I looked at it and there was no reinforcing or filled cores in masonry, and the back fill was too high for an unreinforced CMU wall. I told her this and she asked - with a straight face - how could the town inspectors have allowed the contractor to build it incorrectly, without requiring someone to design the wall? Wasn't that their job?
So if you ask whether government oversight is good or bad, for this woman it was clearly bad when it was going to cost her money, but it would have been good if it had prevented her house from being damaged. Same woman, same inspections office, same requirement that an engineer design a structural building element. The effect is very real.
To those who want a standing army of over 4 million active service and support staff rather than a domestic defense force, please get out your checkbooks and send your portion of the 1.2 Trillion Dollars we spend on the military every year. I, personally, think we should be able to defend the 4M sq miles of land we have with the same money that Russia spends on its 7M square miles. And that means those few who want all that extra military need to cough up the 90% of that 1.2 Trillion that we're over spending.
When that happens, I'll have the money chip in a few extra bucks a gallon at the pump for better roads, bridges, public transportation subsidies, and the like.
If by "flooded" you mean "failed to artificially restrict" then, yes. It's interesting in that the oil producing nations have, at times, been able to collectively meter their output to keep the money flowing in. Of course, at $100 a bbl there's no need to cut back, and several states are strapped for cash so they're less interested in putting the screws to the non-oil producing nations as they are putting cash in their pockets, rockets in their launchers, and food on the table. As a result, the market is floating as it would in a normal competitive marketplace.
Actually, if the US really wanted lower gas prices all the congress would have to do is forbid the export of oil products (or tax it at a significantly high rate), keeping the domestic supply here. The US is the world's largest exporter of refined oil products (diesel and gasoline chief among them) - we pay high prices at the pump because we ship so much to other countries, who are willing to pay for it.
Man, I hate these headlines. I now reflexively ignore stories which are captioned this way - basically anything which doesn't describe the article content, no matter how many boobs, muscles, butts, or cute/sad animals are in the photo caption. No, I take that back - *especially* if there are boobs, muscles, butts, or cute/sad animals are in the photo caption.
If you have $20M what are you doing wasting your money on life insurance? Unless you have some reason to believe that leaving behind $20M will not be enough for your beneficiary to carry on, it's a pretty poor financial choice.
Not really. One time bonds are still based on actuarial data. To believe Elon Musk, the most safety conscious regular transportation organization in the world has a 3% failure rate on returning occupants alive. Your ticket cost is irrelevant; its your insured amount that matters. So for a one-off, you might double the acturial number. A $1M life insurance policy might cost 6% ($60,000), 8%($80,000) if Musk is deemed less reliable than NASA. If you had a statically significant sample, say hundreds or thousands of non-cancellable policies - it would be a small fee over the risk, say 3.6-4% of the policy face value.
Until Musk can prove he is actually safer than NASA, he's not going to get a better rate.
If this were news for jocks, every flash of flesh of the Kardashians would rate a story. This is news for nerds, so the only truly sexy, viable electric car get's the nod. NerdPorn, simple as that.
What reason do they have to lie? They've just told you that they keep the cream of the crop for themselves, and they let all the little fish go (sorry for the mixed metaphor). Keeping just one in a hundred exploits would be sufficient. If you get to pick the very best, the most obscure, and you let the community close the rest, that seems to work in their favor.
Have you seen the economy of the rest of the world? Europe makes US manpower look practically 3rd world, and their energy costs are through the roof. Asia is starting to get expensive for manpower, and the environmental problems they're having are making it hard to attract and retain top global talent because nobody wants shitty water and air. Are you going to go to Russia to avoid domestic spying, 'cause that's not really the first place I think of when I list free and open discourse on privacy matters. Africa...yeah, right.
The US is the worst place to do business, except when you count just about everywhere else in the world. In which case it turns out to be pretty high on the list. And, honestly, it's not really dropping in the rankings.
They don't see the need, and I'm not surprised. Why would you need 128GB of local storage if you're in the bay area? Wifi and cell coverage is everywhere, and the big corps still have unlimited cell data available for $20 a month (I'm on one of those plans...it's nice). Your company builds servers so that you don't have to worry about local storage on your handheld device.
