I left Cali long long ago. Too rich for my blood to actually live in a nice place and the rest of the working stiffs are stuffed into the suburbs like cord wood, house poor and struggling to make ends meet on 2 $100k/year salaries.
I'd suggest you move to "fly over" country where $100K/year actually gets you a decent standard of living.
So, your position, that Hillary was confused and thus didn't lie and didn't commit a crime, doesn't have the same issue...
The fact remains that she *should* have known what that mark means and was legally responsible to properly handle classified information which includes not placing it on unauthorized computer systems. She also *should* have known that using a private e-mail server violated State Department policy and federal law. She failed on both accounts in situations where she should have known better.
You want to excuse her for these failures because she didn't know, but you don't get excused for breaking many laws by claiming you didn't intend to. Involuntary manslaughter doesn't require intent, just reckless behavior. The statute that makes it a crime to mishandle classified material doesn't require intent either, just being negligent is enough.
That's Hillary's problem here.. And yours if you wish to defend her and her public statements.
Ground forces are not a problem and are easily immobilized by the Air Force, Army Air Corps, and Marines from the air. Remember the first gulf war? Iraq's ground forces got shellacked because they had zero control of the air. DPRK will have the same problem.
Look, I'm not trying to sell DPRK short, they DO have a bunch of troops, but they have nearly zero Air support and nearly non-existent air defenses. Technologically they are out matched, out gunned and easy prey should a shooting war start. The first Gulf War proved that without control of the air space, all the troops in the world won't stand a chance, even using conventional weapons. So millions of troops, on foot with no hope of logistical support once the shooting starts are not a huge concern. We do need to contain them where they are north of the DMZ and that may take a few hours, but they will quickly lose the capability to move, except on foot and then only in small infiltration teams which will be a bloody mess for civilians, but tactically insignificant.
If you cannot protect your troops from air attack, they will be limited to traveling on foot with what they can carry. If you cannot effectively resupply your ground troops they won't be an effective force and won't be able to move. They will be stuck in place, with any supplies they have, and that's about all.
There are two things that worry me though...
1. Shelling Seoul from north of the DMZ will be unavoidable. This will be short lived, but the causalities to civilian and military areas will be significant until it can be suppressed. BTW... You do realize that we have the ability to track incoming shells back to their origin and can have a return volley on the source within two rounds.. Right? As soon as DPRK forces fire, they will get 2 maybe 3 rounds before they die and it takes usually 2+ rounds to get on target unless you are lucky. Artillery will make a mess, but not for long. I'm worried about this mess and the relationship strain this will cause in the region.
2. The first round of the Korean War was clearly lost by the north, until China stepped in. They had their butts kicked all the way to the border and clearly they would again. My fear is that China will once again step in, for the same reasons (Or that the Russians will do something). This is where this shooting war could get out of hand.
Do you suppose that if somebody stole the actual plans that *anybody* would admit to it?
Also, do you suppose that given the apparent age of the plans in question and the changing of the governments of BOTH the USA and South Korea which included wholesale policy changes in regards to North Korea in both countries that even if the real plans had been laying out there for all to see that the *current* plans would be the same?
Finally, do you also suppose that the North Koreans didn't already have a sufficient understanding of their own situation to not be able to anticipate what the US forces could do? My guess is that the North's leadership fully understands what the plan of the USA is in specific enough detail to know what's going to happen at least for the first few hours anyway, and after that, any specific plans you may have had are likely OBE anyway..
...as opposed to orange hair il Douchebag's plan, which is to be as ignorant as any human can be, and then demonstrate said ignorance by starting WW3 as soon as possible.
Hyperbolae much? As soon as possible would have been on January 20th right about noon. North Korea could have been a glowing parking lot by 3 PM eastern if the whole plan was to start a war with them. Trump must really be in your head or something.
