Manning wasn't pardoned. She had his sentence commuted
With sincere apologies to Ms Manning. (Wish Slashdot had an edit button. Also having to wait five minutes to respond to your own comment with a correction just encourages pointless flamewars.)
Manning wasn't pardoned. He had his sentence commuted. That means, in the view of the US government, she'd served enough of his sentence, not that the government agreed with what he did. This was after 7 years of imprisonment, during which time she was tortured. The US government can take the position that what Manning did was wrong, and something it wants to discourage, while still feeling that she had suffered enough.
Snowden hasn't been tried or convicted, and as a result the US government cannot reasonably say he's been "punished enough" without their position being that leaking state secrets isn't a crime that rises to the level of any punishment at all.
That's the logic behind pardoning Manning but not Snowden.
I suspect that sentence was mangled between brain and keyboard, because a hallmark of cheap* phones is that they don't get updates, and the entire point of the sentence is to suggest that Android One devices are superior to regular cheap phones.
* Yeah, OK, let's be honest, almost all Android phones, cheap or not, don't get updated.
So just to be clear, Britain and Sweden are organizing a very public extradition process so that the two nations can cooperate with a secret request by the US to (illegally, in both countries) kidnap Assange, transfer him to Saudi Arabia, and torture him there?
Why bother? Why not just let the US do the kidnapping on British soil?
I think everyone's missing the major loophole here. I'm not sure there even is an extradition request from the US for Assange, but even if there is one, the laws an Australian citizen can be prosecuted for regarding US secrets are dubious.
The actual extradition request that actually matters, the one the UK has agreed to, is to Sweden. Assange doesn't mention that one.
As you point out, it's not offer for a some future negotiation of a treaty. And as others have pointed out, "Clemency" somehow only meaning "pardoning" isn't Assange's escape route either. But it'd be interesting if he was extradited to the US, and then promptly extradited to Sweden.
I'd be shocked if Trump pardons Snowden. Trump has previously called for Snowden to be killed. And Snowden is part of the leaking-government-secrets Wikileaks, not the leaking-Trump's-opponents-dirty-laundry secrets Wikileaks.
Well, it hasn't happened yet. That said, why would you cancel your cable Internet for this? Yes, cellular Internet will be useful for your Chromebook when you're away from home, but in the same way it is today - a useful supplementary service that fills in the gaps, not as your primary system.
As for how you'd connect to a server at home, there are two options: VPN, or IPv6. The latter tends to get forgotten, but I connect to machines at home directly via IPv6 from my (T-Mobile) cellular connection without any problems. This sounds horrifying in terms of security, but if you imagine the development server being as locked down as a Chromebook or iDevice, without the back doors associated with too many modern IoT devices, it should be fine.
I'm more bothered about having to develop using a web interface, especially in an era in which leaving Firefox open for a day with 20 or so tabs open seems to result in it eating 4+Gb of memory, not the connectivity part. The connectivity part is actually the nice part.
It takes way more than one second to write anything in Java. What's been gained in reusable code has been lost in bureaucracy. It's not called the COBOL of the 21st Century just because it's become the standard back-end language.
PHP, I'll give you, but that's an entirely different nightmare...
I bought a consumer NAS a year or so ago, which is a collection of servers (software, from Samba to various video streaming DLNA type things) running over GNU/Linux, connected to a big hard drive. It's still a little bit of a nerds thing, but I can totally see people wanting to use things like this to ensure they have control over their own content.
And after I got a Chromebook, I started to wonder how far off we are having similar devices that host IDEs (don't laugh, there are quite a few web based IDEs out there, Eclipse has two such projects, though in my view they're not ready for prime time.) You could, in theory, use your Chromebook as-is in the future, with a third party, locked down, server that has an IDE on it, to develop Android apps. Hell (and I mean hell), if Google gets involved, that might become the recommended development environment.
Obama has only said he can't. He's never said why. Those claiming he said he can't because of legal reasons related to admissions of guilt or trials are lying (or unwittingly repeating lies) - he's never made any such assertion.
In all honesty, the reason he "can't" probably has to do with setting a precedent. Hopefully the same principle doesn't apply to commuting a sentence, and Obama can commute Manning's before he leaves office.
I seriously doubt there's any body of research that says that exercise, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with weight, and the only times I've successfully lost significant amounts of weight (more than 20lbs) were when I combined a more controlled diet with exercise. Simply trying to control my diet has never helped, and I know nobody who successfully lost a lot of weight without either going on a relatively dangerous starvation diet (sometimes necessary) or combining exercise with something more reasonable.
