Go jump out of an airplane over the Pacific and let us know how much kinship you feel you vicarious-living charade.
Jumping out of a plane going down in flames isn't really the accomplishment. Flying a perfectly good airplane to the island that is heavily defended and known to be commanded by someone who beheads captured pilots and practices ritualistic cannibalism is the accomplishment.
His re-election failure was a fluke. Like Trump, Bill Clinton won the election with a minority of the votes. 3rd party candidate Ross Perot split the conservative vote, allow the fluke that was Clinton.
During the first Gulf War, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia(*):
Generals: Estimated casualties to take Bagdhad and remove Saddam Hussein, 5,000 US troops.
President HW Bush: Not worth it. End the war. Kicking the Iraqis back to their own country was our mission, not regime change.
(*) Yes Saudi Arabia too, Battle of Kafji. 3 Iraqi divisions invaded, stopped by US Marines and Rangers and a hell of a lot of air support.
In China, it's also Alibaba doing the tracking. As best I can tell, they have much tighter "relationship" with the Chinese government than Google does.
The Chinese government is one of Alibaba's owners. At various Chinese companies the communist party works with the corporate boards and senior management to make sure companies are in sync with government policies and long term goals. And then there is a certain amount of patriotism and trust in the government by many Chinese people.
In contrast, Google employees assist the Chinese government for money.
Only difference is in the US private companies keep scores on you instead of the government.
Well in China it is US companies, ex Google, helping to keep track of people on behalf of the Chinese government. Its only the US government that Google/Amazon/etc employees refuse to work for.
That would still be Trump trying to pass his share of the blame to the state of California at best.
So what? Who cares what he says? What he like or dislikes has no influence on any idea, the accuracy of ideas stands apart from him. If what Trump say is important to you, seek help.
I think the military bit had to do with:
* being able to plan
* being trainable (ex the civilian parachuting school)
* being somewhat risk tolerant
* being somewhat able to overcome fear and complete a task
Also the older former paratrooper could teach the younger former sailor about techniques for landing around obstacles, getting down out of trees, etc. Things not normally taught in civilian training.
And then there is the likelihood that one veteran would see another veteran as a more trustworthy partner than a civilian, even with service in different branches.
Hijacking includes robbery based, for example trucks having their cargo stolen. The term is not limited to hostage taking, political terrorism.
Skyjacking is more directly derived from hijacking and predates the common use of carjacking.
Skyjacking emerged in the 1960s/70s during a period of frequent airline aircraft takeovers by terrorists, not so much the commercially minded as in the DB Cooper case. Yet like hijacking the dual use, commercial and political terrorism, was well understood. Hijacking simply leaned towards the commercial, skyjacking simple leaned towards the political. The words are very closely related. Skyjacking was commonly understood as hijacking, but with an airplane.
There is no shortage of forest fires in California on non-federal land.
There is no shortage of mismanagement at the state and local levels, it is not a problem specific to the federal level.
There is no wonky logic, you merely miss the point. The problem is hyper aggressive fighting of every small fire. Minimizing its burn. This leads to accumulation of fuel over large areas. In Mexico where the small fires are allowed to burn a bit more naturally there develops a patchwork of areas without enough fuel to sustain large fires and thereby prevents their development or limits their scope.
I am not speaking of only forested areas, I am referring the grass/brush covered regions as well. The disparity observed between the US and Mexico includes grass/brush covered regions. I have also lived in such a region for several decades. The gov't induced problems are many. For example in one locale homeowners were prevented from clearing brush near their homes, brush that was a fire danger, because it was considered habitat for some sort of ground squirrel.
Why are databases of licence plates - and the links to their owners - publicly available?
I'm not sure the links to owners are, rather the data that says a license plate was here on date/time. The civilian users of the database -- bail bondsman, vehicle repossessors, etc -- may have access vehicle registrations as part of their normal work or they are coming from the other direction. They have data on the person who has the bond/debt and this data includes license plates.