Seriously, do try to at least understand the man a bit better it will help you survive the full 8 year treatment you are in for... He's not trying to start a war, but he's not kicking the can down the road anymore either. He's not the smooth talking political animal you are used to, but a brash outspoken loud mouth that gets stuff done in his own way. He loves to tweak folks and get in his advisories heads, which is what he's doing to Kimmy boy in North Korea. I think that's a good thing actually. I want Kim to be looking over his shoulder and not sleeping well at night worried about what Trump might actually do. Nervous people make mistakes, costly mistakes, so all Trump need do is sit back and tweak the kid, get time for the sanctions to start to bite and see if Kim makes an unforced error of some kind.
You don't have to like Trump, but at least try to understand that there might be a method in the madness you see.
No, actually they have some pretty modern weapons... Just no roads to move them around or fuel for the trucks they are on.
Their air defense network is pretty good, being built from hand me down, hand me downs they purchased from the Russians paying with fish and held together with left over bailing wire. It will be good as long as they don't actually try to use it.
Even with the middle east, DPRK would be a cake walk for the USA, the problem isn't resources, the problem is how long it would take to deliver them... South Korea would suffer significant civilian causalities for the hour or so the North could keep up the shelling with the various chemical weapons they have in the field and I'm sure there would be a number of bloody infiltration attacks for a couple of days to contend with.
Any shooting war would be decidedly short, as short as the USA could make it and we have the resources to take care of DPRK close enough to make that time window into hours not days.
We could win the war with the resources already in the region. Of course, winning the peace would be a bit more of a challenge, but not as much of a challenge as Iraq was. There will be a short lived insurgency from some military holdouts, but given the north isn't currently at odds internally like Iraq was, it won't be sectarian violence.
Wink wink... Of course they wheel Uns.... No way the South Koreans are smart enough to do a diversionary gambit or feed Littl' Kimmy's Toy Army misinformation. They wouldn't dare try to trick der Leader... No way at all...
Not as many as there are now. Rural electrification didn't take place in earnest until after 1936 and that didn't subsidize phone until the mid 40's....
The measurable filth on those birds is nothing but a hoax. And even if it's true: how do we know exactly how they got that crap on them. For all we know, they frequent bars that allow smoking. Or maybe they drive diesel trucks.
My guess is that they frequented tall smoke stacks and chimneys as elevated safe perches.... Remember this was before the current crop of telephone poles and wires sprang up. It was trees or a building for the most part.
Perhaps I am just looking for a reason to not like Hills... Actually, I didn't like her policies or her continual lying about this and other things.
But you have to admit, I'm not alone. There are a LOT of folks who dislike the Clinton's political views and propensity to be stretchers of the truth to paraphrase Mark Twain. Bill got sanctioned and lost his law license for lying under oath while in office. He got himself impeached too. Hillary participated in the covering up of Bill's indiscretions and didn't bat an eye about having to launch personal attacks on her husband's accusers, not because they were lying, but because it hurt Bill's and her's political futures. You see it's all about power with her and the money that comes with that power.
However, I never would make the mistake to believe that Hillary or Bill are stupid people, backwood hicks from Arkansas or any other such nonsense. They are both quite bright and very astute political players, Hillary more so than Bill even. As much as I don't like her policy or politics, I have never believed Hillary didn't have the ability or intellect necessary to do her various jobs, I just don't like her politics and I don't trust what she says because she has a history of lying.
So now, we come to this E-mail thing that Hillary really messed up on. You want to excuse Hillary by using a "she didn't know better" or worse "She wasn't paying close enough attention" to what was going on. She's not that stupid. She got the training, she knew what the marks where and what they mean, so I don't believe for a second she was just unaware of the nature of the information she was sending on unclassified systems. I DO however, believe that she simply didn't care, that she was smart enough and aware enough to know, but didn't think it mattered.
It actually explains a LOT of what she did and said if you look at it this way. She didn't care because she never thought she'd be investigated on this subject. That personal E-mail server, illegal to use for unclassified work purposes to start was just hers to do with as she pleased so she did. The record retention rules didn't apply, nor did the rules for handling classified information, she was in charge! This is where Hillary failed, she didn't care, and didn't follow the laws that governed her activities. She's Hillary Clinton after all,Secretary of State, heir apparent to the presidency.