But note that I also pointed out that urban vs suburban living also determines diet.
Yes, I also lived there. I said absolutely nothing to contradict that, pointing out merely that there are more overweight people in the US, that the average Brit weighs less, and I also pointed out, referring to my own case, that many people who are overweight don't look it.
Here in the States, it's treated as a character flaw and research pales in comparison.
As someone who's lived in both countries - though fortunately had a body type that wasn't seen to be overweight in either country (technically I am overweight right now, but nobody I know thinks so) - I can honestly say I question this. In the UK, I routinely witnessed overweight people mocked and verbally abused. In the US, there's at least a general recognition that losing weight isn't easy, and gaining it is. Which is not to say that there are no assholes in the US either.
I'd always assumed it was due to the environment. The UK is generally urban, which means people get plenty of exercise, and spend 20 minutes getting to and from work leaving more time in their day for healthy food preparation. In the US, which is more suburban, a combination of barriers to walking (some, like bizarre zoning, legally enforced) means people have to seek out exercise, do not get it naturally, and the 30-45 minute each way commute leaves even less time for food preparation, leading to widespread consumption of relatively unhealthy premade meals.
That leads to a situation where people in the UK weigh far less than the average American, which means there's less empathy - fewer people in your circle are likely to be overweight, so you're allowed to make more negative judgments AND the fact that so few people are overweight makes you more likely to treat them as doing something "wrong", as obviously they're "doing something" that the vast majority of people aren't (which, ironically, is less likely to be true in an environment with fewer overweight people - you're more likely to find people in that environment who do the same things as you, but have biological/genetic/medical/etc reasons for gaining weight.)
Is there better research in Europe? No idea - if there is, it probably has to do with a willingness of governments to fund research that has no agenda beyond better health, while I'm willing to bet most American research into obesity has an end goal of selling more Nutrasystems and Slimfasts. (That said, I'd love to be proven wrong on this.)
Open source means that the source code is available and you can modify it and redistribute it with minimal conditions.
It does not mean "portable", which already had a word describing the concept, namely "portable"!
Most open source software ends up ported to other platforms, because as the source is available, it's relatively easy for someone to do it if the original maintainer doesn't want to, but that doesn't make them the same thing.
You can read more about open source here. The related concept of Free Software (mostly a matter of emphasis - open source advocates tend to focus on the benefits of a community driven development matter, while free software advocates tend to focus on the right to have and to share knowledge) is described fairly well here. While the two philosophies are frequently considered rivals, software categorized as free software is virtually always also open source, and vice versa.
Well, OK, in your specific case you probably don't load much that's cached, but you must admit, you're not really doing the same things most people are!
That'd make sense if Wifi used orders of magnitude more power than an SSD drive. I'd hazard a guess that of the components used to render a webpage and display it to you, the main battery suckers are, in order:
- Screen
- CPU/GPU
- (Lots of other things)
- *Wifi card that's receiving data rather than listening for it/*SSD that's not idling
- *Wifi card that's listening for data
- *SSD that's idling.
* Delete what's not applicable.
And just to make it clear. A low speed Ivy Bridge i7 uses about 17W of power. Your Wifi card probably uses less than 1W, and won't vary that much between power draw while receiving data and power draw while listening and waiting for data. An SSD drive can be anywhere (doing a lot of Googling right now) between 0.3W and 1.5W. Presumably SSD drives use pretty much no power when they're not transferring data.
The idea that your laptop's battery life will significantly extend or deteriorate based upon whether the data used to render a webpage (or video) is coming from an SSD or Wifi is absurd.
Try "View Page Info" (if you're using Firefox), it'll list the media embedded on the page. These vary from the Slashdot logo, the zoo icons, the social media icons, etc.
First of all, yes, the implication was that nobody benefits from caching. And secondly, if you're getting every damned thing from the net and nothing from the cache, your network usage is orders of magnitude higher than "normal". AmiMojo is suggesting it's "cheating" to base power usage metrics in part on cached data. But most of the data that built the webpage you're looking at right now came from your cache. You think the HTML - the only dynamically generated part - made up most of the bytes of data that made up the page? Think again.
Worse still, you're focusing on something that's relatively meaningless. Do you think your Wifi card draws massive amounts of power when it's receiving data? I actually don't know if the difference in power between Wifi "listening" and Wifi "receiving" is more than the difference between "SSD drive idling" and "SSD drive sending data", and I suspect you don't either.