Actually we know the sizes of fires with and without hyper aggressive fire suppression by comparing similar regions of the US and Mexico. Mexico with less suppression has much smaller fires that create less damage. There is effectively a patchwork of firebreaks from previous year's small fires. The problem with the US is that we don't have such a patchwork and this allows fires to more easily traverse terrain and reach much larger sizes.
Yes 10 years is not very long but its not about one particular area burning, its about a fire spreading from one area to another to another to another.
... As usual, you should ignore Trump's attempts to somehow blame this on Democrats, saying they weren't "managing" the forests properly...
Don't let your politics fool you. Science does in fact say we are mismanaging forest and brush lands. Trump may be an idiot but via the broken clock effect he is occasionally correct. In this case our hyper aggressive firefighting over many decades, overseen by both republicans and democrats, has let fuel accumulate. The result has been more and larger fires that are more difficult to contain.
There are many ways to f' up the environment. Some of them are industrial, some of them are well meaning and superficially pro-environment policies. Fires are a natural part of the environmental cycle in some regions. That needs to be recognized and fire suppression needs to start taking that into account.
They weren't culling deadwood and managing the forest around their town. All the dead wood and brush is/was a tinder box waiting to flame up. That said, burn offs are completely natural and part of the cycle of life for woodlands.
Where I used to live people were prohibited from removing built-up fuel near their homes Such deadwood/brush was considered a habitat for some local endangered ground squirrel type critter. Structures and lives were lost as a result, this was decades ago. I'm sure things have gotten no better, probably worse.
Its often not the police collecting the data, the police are often merely subscribers to the commercial private databases. These database are filled by other private sources, bail bondsmen, reposessors, etc. These private entities will literally cruise up and down the isles of parking lots at various public venues -- malls, stadiums, walmart, etc -- scanning/recording plates and waiting for statistics to find them a car/person of interest. As a bonus they also sell all their collected data to the commercial private databases.
To think that this is largely a law enforcement effort or a law enforcement database is to totally misunderstand what has been happening.
No warrant is needed for public information available from a private source. That's the "beauty" of the current system for law enforcement, why they like to merely be a subscriber.
Mail — and all your other means of communications, except those under blanket ones you mentioned — are still subject to interception by government. And, probably, should be.
Though two dedicated people could use some of the means you describe, it can not be done commercially....
Yes, and when the gov't grabs a single site as in this case you lose everything. However if you had used one of the other channels for key distribution you would overwhelmingly likely be just fine. You are comparing apples and oranges, a massive haul of keys and communications at a single point of failure and the targeting of one specific person over many channels of communications. Two very very different things.
And if you are concerned about being targeted over many channels of communications then you do a face-to-face meeting as I originally mentioned.
The fact remains that letting your communications provider handle your keys is the worst possible way of going about this.
Or any myriad of less drastic things that would be an improvement over letting a middleman handle keys for you.
Such as? Remember, we are talking here about strangers seeking to communicate securely without ever meeting each other in person...
Sigh --- Create a truecrypt/versacrypt volume with a text file with the keys. Email them, put them on a USB stick or SD Card and postal mail them,... Phone, text, postal mail (not if sending USB stick or SD card via postal), etc the volume passphrase. Use temporary emails, burner phones, etc depending on you level of paranoia, fedex, ups or courier rather than postal mail. As I said there are a host of options beyond the chat service middleman also handling your keys.
The key should be exchanged via an entirely different and unrelated channel of communications.
The "different and unrelated"... such as?
Well you could go the full Snowden and fly to Hong Kong, meet in a hotel room and get under a blanket with computers that have never been online. Or any myriad of less drastic things that would be an improvement over letting a middleman handle keys for you.
Its not end-to-end if the service provider / middleman is providing or transmitting the keys. The key should be exchanged via an entirely different and unrelated channel of communications.
Slashdot Mirror
Go jump out of an airplane over the Pacific and let us know how much kinship you feel you vicarious-living charade.
Jumping out of a plane going down in flames isn't really the accomplishment. Flying a perfectly good airplane to the island that is heavily defended and known to be commanded by someone who beheads captured pilots and practices ritualistic cannibalism is the accomplishment.