It was her attitude that did her in, not her inability to know what a portion mark ment, or that the content being discussed was classified. This makes her categorical denial that this private E-mail server was ever used for work possible. She knew it was, but she thought nobody would look into it, that nobody cared because she didn't care. She was wrong. At that point, the PR game was on for her. She got caught in a bald faced lie, one she should have known better than to say and the rest was about damage control and PR spin. In pure Clinton style, she kept admitting to as little as she could and categorically denying all else waiting for the revelations to stop. It's how Bill handled the Monica Lewinsky thing, the Jennifer Flowers case and how they handled Whitewater together. And actually it's a great method, assuming you can get interest in the story to waine soon enough. Public attention is short, the new cycle is fast, so if you can get enough distance between you and the story and make your categorical denials the thing that gets reported, the public will forget. The trick is to make it a non-story as fast as you can and get your denial on the record as soon and as often as you can, then wait for it to pass. It's the Clinton way, and it usually works.
Hills problem was it kept coming back up, new facts kept making her into a liar and making her change her story. So, in this case, the Clinton spin cycle didn't actually work for her as well as it had in the past. Trump didn't mind bringing up the E-mail thing over and over, forcing all the FBI investigation stuff and Clinton's ev
Try it and see. If it survives the market, the world needed what you built. If it doesn't survive, the world didn't need what you built.
That's not really how it works. Products fail every day not because they weren't needed, but because they didn't fulfill that need well enough.
Then they didn't build what was needed, if you only build part of the solution when the whole solution was needed, you failed... Of course this is semantics...
Try it and see. If it survives the market, the world needed what you built. If it doesn't survive, the world didn't need what you built.
The world didn't need Windows on a phone or BlackBerry but they might like some other Operating System design....The issue will be what does your OS provide that the others don't do as well?
I wish you luck, IOS has a strangle hold on most of the market because it "just works" (usually) and Google has nearly all the rest wrapped up with Android. If you can do it better, have at it.
"We're going to do it properly and safely and with some kind of guarantee."
What kind of guarantee?
I really don't want to be on that first SpaceX trip to Mars though... This thing is SO expensive that taking the crawl, walk, run and then fly approach is going to soak every bit or profit SpaceX can create and then some, for little or no commercial benefit that I can come up with.
The real purpose of this story is that Musk is trying to soak up more taxpayer funding for Manned spaceflight, not that he actually knows how long it will take him to develop the technologies.
If he can't make his goals of Telsa 3 production, why should we believe he can put people on Mars...
Hey, the first schedule is always based on "If nothing goes wrong" planning. It's how industry always works....
Ah, reminds me of a conversation I had with a sales exec once who was yelling about how engineering (me) never cooperated with him on the schedule... I kept saying that the best delivery date we could hope for was 6 months later than he wanted (or as it turns out, what he promised the customer already w/o asking me). Then he hit me with the following question... "So what keeps you from doing this?"
My answer was "I'm not totally sure, but all the internal milestones are too aggressive and one or more of them will obviously slip. Something will go wrong." (which turned out to be a mistake).
He then asked "So what can you do if nothing goes wrong?"
I should have said "I can create lasting world peace!" or some such nonsense, but I had to admit that if *everyone* met their dates, I could too.
Problem was, I was the install team and was responsible for proving to the customer it all worked, so when the milestones from development and hardware slipped, my part of the schedule got shorter and shorter. Finally, I got blamed for the failure to deliver on schedule, not because it was actually my fault, but because it was my tasks that where not complete....
BTW... Can anybody guess when we got done? Would you be surprised to learn it was right at 6 months late?
It actually was better back in the 40's in all ways but two... The acting was better, the direction was better, the writing was way better.... The only thing that wasn't better was the quality of the image and sound.