But I can say, without too much doubt, that the GPU and CPU suck much, much, more power than both of those put together when they're rendering a webpage. Hell, I just leave Twitter open in a tab before I go to work and my 2011 i7 laptop at home's fans are whirring by the time I get home.
On the face of it, calling it "cheat mode" when you instruct a laptop to cache webpages in a perfectly normal way is ludicrous hyperbole. The cache makes little or no difference to power usage, and it's normal behavior to have it enabled. It's also irrelevant - as others have pointed out - to why this particular benchmark turned out to be flawed, which was a bug in the no-cache mode, not something to do with caching specifically.
You visited Slashdot at least five times today (evidence.) Unless you were visiting using Lynx, it's hard to believe that you didn't benefit from having all the CSS and image files that make up every page on Slashdot cached.
1. Nobody uses caching in real life, they download everything again when browsing. When downloading Slashdot, for example, they'll reload zoo.png not just for every page they visit, but probably every single comment on every single page.
2. Disk drives use no energy whatsoever, while Wifi, well, wow, that just sucks power, but only when transferring data.
Caching isn't "Cheat mode", browsers - even browsers used by people who aren't benchmarking power usage - enable it by default for a good reason. Try turning it off on your browser and see how well it runs...
It's going to be owned by Verizon. That said, it was always unsupported, so the chances of it suddenly disappearing are no different today than they were a year ago.
Google also has an API, but annoyingly they often put up a CAPTCHA if you use it, because some idiot at Google thinks APIs are for human beings who want to read JSON structures. Otherwise there are also a bunch of commercial services that'll provide stock prices via an API at a price.
Nothing to do with Ubuntu or Mint. That's a Firefox thing. If you do a fresh install of Firefox under Windows or Mac, you'll also find it defaults to Yahoo.
Some time ago the new owners of Slashdot actually posted to KIA, Reddit's infamous Gamergate forum, encouraging readers there to come over here. That's why there's so much misogynist shit here at the moment.
I don't think anyone can reasonably say Mayer killed Yahoo. She just failed to save it. I doubt most Slashdotters know how to save Yahoo, but a very loud subset does like blaming women for everything.
Slashdot Mirror
Correction:
With sincere apologies to Ms Manning. (Wish Slashdot had an edit button. Also having to wait five minutes to respond to your own comment with a correction just encourages pointless flamewars.)
Manning wasn't pardoned. He had his sentence commuted. That means, in the view of the US government, she'd served enough of his sentence, not that the government agreed with what he did. This was after 7 years of imprisonment, during which time she was tortured. The US government can take the position that what Manning did was wrong, and something it wants to discourage, while still feeling that she had suffered enough.
Snowden hasn't been tried or convicted, and as a result the US government cannot reasonably say he's been "punished enough" without their position being that leaking state secrets isn't a crime that rises to the level of any punishment at all.
That's the logic behind pardoning Manning but not Snowden.
I suspect that sentence was mangled between brain and keyboard, because a hallmark of cheap* phones is that they don't get updates, and the entire point of the sentence is to suggest that Android One devices are superior to regular cheap phones.
* Yeah, OK, let's be honest, almost all Android phones, cheap or not, don't get updated.
So just to be clear, Britain and Sweden are organizing a very public extradition process so that the two nations can cooperate with a secret request by the US to (illegally, in both countries) kidnap Assange, transfer him to Saudi Arabia, and torture him there?
Why bother? Why not just let the US do the kidnapping on British soil?
I think everyone's missing the major loophole here. I'm not sure there even is an extradition request from the US for Assange, but even if there is one, the laws an Australian citizen can be prosecuted for regarding US secrets are dubious.
The actual extradition request that actually matters, the one the UK has agreed to, is to Sweden. Assange doesn't mention that one.
As you point out, it's not offer for a some future negotiation of a treaty. And as others have pointed out, "Clemency" somehow only meaning "pardoning" isn't Assange's escape route either. But it'd be interesting if he was extradited to the US, and then promptly extradited to Sweden.
I'd be shocked if Trump pardons Snowden. Trump has previously called for Snowden to be killed. And Snowden is part of the leaking-government-secrets Wikileaks, not the leaking-Trump's-opponents-dirty-laundry secrets Wikileaks.
Well, it hasn't happened yet. That said, why would you cancel your cable Internet for this? Yes, cellular Internet will be useful for your Chromebook when you're away from home, but in the same way it is today - a useful supplementary service that fills in the gaps, not as your primary system.