His re-election failure was a fluke. Like Trump, Bill Clinton won the election with a minority of the votes. 3rd party candidate Ross Perot split the conservative vote, allow the fluke that was Clinton.
Yeah, another one based on lies!
What lies?
The lie that Iraq invaded Kuwait. The invasion was filmed on the old Apollo 11 moon landing set. ;-)
Ross Perot cost him the election, not Quayle.
Tell me again how he deserves respect?
During the first Gulf War, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia(*):
Generals: Estimated casualties to take Bagdhad and remove Saddam Hussein, 5,000 US troops.
President HW Bush: Not worth it. End the war. Kicking the Iraqis back to their own country was our mission, not regime change.
(*) Yes Saudi Arabia too, Battle of Kafji. 3 Iraqi divisions invaded, stopped by US Marines and Rangers and a hell of a lot of air support.
Yes, it is. The first war was predicated on falsehood also, stop making excuses you old saggy titted liar.
What falsehood, that Iraq invaded Kuwait?
In China, it's also Alibaba doing the tracking. As best I can tell, they have much tighter "relationship" with the Chinese government than Google does.
The Chinese government is one of Alibaba's owners. At various Chinese companies the communist party works with the corporate boards and senior management to make sure companies are in sync with government policies and long term goals. And then there is a certain amount of patriotism and trust in the government by many Chinese people.
In contrast, Google employees assist the Chinese government for money.
Only difference is in the US private companies keep scores on you instead of the government.
Well in China it is US companies, ex Google, helping to keep track of people on behalf of the Chinese government. Its only the US government that Google/Amazon/etc employees refuse to work for.
That would still be Trump trying to pass his share of the blame to the state of California at best.
So what? Who cares what he says? What he like or dislikes has no influence on any idea, the accuracy of ideas stands apart from him. If what Trump say is important to you, seek help.
I think the military bit had to do with:
* being able to plan
* being trainable (ex the civilian parachuting school)
* being somewhat risk tolerant
* being somewhat able to overcome fear and complete a task
Also the older former paratrooper could teach the younger former sailor about techniques for landing around obstacles, getting down out of trees, etc. Things not normally taught in civilian training.
And then there is the likelihood that one veteran would see another veteran as a more trustworthy partner than a civilian, even with service in different branches.
Hijacking includes robbery based, for example trucks having their cargo stolen. The term is not limited to hostage taking, political terrorism.
Skyjacking is more directly derived from hijacking and predates the common use of carjacking.
Skyjacking emerged in the 1960s/70s during a period of frequent airline aircraft takeovers by terrorists, not so much the commercially minded as in the DB Cooper case. Yet like hijacking the dual use, commercial and political terrorism, was well understood. Hijacking simply leaned towards the commercial, skyjacking simple leaned towards the political. The words are very closely related. Skyjacking was commonly understood as hijacking, but with an airplane.
There is no shortage of forest fires in California on non-federal land.
There is no shortage of mismanagement at the state and local levels, it is not a problem specific to the federal level.
There is no wonky logic, you merely miss the point. The problem is hyper aggressive fighting of every small fire. Minimizing its burn. This leads to accumulation of fuel over large areas. In Mexico where the small fires are allowed to burn a bit more naturally there develops a patchwork of areas without enough fuel to sustain large fires and thereby prevents their development or limits their scope.
I am not speaking of only forested areas, I am referring the grass/brush covered regions as well. The disparity observed between the US and Mexico includes grass/brush covered regions. I have also lived in such a region for several decades. The gov't induced problems are many. For example in one locale homeowners were prevented from clearing brush near their homes, brush that was a fire danger, because it was considered habitat for some sort of ground squirrel.
Why are databases of licence plates - and the links to their owners - publicly available?
I'm not sure the links to owners are, rather the data that says a license plate was here on date/time. The civilian users of the database -- bail bondsman, vehicle repossessors, etc -- may have access vehicle registrations as part of their normal work or they are coming from the other direction. They have data on the person who has the bond/debt and this data includes license plates.