Hollywood has turned all "good" TV shows into the same tired formula for political correctness reasons and then to pump up the ratings they throw in gratuitous sex or violence which usually adds nothing to the show, except shock value.
However, I think we are actually turning the corner on some of this, with subscription services starting to produce original content of their own that is pretty good and depends on better acting, directing and writing more than shock.
So.. You are defending Clinton for getting a ticket doing 20 MPH over by complaining that other folks broke the law by doing 5 MPH over only got warnings? When she got pulled over she told everyone who would listen that there was no way she broke the law and the officer was wrong. Upon further investigation, it was determined that Clinton WAS speeding and was ALSO transporting illegal materials in her vehicle at the time... She was lying and actually deserved the speeding citation and more besides.
Both of the people you mention immediately turned over all relevant E-mail's, no delay, no lying about it. Yes, it was wrong for them to do, they admitted to it and provided the necessary information for the archives. Clinton? Not so much, she lied about this, tried to claim it never happened then proceeded to have her E-mail archives destroyed so they can never be found. Why is that do you suppose? Might there be something other than just planning for her daughter's wedding and yoga schedules in those things? I think so, But I digress.
Yes, she did
And they were all stamped CONFIDENTIAL (c)
Which is enough to validate my claim that she sent and received classified information on her private unclassified E-mail server which was MARKED as classified.
Clinton denied (at various points) all of the following:
1. She used her private server for work (She did, in violation of State Department policy and federal record keeping laws).
2. She send and received classified information on her private unclassified E-mail system. (She did this too).
3. She sent and received material that was MARKED classified on this private unclassified system. (When she provably did)
4. The information on this system was exposed to our enemies. (Which seems likely to be true by the FBI, but not provable with the information we have been able to recover.)
So she broke the spirit and letter of two major statutes and has likely exposed information that was classified. Further, she lied about all of this and was forced to progressively change her public statements on this activity, which isn't a crime per se, but does speak to her willingness to stretch the truth to stay in power, and the public outcry over it was likely responsible for turning enough voters away to cost her the election.
The thing about criminal negligence is that it's only going to be prosecuted if there's actual harm. Nobody's shown any actual harm from the classified emails.
LOL.. But the FBI does conclude that although they cannot prove Clinton's private server was compromised, it seems likely that it was.
Read the statute on this that Comey talked about when he let her off the hook. It doesn't require intent, only negligence, and it doesn't require proof that the information was compromised. All it really requires is gross negligence and careless behavior which Clinton clearly displayed.
Also, don't forget that Clinton has two legal issue here and the classified information showing up in her unclassified server is but one. The other is that this private E-mail system was illegal due to the required record keeping rules, where all Clinton's correspondence is required to be archived. On both she failed to exercise proper care and failed to live up to the letter and spirit of the law.
Continued mishandling of classified, albeit unintentional or not, IS a disqualifier however. Seriously, if you make a mistake or two, I'm sure they will be reasonable, require some remedial training in the areas where you are making mistakes and keep an eye on you for awhile. If you keep messing up, they are going to eventually yank your access and kick you to the curb because you don't seem well suited for the work you are doing.
However, intent is not necessary to break the law here. If you are careless enough, they CAN skip all the remedial training and jump straight to criminal charges if they choose. I suppose that if the data you exposed was serious enough and you were careless enough they'd do this.
It's the same legal principle as "criminal negligence" in a wrongful death where someone was careless enough to allow a dangerous situation go unfixed. They were aware of it, had the power to do something about it that would have prevented the death but made the choice to ignore the problem and somebody died as a result. If you are so careless with classified that it rises to the level of gross negligence then it's criminal, intent is not a factor.
Slashdot Mirror
I left Cali long long ago. Too rich for my blood to actually live in a nice place and the rest of the working stiffs are stuffed into the suburbs like cord wood, house poor and struggling to make ends meet on 2 $100k/year salaries.
I'd suggest you move to "fly over" country where $100K/year actually gets you a decent standard of living.
Riiiight... LOL..
So, your position, that Hillary was confused and thus didn't lie and didn't commit a crime, doesn't have the same issue...