They completely forget about those of us that live in the 90% of the country without high speed cell data cell coverage (not by population, but by land area). They forget that we need local maps of huge areas. That we have weird and unusual demands that make it impractical to stream music or video in many places. Heck, 10 years ago an IT friend from Dallas sent me a photo of the storm he just finished chasing. I just about killed him for it - he sent me a 5MB bmp file, which was no big deal for him, but I was still on dialup and that damned thing took half an hour to download. He didn't think anyone was still on dialup, much less me - just 15 minutes away from one of the most wired university campuses and less than 300 miles from Washington DC.
They fell into the "this is so awesome everybody is gonna love this shit" trap, and forgot that not everyone has the resources they have.
Apple taught everyone that it's much more profitable to included cheap, on-board memory at a premium price.
That's a lesson that none of the manufacturers appear to have learned, seeing as there are no flagship Android devices that are even sold with more than 32GB of onboard storage. You'd think they'd be hawking their 64/128/256GB monsters for gobs of cash, but it just isn't happening.
Coverage + $20 unlimited data keeps me with them. And, in reality, I'm rooted so I don't really have issues with permissions. Still, it'd be nice to have the new bling.
So because Android is less open than it originally was, you switched to the most closed platform available for phones? That's like being so pissed they dropped the speed limit on the highway from 65 to 55 to swore you'd drive on 35MPH surface streets from now on.
That's as bad as the guy who recently wrote that after 20 years as a loyal customer of CVS, having never once in those years used NFC payments until two weeks ago when ApplePay was turned on, is now boycotting CVS because they stopped taking NFC payments.
Slashdot Mirror
No you don't. You just don't realize that the people who fled here in the 17th century to avoid the oppressive regime in England created a whole new oppressive regime for the indigenous people. And it was so rampant into the 18th century that they wrote an entire constitution (that didn't apply to said indigenous people, or the slaves that were imported) to try and protect it. Then in the 19th century, half the country tried to repress the other half - destroying their entire way of life. By the 20 the century we were into your bedroom and your liquor cabinet trying to impose morality on the immoral. And we can't forget McCarthysim - oooh, that was a really good one, followed by the Hoover FBI.
Oppression is as much a part of humanity as humanity itself.
Think about it - always listening, always plugged into the grid where it could send the data back to the collectors on every street post in America.
Ever wonder why they strung telephone and power on the same pole? It's not for convenience - the two are horribly incompatible and terribly dangerous to mix. But both the FBI and the NSA needed a way to use power grid appliances to send data back to their servers, and once you hit a transformer it's hard to do that. By putting telephone on the poles, all the connections are right there together.
You're not paranoid; they've been listening in on your conversations continually for decades, even before the "internet." I, of course, have to put that in quotes because it was the internet as early as the 1940s, but it was a major leak that caused them to fabricate most of the documentation from DARPA to look like a new research project.
In fact, the moon landing wasn't actually as expensive as it was. They originally did plan to go to the moon, until the country-wide 24/7 surveillance plan (well, the network parts) were revealed. The moon landing had to be scrapped and faked because most of the money was siphoned off to re-do the entire way the surveillance was being run. We could have gone and come back if it weren't for the cover up, but we just couldn't hide that much money any other way.
How do I know? I was part of the project. I've got terminal cancer now, so it's not like I have anything to lose. All I can say is we busted our asses for near 5 years to reroute and deflect that we'd been doing 100% surveillance and monitoring since the early 40s. It was part of the WWII run up. It never ended. I don't even know all the ways they've tapped everyone now. I just know that most everybody at Ft. Meade has a huge laugh about the Google Now and Siri and now the Echo, because we don't even need that data - it's like our third tier backup. We don't even actively monitor that unless one of the others fails, and even then I don't think they've ever actually archived that stream.
No, the irony was entirely lost on her. It's hard to convey her intent and emotion in a post. She was really put out that she was being required to build something to code and that she was considering just avoiding the inspectors. She was also astonished that the inspections were so minimal that they missed a glaring error - or possibly that they didn't catch someone who didn't even apply for a permit previously. There was no connection between the two in her eyes, no "how come I have to do it but they didn't". The same people who were incompetent for not catching the first work were incompetent for keeping her from skirting the regs this time.