As for how you'd connect to a server at home, there are two options: VPN, or IPv6. The latter tends to get forgotten, but I connect to machines at home directly via IPv6 from my (T-Mobile) cellular connection without any problems. This sounds horrifying in terms of security, but if you imagine the development server being as locked down as a Chromebook or iDevice, without the back doors associated with too many modern IoT devices, it should be fine.
I'm more bothered about having to develop using a web interface, especially in an era in which leaving Firefox open for a day with 20 or so tabs open seems to result in it eating 4+Gb of memory, not the connectivity part. The connectivity part is actually the nice part.
It takes way more than one second to write anything in Java. What's been gained in reusable code has been lost in bureaucracy. It's not called the COBOL of the 21st Century just because it's become the standard back-end language.
PHP, I'll give you, but that's an entirely different nightmare...
Maybe...
I bought a consumer NAS a year or so ago, which is a collection of servers (software, from Samba to various video streaming DLNA type things) running over GNU/Linux, connected to a big hard drive. It's still a little bit of a nerds thing, but I can totally see people wanting to use things like this to ensure they have control over their own content.
And after I got a Chromebook, I started to wonder how far off we are having similar devices that host IDEs (don't laugh, there are quite a few web based IDEs out there, Eclipse has two such projects, though in my view they're not ready for prime time.) You could, in theory, use your Chromebook as-is in the future, with a third party, locked down, server that has an IDE on it, to develop Android apps. Hell (and I mean hell), if Google gets involved, that might become the recommended development environment.
Obama has only said he can't. He's never said why. Those claiming he said he can't because of legal reasons related to admissions of guilt or trials are lying (or unwittingly repeating lies) - he's never made any such assertion.
In all honesty, the reason he "can't" probably has to do with setting a precedent. Hopefully the same principle doesn't apply to commuting a sentence, and Obama can commute Manning's before he leaves office.
I seriously doubt there's any body of research that says that exercise, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with weight, and the only times I've successfully lost significant amounts of weight (more than 20lbs) were when I combined a more controlled diet with exercise. Simply trying to control my diet has never helped, and I know nobody who successfully lost a lot of weight without either going on a relatively dangerous starvation diet (sometimes necessary) or combining exercise with something more reasonable.
But note that I also pointed out that urban vs suburban living also determines diet.
I quoted the tweet, here it is again, with the bit that answers your question emphasized:
Does that help?
Yes, I also lived there. I said absolutely nothing to contradict that, pointing out merely that there are more overweight people in the US, that the average Brit weighs less, and I also pointed out, referring to my own case, that many people who are overweight don't look it.
As someone who's lived in both countries - though fortunately had a body type that wasn't seen to be overweight in either country (technically I am overweight right now, but nobody I know thinks so) - I can honestly say I question this. In the UK, I routinely witnessed overweight people mocked and verbally abused. In the US, there's at least a general recognition that losing weight isn't easy, and gaining it is. Which is not to say that there are no assholes in the US either.
I'd always assumed it was due to the environment. The UK is generally urban, which means people get plenty of exercise, and spend 20 minutes getting to and from work leaving more time in their day for healthy food preparation. In the US, which is more suburban, a combination of barriers to walking (some, like bizarre zoning, legally enforced) means people have to seek out exercise, do not get it naturally, and the 30-45 minute each way commute leaves even less time for food preparation, leading to widespread consumption of relatively unhealthy premade meals.
That leads to a situation where people in the UK weigh far less than the average American, which means there's less empathy - fewer people in your circle are likely to be overweight, so you're allowed to make more negative judgments AND the fact that so few people are overweight makes you more likely to treat them as doing something "wrong", as obviously they're "doing something" that the vast majority of people aren't (which, ironically, is less likely to be true in an environment with fewer overweight people - you're more likely to find people in that environment who do the same things as you, but have biological/genetic/medical/etc reasons for gaining weight.)
Is there better research in Europe? No idea - if there is, it probably has to do with a willingness of governments to fund research that has no agenda beyond better health, while I'm willing to bet most American research into obesity has an end goal of selling more Nutrasystems and Slimfasts. (That said, I'd love to be proven wrong on this.)
Open source means that the source code is available and you can modify it and redistribute it with minimal conditions.
It does not mean "portable", which already had a word describing the concept, namely "portable"!
Most open source software ends up ported to other platforms, because as the source is available, it's relatively easy for someone to do it if the original maintainer doesn't want to, but that doesn't make them the same thing.