The fact remains that she *should* have known what that mark means and was legally responsible to properly handle classified information which includes not placing it on unauthorized computer systems. She also *should* have known that using a private e-mail server violated State Department policy and federal law. She failed on both accounts in situations where she should have known better.
You want to excuse her for these failures because she didn't know, but you don't get excused for breaking many laws by claiming you didn't intend to. Involuntary manslaughter doesn't require intent, just reckless behavior. The statute that makes it a crime to mishandle classified material doesn't require intent either, just being negligent is enough.
That's Hillary's problem here.. And yours if you wish to defend her and her public statements.
Ground forces are not a problem and are easily immobilized by the Air Force, Army Air Corps, and Marines from the air. Remember the first gulf war? Iraq's ground forces got shellacked because they had zero control of the air. DPRK will have the same problem.
Look, I'm not trying to sell DPRK short, they DO have a bunch of troops, but they have nearly zero Air support and nearly non-existent air defenses. Technologically they are out matched, out gunned and easy prey should a shooting war start. The first Gulf War proved that without control of the air space, all the troops in the world won't stand a chance, even using conventional weapons. So millions of troops, on foot with no hope of logistical support once the shooting starts are not a huge concern. We do need to contain them where they are north of the DMZ and that may take a few hours, but they will quickly lose the capability to move, except on foot and then only in small infiltration teams which will be a bloody mess for civilians, but tactically insignificant.
If you cannot protect your troops from air attack, they will be limited to traveling on foot with what they can carry. If you cannot effectively resupply your ground troops they won't be an effective force and won't be able to move. They will be stuck in place, with any supplies they have, and that's about all.
There are two things that worry me though...
1. Shelling Seoul from north of the DMZ will be unavoidable. This will be short lived, but the causalities to civilian and military areas will be significant until it can be suppressed. BTW... You do realize that we have the ability to track incoming shells back to their origin and can have a return volley on the source within two rounds.. Right? As soon as DPRK forces fire, they will get 2 maybe 3 rounds before they die and it takes usually 2+ rounds to get on target unless you are lucky. Artillery will make a mess, but not for long. I'm worried about this mess and the relationship strain this will cause in the region.
2. The first round of the Korean War was clearly lost by the north, until China stepped in. They had their butts kicked all the way to the border and clearly they would again. My fear is that China will once again step in, for the same reasons (Or that the Russians will do something). This is where this shooting war could get out of hand.
Or, did it?
Do you suppose that if somebody stole the actual plans that *anybody* would admit to it?
Also, do you suppose that given the apparent age of the plans in question and the changing of the governments of BOTH the USA and South Korea which included wholesale policy changes in regards to North Korea in both countries that even if the real plans had been laying out there for all to see that the *current* plans would be the same?
Finally, do you also suppose that the North Koreans didn't already have a sufficient understanding of their own situation to not be able to anticipate what the US forces could do? My guess is that the North's leadership fully understands what the plan of the USA is in specific enough detail to know what's going to happen at least for the first few hours anyway, and after that, any specific plans you may have had are likely OBE anyway..
Good point.. Where did the birds come from? Did they study that part too?
...as opposed to orange hair il Douchebag's plan, which is to be as ignorant as any human can be, and then demonstrate said ignorance by starting WW3 as soon as possible.
Hyperbolae much? As soon as possible would have been on January 20th right about noon. North Korea could have been a glowing parking lot by 3 PM eastern if the whole plan was to start a war with them. Trump must really be in your head or something.
Seriously, do try to at least understand the man a bit better it will help you survive the full 8 year treatment you are in for... He's not trying to start a war, but he's not kicking the can down the road anymore either. He's not the smooth talking political animal you are used to, but a brash outspoken loud mouth that gets stuff done in his own way. He loves to tweak folks and get in his advisories heads, which is what he's doing to Kimmy boy in North Korea. I think that's a good thing actually. I want Kim to be looking over his shoulder and not sleeping well at night worried about what Trump might actually do. Nervous people make mistakes, costly mistakes, so all Trump need do is sit back and tweak the kid, get time for the sanctions to start to bite and see if Kim makes an unforced error of some kind.