Also, she bought the house after the inferior work was done. She assumed it was done right because she assumed it was inspected by the town. She paid no money the "first time" for the inspection. In fact, it's unlikely there was any inspection the first time...it was before our town did much more than note that work was being done with a "permit" but no inspections were regularly made on residential work (or any work for that matter). So no inspection, bad work, owner mad. Today there's required inspection, guaranteed proper work, owner is mad.
Note that, had she tried to remove that post, the whole first floor would likely have sagged 1.5-3 inches almost immediately, if it didn't actually break/collapse. Since I see buildings fail (actually collapse) due to poor workmanship on a regular basis, I think I have a bit of a strong position to argue that this is not some expert hubris, but actual experience. There are some things in the building code which are of pretty limited value to most people. And the structural provisions don't really matter but once in 50 years (our design is for a 2% or 50 year return period storm/event), which is non-trivial for construction. However, most people I've encountered get pretty wrapped around the axle when they find a load of snow in their kitchen, or their front yard in their basement, or their garage on the ground in pieces after a thunderstorm.
Actually, they appear to have shown malleability in the belief of the subject in a problem based on whether the solution was favorable or unfavorable to their closely held beliefs.
I see it all the time in my job. I get called out to assess structural problems in peoples homes, and also to consult on renovations and modifications. Most of the time, people who find a fault in their home complain about why the local inspections office didn't catch the substandard building practice when it was built. Most people who have to pay me design a correctly engineered wall or beam are angry that the building department is making the process so difficult and expensive by requiring special design and inspections for a "simple" change.
I actually had a woman who was angry with me because I told here she'd need to install a beam if she took out a support post in her basement. The beam looked continuous from the wall, over the post, to the second post, and she was pretty sure it would be fine if they just removed it, but the building official said she couldn't make the change unless she had someone design a beam for it. She told me she probably wouldn't apply for a permit, since nobody would ever see the work getting done. As I was about to leave, she asked about a large crack in the basement wall of her addition that was put in about 10 years ago. I looked at it and there was no reinforcing or filled cores in masonry, and the back fill was too high for an unreinforced CMU wall. I told her this and she asked - with a straight face - how could the town inspectors have allowed the contractor to build it incorrectly, without requiring someone to design the wall? Wasn't that their job?
So if you ask whether government oversight is good or bad, for this woman it was clearly bad when it was going to cost her money, but it would have been good if it had prevented her house from being damaged. Same woman, same inspections office, same requirement that an engineer design a structural building element. The effect is very real.
To those who want a standing army of over 4 million active service and support staff rather than a domestic defense force, please get out your checkbooks and send your portion of the 1.2 Trillion Dollars we spend on the military every year. I, personally, think we should be able to defend the 4M sq miles of land we have with the same money that Russia spends on its 7M square miles. And that means those few who want all that extra military need to cough up the 90% of that 1.2 Trillion that we're over spending.
When that happens, I'll have the money chip in a few extra bucks a gallon at the pump for better roads, bridges, public transportation subsidies, and the like.
If by "flooded" you mean "failed to artificially restrict" then, yes. It's interesting in that the oil producing nations have, at times, been able to collectively meter their output to keep the money flowing in. Of course, at $100 a bbl there's no need to cut back, and several states are strapped for cash so they're less interested in putting the screws to the non-oil producing nations as they are putting cash in their pockets, rockets in their launchers, and food on the table. As a result, the market is floating as it would in a normal competitive marketplace.
Actually, if the US really wanted lower gas prices all the congress would have to do is forbid the export of oil products (or tax it at a significantly high rate), keeping the domestic supply here. The US is the world's largest exporter of refined oil products (diesel and gasoline chief among them) - we pay high prices at the pump because we ship so much to other countries, who are willing to pay for it.
Oooh, that's a good one.
Man, I hate these headlines. I now reflexively ignore stories which are captioned this way - basically anything which doesn't describe the article content, no matter how many boobs, muscles, butts, or cute/sad animals are in the photo caption. No, I take that back - *especially* if there are boobs, muscles, butts, or cute/sad animals are in the photo caption.
If you have $20M what are you doing wasting your money on life insurance? Unless you have some reason to believe that leaving behind $20M will not be enough for your beneficiary to carry on, it's a pretty poor financial choice.