You can read more about open source here. The related concept of Free Software (mostly a matter of emphasis - open source advocates tend to focus on the benefits of a community driven development matter, while free software advocates tend to focus on the right to have and to share knowledge) is described fairly well here. While the two philosophies are frequently considered rivals, software categorized as free software is virtually always also open source, and vice versa.
Well, OK, in your specific case you probably don't load much that's cached, but you must admit, you're not really doing the same things most people are!
- Screen
- CPU/GPU
- (Lots of other things)
- *Wifi card that's receiving data rather than listening for it/*SSD that's not idling - *Wifi card that's listening for data - *SSD that's idling.
* Delete what's not applicable.
And just to make it clear. A low speed Ivy Bridge i7 uses about 17W of power. Your Wifi card probably uses less than 1W, and won't vary that much between power draw while receiving data and power draw while listening and waiting for data. An SSD drive can be anywhere (doing a lot of Googling right now) between 0.3W and 1.5W. Presumably SSD drives use pretty much no power when they're not transferring data.
The idea that your laptop's battery life will significantly extend or deteriorate based upon whether the data used to render a webpage (or video) is coming from an SSD or Wifi is absurd.
Try "View Page Info" (if you're using Firefox), it'll list the media embedded on the page. These vary from the Slashdot logo, the zoo icons, the social media icons, etc.
There's more than you think.
First of all, yes, the implication was that nobody benefits from caching. And secondly, if you're getting every damned thing from the net and nothing from the cache, your network usage is orders of magnitude higher than "normal". AmiMojo is suggesting it's "cheating" to base power usage metrics in part on cached data. But most of the data that built the webpage you're looking at right now came from your cache. You think the HTML - the only dynamically generated part - made up most of the bytes of data that made up the page? Think again.
Worse still, you're focusing on something that's relatively meaningless. Do you think your Wifi card draws massive amounts of power when it's receiving data? I actually don't know if the difference in power between Wifi "listening" and Wifi "receiving" is more than the difference between "SSD drive idling" and "SSD drive sending data", and I suspect you don't either.
But I can say, without too much doubt, that the GPU and CPU suck much, much, more power than both of those put together when they're rendering a webpage. Hell, I just leave Twitter open in a tab before I go to work and my 2011 i7 laptop at home's fans are whirring by the time I get home.
On the face of it, calling it "cheat mode" when you instruct a laptop to cache webpages in a perfectly normal way is ludicrous hyperbole. The cache makes little or no difference to power usage, and it's normal behavior to have it enabled. It's also irrelevant - as others have pointed out - to why this particular benchmark turned out to be flawed, which was a bug in the no-cache mode, not something to do with caching specifically.
You visited Slashdot at least five times today (evidence.) Unless you were visiting using Lynx, it's hard to believe that you didn't benefit from having all the CSS and image files that make up every page on Slashdot cached.
TIL:
1. Nobody uses caching in real life, they download everything again when browsing. When downloading Slashdot, for example, they'll reload zoo.png not just for every page they visit, but probably every single comment on every single page.
2. Disk drives use no energy whatsoever, while Wifi, well, wow, that just sucks power, but only when transferring data.
Caching isn't "Cheat mode", browsers - even browsers used by people who aren't benchmarking power usage - enable it by default for a good reason. Try turning it off on your browser and see how well it runs...
It's going to be owned by Verizon. That said, it was always unsupported, so the chances of it suddenly disappearing are no different today than they were a year ago.
Google also has an API, but annoyingly they often put up a CAPTCHA if you use it, because some idiot at Google thinks APIs are for human beings who want to read JSON structures. Otherwise there are also a bunch of commercial services that'll provide stock prices via an API at a price.
Nothing to do with Ubuntu or Mint. That's a Firefox thing. If you do a fresh install of Firefox under Windows or Mac, you'll also find it defaults to Yahoo.
Yahoo Mail, and the name "Yahoo!" are being sold to Verizon. Altaba is the name for everything that isn't being sold to Verizon.
So no, you don't have to worry about your Yahoo mail address changing to someone@altaba.com. It'll actually be changing to someone@verizon.net.
Some time ago the new owners of Slashdot actually posted to KIA, Reddit's infamous Gamergate forum, encouraging readers there to come over here. That's why there's so much misogynist shit here at the moment.
I don't think anyone can reasonably say Mayer killed Yahoo. She just failed to save it. I doubt most Slashdotters know how to save Yahoo, but a very loud subset does like blaming women for everything.