You don't have to like Trump, but at least try to understand that there might be a method in the madness you see.
No, actually they have some pretty modern weapons... Just no roads to move them around or fuel for the trucks they are on.
Their air defense network is pretty good, being built from hand me down, hand me downs they purchased from the Russians paying with fish and held together with left over bailing wire. It will be good as long as they don't actually try to use it.
Even with the middle east, DPRK would be a cake walk for the USA, the problem isn't resources, the problem is how long it would take to deliver them... South Korea would suffer significant civilian causalities for the hour or so the North could keep up the shelling with the various chemical weapons they have in the field and I'm sure there would be a number of bloody infiltration attacks for a couple of days to contend with.
Any shooting war would be decidedly short, as short as the USA could make it and we have the resources to take care of DPRK close enough to make that time window into hours not days.
We could win the war with the resources already in the region. Of course, winning the peace would be a bit more of a challenge, but not as much of a challenge as Iraq was. There will be a short lived insurgency from some military holdouts, but given the north isn't currently at odds internally like Iraq was, it won't be sectarian violence.
I'm sure they got "da wheel pans" wink wink
Wink wink... Of course they wheel Uns.... No way the South Koreans are smart enough to do a diversionary gambit or feed Littl' Kimmy's Toy Army misinformation. They wouldn't dare try to trick der Leader... No way at all...
Not as many as there are now. Rural electrification didn't take place in earnest until after 1936 and that didn't subsidize phone until the mid 40's....
African or European?
The measurable filth on those birds is nothing but a hoax. And even if it's true: how do we know exactly how they got that crap on them. For all we know, they frequent bars that allow smoking. Or maybe they drive diesel trucks.
My guess is that they frequented tall smoke stacks and chimneys as elevated safe perches.... Remember this was before the current crop of telephone poles and wires sprang up. It was trees or a building for the most part.
Was it valid, or for the birds?
Why the Angry Birds of course..
Was this a study that they planned to do, or was this something they did on a lark?
It was planned to be just a big goose egg but it turned into something to crow about and not just fowl data.
But that's what happens when research isn't just a flight of fancy, imagination takes wing bringing understanding to new heights.
(Ducking for cover.... )
Perhaps I am just looking for a reason to not like Hills... Actually, I didn't like her policies or her continual lying about this and other things.
But you have to admit, I'm not alone. There are a LOT of folks who dislike the Clinton's political views and propensity to be stretchers of the truth to paraphrase Mark Twain. Bill got sanctioned and lost his law license for lying under oath while in office. He got himself impeached too. Hillary participated in the covering up of Bill's indiscretions and didn't bat an eye about having to launch personal attacks on her husband's accusers, not because they were lying, but because it hurt Bill's and her's political futures. You see it's all about power with her and the money that comes with that power.
However, I never would make the mistake to believe that Hillary or Bill are stupid people, backwood hicks from Arkansas or any other such nonsense. They are both quite bright and very astute political players, Hillary more so than Bill even. As much as I don't like her policy or politics, I have never believed Hillary didn't have the ability or intellect necessary to do her various jobs, I just don't like her politics and I don't trust what she says because she has a history of lying.
So now, we come to this E-mail thing that Hillary really messed up on. You want to excuse Hillary by using a "she didn't know better" or worse "She wasn't paying close enough attention" to what was going on. She's not that stupid. She got the training, she knew what the marks where and what they mean, so I don't believe for a second she was just unaware of the nature of the information she was sending on unclassified systems. I DO however, believe that she simply didn't care, that she was smart enough and aware enough to know, but didn't think it mattered.