Not really. One time bonds are still based on actuarial data. To believe Elon Musk, the most safety conscious regular transportation organization in the world has a 3% failure rate on returning occupants alive. Your ticket cost is irrelevant; its your insured amount that matters. So for a one-off, you might double the acturial number. A $1M life insurance policy might cost 6% ($60,000), 8%($80,000) if Musk is deemed less reliable than NASA. If you had a statically significant sample, say hundreds or thousands of non-cancellable policies - it would be a small fee over the risk, say 3.6-4% of the policy face value.
Until Musk can prove he is actually safer than NASA, he's not going to get a better rate.
...and you won't believe how easy it is!
C'mon editors, it's like you missed the entire social media headline writing class.
Yes, apparently you can. Jarvis will be popular, but I'm sorely tempted to go with "hey, asshole".
The implication, also, is that you can't actually see the rainbow I would presume, since no light is getting out.
The Irish equivalent of rocky mountain oysters?
God: the world's original asshole DM
If this were news for jocks, every flash of flesh of the Kardashians would rate a story. This is news for nerds, so the only truly sexy, viable electric car get's the nod. NerdPorn, simple as that.
I think the Surfaces will be less expensive than most of the Apple branded and MFI certified components.
Or by 10psi. They're not clear whether it's relative or absolute.
What reason do they have to lie? They've just told you that they keep the cream of the crop for themselves, and they let all the little fish go (sorry for the mixed metaphor). Keeping just one in a hundred exploits would be sufficient. If you get to pick the very best, the most obscure, and you let the community close the rest, that seems to work in their favor.
Doubtful.
Have you seen the economy of the rest of the world? Europe makes US manpower look practically 3rd world, and their energy costs are through the roof. Asia is starting to get expensive for manpower, and the environmental problems they're having are making it hard to attract and retain top global talent because nobody wants shitty water and air. Are you going to go to Russia to avoid domestic spying, 'cause that's not really the first place I think of when I list free and open discourse on privacy matters. Africa...yeah, right.
The US is the worst place to do business, except when you count just about everywhere else in the world. In which case it turns out to be pretty high on the list. And, honestly, it's not really dropping in the rankings.
They don't see the need, and I'm not surprised. Why would you need 128GB of local storage if you're in the bay area? Wifi and cell coverage is everywhere, and the big corps still have unlimited cell data available for $20 a month (I'm on one of those plans...it's nice). Your company builds servers so that you don't have to worry about local storage on your handheld device.
They completely forget about those of us that live in the 90% of the country without high speed cell data cell coverage (not by population, but by land area). They forget that we need local maps of huge areas. That we have weird and unusual demands that make it impractical to stream music or video in many places. Heck, 10 years ago an IT friend from Dallas sent me a photo of the storm he just finished chasing. I just about killed him for it - he sent me a 5MB bmp file, which was no big deal for him, but I was still on dialup and that damned thing took half an hour to download. He didn't think anyone was still on dialup, much less me - just 15 minutes away from one of the most wired university campuses and less than 300 miles from Washington DC.
They fell into the "this is so awesome everybody is gonna love this shit" trap, and forgot that not everyone has the resources they have.
This is one of those topics where, if you go far enough left and far enough right, the two sides happen to meet on the same issue.
Apple taught everyone that it's much more profitable to included cheap, on-board memory at a premium price.
That's a lesson that none of the manufacturers appear to have learned, seeing as there are no flagship Android devices that are even sold with more than 32GB of onboard storage. You'd think they'd be hawking their 64/128/256GB monsters for gobs of cash, but it just isn't happening.
Coverage + $20 unlimited data keeps me with them. And, in reality, I'm rooted so I don't really have issues with permissions. Still, it'd be nice to have the new bling.
So because Android is less open than it originally was, you switched to the most closed platform available for phones? That's like being so pissed they dropped the speed limit on the highway from 65 to 55 to swore you'd drive on 35MPH surface streets from now on.
That's as bad as the guy who recently wrote that after 20 years as a loyal customer of CVS, having never once in those years used NFC payments until two weeks ago when ApplePay was turned on, is now boycotting CVS because they stopped taking NFC payments.
That's why you should always root and use https://play.google.com/store/...