Actually we know the sizes of fires with and without hyper aggressive fire suppression by comparing similar regions of the US and Mexico. Mexico with less suppression has much smaller fires that create less damage. There is effectively a patchwork of firebreaks from previous year's small fires. The problem with the US is that we don't have such a patchwork and this allows fires to more easily traverse terrain and reach much larger sizes.
Yes 10 years is not very long but its not about one particular area burning, its about a fire spreading from one area to another to another to another.
... As usual, you should ignore Trump's attempts to somehow blame this on Democrats, saying they weren't "managing" the forests properly ...
Don't let your politics fool you. Science does in fact say we are mismanaging forest and brush lands. Trump may be an idiot but via the broken clock effect he is occasionally correct. In this case our hyper aggressive firefighting over many decades, overseen by both republicans and democrats, has let fuel accumulate. The result has been more and larger fires that are more difficult to contain.
There are many ways to f' up the environment. Some of them are industrial, some of them are well meaning and superficially pro-environment policies. Fires are a natural part of the environmental cycle in some regions. That needs to be recognized and fire suppression needs to start taking that into account.
They weren't culling deadwood and managing the forest around their town. All the dead wood and brush is/was a tinder box waiting to flame up. That said, burn offs are completely natural and part of the cycle of life for woodlands.
Where I used to live people were prohibited from removing built-up fuel near their homes Such deadwood/brush was considered a habitat for some local endangered ground squirrel type critter. Structures and lives were lost as a result, this was decades ago. I'm sure things have gotten no better, probably worse.
Its often not the police collecting the data, the police are often merely subscribers to the commercial private databases. These database are filled by other private sources, bail bondsmen, reposessors, etc. These private entities will literally cruise up and down the isles of parking lots at various public venues -- malls, stadiums, walmart, etc -- scanning/recording plates and waiting for statistics to find them a car/person of interest. As a bonus they also sell all their collected data to the commercial private databases.
To think that this is largely a law enforcement effort or a law enforcement database is to totally misunderstand what has been happening.
No warrant is needed for public information available from a private source. That's the "beauty" of the current system for law enforcement, why they like to merely be a subscriber.
Mail — and all your other means of communications, except those under blanket ones you mentioned — are still subject to interception by government. And, probably, should be.
Though two dedicated people could use some of the means you describe, it can not be done commercially....
Yes, and when the gov't grabs a single site as in this case you lose everything. However if you had used one of the other channels for key distribution you would overwhelmingly likely be just fine. You are comparing apples and oranges, a massive haul of keys and communications at a single point of failure and the targeting of one specific person over many channels of communications. Two very very different things.
And if you are concerned about being targeted over many channels of communications then you do a face-to-face meeting as I originally mentioned.
The fact remains that letting your communications provider handle your keys is the worst possible way of going about this.
Such as? Remember, we are talking here about strangers seeking to communicate securely without ever meeting each other in person...
Sigh --- Create a truecrypt/versacrypt volume with a text file with the keys. Email them, put them on a USB stick or SD Card and postal mail them, ... Phone, text, postal mail (not if sending USB stick or SD card via postal), etc the volume passphrase. Use temporary emails, burner phones, etc depending on you level of paranoia, fedex, ups or courier rather than postal mail. As I said there are a host of options beyond the chat service middleman also handling your keys.
The "different and unrelated"... such as?
Well you could go the full Snowden and fly to Hong Kong, meet in a hotel room and get under a blanket with computers that have never been online. Or any myriad of less drastic things that would be an improvement over letting a middleman handle keys for you.
Why only Android? You don't think Apple bends of backward to accommodate law enforcement?
Because of the word "trojan" in: "A trojaned version of the app is also a good possibility."
Its not end-to-end if the service provider / middleman is providing or transmitting the keys. The key should be exchanged via an entirely different and unrelated channel of communications.
So only the Android users were hit and not the iOS users of the app?