It actually explains a LOT of what she did and said if you look at it this way. She didn't care because she never thought she'd be investigated on this subject. That personal E-mail server, illegal to use for unclassified work purposes to start was just hers to do with as she pleased so she did. The record retention rules didn't apply, nor did the rules for handling classified information, she was in charge! This is where Hillary failed, she didn't care, and didn't follow the laws that governed her activities. She's Hillary Clinton after all,Secretary of State, heir apparent to the presidency.
It was her attitude that did her in, not her inability to know what a portion mark ment, or that the content being discussed was classified. This makes her categorical denial that this private E-mail server was ever used for work possible. She knew it was, but she thought nobody would look into it, that nobody cared because she didn't care. She was wrong. At that point, the PR game was on for her. She got caught in a bald faced lie, one she should have known better than to say and the rest was about damage control and PR spin. In pure Clinton style, she kept admitting to as little as she could and categorically denying all else waiting for the revelations to stop. It's how Bill handled the Monica Lewinsky thing, the Jennifer Flowers case and how they handled Whitewater together. And actually it's a great method, assuming you can get interest in the story to waine soon enough. Public attention is short, the new cycle is fast, so if you can get enough distance between you and the story and make your categorical denials the thing that gets reported, the public will forget. The trick is to make it a non-story as fast as you can and get your denial on the record as soon and as often as you can, then wait for it to pass. It's the Clinton way, and it usually works.
Hills problem was it kept coming back up, new facts kept making her into a liar and making her change her story. So, in this case, the Clinton spin cycle didn't actually work for her as well as it had in the past. Trump didn't mind bringing up the E-mail thing over and over, forcing all the FBI investigation stuff and Clinton's ev
Try it and see. If it survives the market, the world needed what you built. If it doesn't survive, the world didn't need what you built.
That's not really how it works. Products fail every day not because they weren't needed, but because they didn't fulfill that need well enough.
Then they didn't build what was needed, if you only build part of the solution when the whole solution was needed, you failed... Of course this is semantics...
Try it and see. If it survives the market, the world needed what you built. If it doesn't survive, the world didn't need what you built.
The world didn't need Windows on a phone or BlackBerry but they might like some other Operating System design....The issue will be what does your OS provide that the others don't do as well?
I wish you luck, IOS has a strangle hold on most of the market because it "just works" (usually) and Google has nearly all the rest wrapped up with Android. If you can do it better, have at it.
"increasingly hard to defend"
Seems to me the defence is quite easy.
"We're going to do it properly and safely and with some kind of guarantee."
What kind of guarantee?
I really don't want to be on that first SpaceX trip to Mars though... This thing is SO expensive that taking the crawl, walk, run and then fly approach is going to soak every bit or profit SpaceX can create and then some, for little or no commercial benefit that I can come up with.
The real purpose of this story is that Musk is trying to soak up more taxpayer funding for Manned spaceflight, not that he actually knows how long it will take him to develop the technologies.
If he can't make his goals of Telsa 3 production, why should we believe he can put people on Mars...
Hey, the first schedule is always based on "If nothing goes wrong" planning. It's how industry always works....
Ah, reminds me of a conversation I had with a sales exec once who was yelling about how engineering (me) never cooperated with him on the schedule... I kept saying that the best delivery date we could hope for was 6 months later than he wanted (or as it turns out, what he promised the customer already w/o asking me). Then he hit me with the following question... "So what keeps you from doing this?"
My answer was "I'm not totally sure, but all the internal milestones are too aggressive and one or more of them will obviously slip. Something will go wrong." (which turned out to be a mistake).
He then asked "So what can you do if nothing goes wrong?"
I should have said "I can create lasting world peace!" or some such nonsense, but I had to admit that if *everyone* met their dates, I could too.
Problem was, I was the install team and was responsible for proving to the customer it all worked, so when the milestones from development and hardware slipped, my part of the schedule got shorter and shorter. Finally, I got blamed for the failure to deliver on schedule, not because it was actually my fault, but because it was my tasks that where not complete....
BTW... Can anybody guess when we got done? Would you be surprised to learn it was right at 6 months late?
How does Musk propose getting around the 0-g effects on the human body?
By harnessing the detrimental affects of radiation to just kill the travelers outright. 0.G effects are the least of your concerns here.
It actually was better back in the 40's in all ways but two... The acting was better, the direction was better, the writing was way better.... The only thing that wasn't better was the quality of the image and sound.
Hollywood has turned all "good" TV shows into the same tired formula for political correctness reasons and then to pump up the ratings they throw in gratuitous sex or violence which usually adds nothing to the show, except shock value.
However, I think we are actually turning the corner on some of this, with subscription services starting to produce original content of their own that is pretty good and depends on better acting, directing and writing more than shock.
LOL.. 'Roud this bush again eh?
So.. You are defending Clinton for getting a ticket doing 20 MPH over by complaining that other folks broke the law by doing 5 MPH over only got warnings? When she got pulled over she told everyone who would listen that there was no way she broke the law and the officer was wrong. Upon further investigation, it was determined that Clinton WAS speeding and was ALSO transporting illegal materials in her vehicle at the time... She was lying and actually deserved the speeding citation and more besides.
Both of the people you mention immediately turned over all relevant E-mail's, no delay, no lying about it. Yes, it was wrong for them to do, they admitted to it and provided the necessary information for the archives. Clinton? Not so much, she lied about this, tried to claim it never happened then proceeded to have her E-mail archives destroyed so they can never be found. Why is that do you suppose? Might there be something other than just planning for her daughter's wedding and yoga schedules in those things? I think so, But I digress.
Yes, she did And they were all stamped CONFIDENTIAL (c)
Which is enough to validate my claim that she sent and received classified information on her private unclassified E-mail server which was MARKED as classified.
Clinton denied (at various points) all of the following:
1. She used her private server for work (She did, in violation of State Department policy and federal record keeping laws).
2. She send and received classified information on her private unclassified E-mail system. (She did this too).
3. She sent and received material that was MARKED classified on this private unclassified system. (When she provably did)
4. The information on this system was exposed to our enemies. (Which seems likely to be true by the FBI, but not provable with the information we have been able to recover.)
So she broke the spirit and letter of two major statutes and has likely exposed information that was classified. Further, she lied about all of this and was forced to progressively change her public statements on this activity, which isn't a crime per se, but does speak to her willingness to stretch the truth to stay in power, and the public outcry over it was likely responsible for turning enough voters away to cost her the election.
The thing about criminal negligence is that it's only going to be prosecuted if there's actual harm. Nobody's shown any actual harm from the classified emails.
LOL.. But the FBI does conclude that although they cannot prove Clinton's private server was compromised, it seems likely that it was.
Read the statute on this that Comey talked about when he let her off the hook. It doesn't require intent, only negligence, and it doesn't require proof that the information was compromised. All it really requires is gross negligence and careless behavior which Clinton clearly displayed.
Also, don't forget that Clinton has two legal issue here and the classified information showing up in her unclassified server is but one. The other is that this private E-mail system was illegal due to the required record keeping rules, where all Clinton's correspondence is required to be archived. On both she failed to exercise proper care and failed to live up to the letter and spirit of the law.
Continued mishandling of classified, albeit unintentional or not, IS a disqualifier however. Seriously, if you make a mistake or two, I'm sure they will be reasonable, require some remedial training in the areas where you are making mistakes and keep an eye on you for awhile. If you keep messing up, they are going to eventually yank your access and kick you to the curb because you don't seem well suited for the work you are doing.
However, intent is not necessary to break the law here. If you are careless enough, they CAN skip all the remedial training and jump straight to criminal charges if they choose. I suppose that if the data you exposed was serious enough and you were careless enough they'd do this.
It's the same legal principle as "criminal negligence" in a wrongful death where someone was careless enough to allow a dangerous situation go unfixed. They were aware of it, had the power to do something about it that would have prevented the death but made the choice to ignore the problem and somebody died as a result. If you are so careless with classified that it rises to the level of gross negligence then it's criminal, intent is not a factor.