You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".
Who's zooming whom?
AFTER a 15% tax cut remember... BUT you are mixing up your numbers. 1.1 Trillion is the increase in the national debt, of which only $799 Billion is from the budget deficit.
But I have a question for ya... Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt? Where you upset with the ACA passing because of it's obvious costs? What about the QE1, QE2, QE3, and QEForever spending? Any of that bother you?
As a % of GDP the debt is increasing, but at a lower rate of increase, since Trump took office. IF we are really worried about the federal debt, or even the budget deficit, what are YOU planning to put on the chopping block to balance the budget?
IF you are really serious about this deficit and national debt thing, I expect you to act on this and start cutting the budget across the board too, not just complaining about how a one time $5.7 Billion is going to break us. Be consistent, act on what you claim to believe.
Seriously? Give the guy his $100 Billion and be done with him...
Oh wait.. This ISN'T about the money is it? Democrats dropped $1 Trillion over 10 years on the ACA with a continued ever increasing entitlement without batting an eyelash (or taking time to actually read the bill), Of course that was something THEY wanted, so they where just dandy with writing that check and committing the government to writing bigger and bigger checks forever.
IF I was a democrat, I'd recommend that you not use the "we cannot afford this" argument card. It's a non starter. The reality is this expenditure is a way to save money over the decades to come, or certainly make our border protection efforts more effective and less costly. It would reduce the governmental service costs that get spent on illegals by more than the initial investment in just a few short years. Plus the lives saved alone (Both the illegals who die trying to cross the border and those who die from the drugs disease that illegally cross the border) would be worth every penny.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.
Ah.. So Democrats are now deficit hawks? Oh that's rich.. I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years and nobody on that side of the isle batting an eyelash about it. In fact, the ACA was projected to cost $1 Trillion over 10 years and established a new entitlement that would continue to suck federal funds FOREVER at an ever increasing cost per year. Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense. After that, you just have to maintain it which is a fraction of the original cost. But a wall is now too expensive? Not to mention that that IF we actually build the wall, we can make the money we spend on patrolling and protecting the border more effective, effectively reducing future costs.
But we all know this isn't about the money. It never was about the money and arguing about it based on cost is not going to work out for those who oppose the wall.
IF you are all upset over Trump trying to come back to congress for more wall funding, fund the whole thing, ONCE. Just offer him $200 Billion for a physical barrier on the border with the stipulation that it won't be repeated. He will take the deal for sure and I'll bet ya that he actually builds a wall with the cash this time.
Out of those 800,000 people, are there enough people with student loans, mortages, CC balances, and other normal debts, that when they stop paying them could be the catalyst to another debt crisis?
IF that's all it takes to topple the economy, the house of cards NEEDS to be toppled.
Still, seems to me that $5.7 Billion is a small price to pay out of a $44 Trillion budget. But this isn't about the money, and never was.
Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.
It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe when you make $44,000 / year and refusing to pay any of the utility bills, buy gas for the car or give the kids milk money for school until the demand for the fence is dropped.
I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car.
So, did the necessary routers adjust their route tables? They did. Data is flowing? It is? Well all went as planned then.
Apart from the bandwidth being limited and the network latency going way up, how's this big news? I mean, they can still get to Slashdot so they aren't missing anything important, right? (sarc off)
There are now computers searching though thousand of hit songs looking for obscure musical phrases in order to sue the producers of the hits (who presumably have money) on behalf of the copyright holders who got "violated" in some technically provable but random way. And I agree, it's a stupid thing that courts decide such suits the way they do, but that's civil law for you.
or it fails. Free them to worship, with all visual and audible alacrity, Most High!
To the Moon!
I know you are making a bit of a joke, but there are actually fair use rules for this.
You are free to claim "fair use" for copyrighted music performed DURING a worship service in a specific location, i.e. during a "live" service. However, you may not broadcast radio or TV, webcast, or even record and distribute copies of such music without permission (a license). Also, you may NOT print or project lyrics from copyrighted music or text from copyrighted books without a first getting written permission from the copyright holder.
James Bond, or more accurately the 007 franchise has 24 films. This franchise is wearing really thin as they are out of original Fleming stores to make films out of now.
Planet of the Apes has 5 in the original series and 3 remakes, for a total of 8, but really only 5 stories. But it's dead for now.
Star Trek was one of the "few" I had in mind, but those that use the original story line characters as part of the main plot are limited. If you include all the various TV series offshoots, they've made a bunch of these films.
Batman is dead after 14 films, a few of which were basically remakes of older films.
But all this illustrates just how hard it is to keep a franchise going past about three films.
Disney is about making money, not about art or entertainment. Their primary focus is to turn a profit on the movie they are making. So, if cutting corners makes them more money, if not consulting with the creators of the franchise or taking their advice looks like it will produce more profit, they are going to do it.
But let's face it. The original Star Wars concept was at best 3 movies and it's been down hill since The Empire Strikes Back and we are waiting for installment 9? This franchise has been driven into the ground and milked for all it was worth and then some (pun intended). Few franchises last this long with Rocky and Star Trek being about all I remember.
Disney bought an old used up sports car, that had 200,000 miles, poor tires and a bad front end out of somebodies barn. I'm not surprised they are having difficulty making money on it's restoration. Such work is a labor of love, not profit, and Disney is about the latter. I'm thinking this franchise is about over.
Again.. From my view, you are just making stuff up here. Orange man bad! Orange man Bad!
IF you where honest about this and what you actually KNOW (and not just suspect) I'm afraid you'd be a lot less confident about just how bad Trump really is. But no, we have to take 3 years of foaming at the mouth, outlandish accusations that don't have ANY basis in law or fact and a media that is fully invested in bringing the guy down, regardless of their journalistic standards getting trampled in the dust.
Seriously, I've heard a whole pile of charges being made, which are ludicrous on their face, yet we've been regaled for days over them. Like firing James Comey is somehow obstruction of justice, or his "Go easy on Flynn" statement being proof of it too.. And that's just two examples of bogus charges which consumed MONTHS of breathless news coverage.
This is absolutely ludicrous yet folks like you run headlong into the fray, repeating the unfounded charges as if they where facts and pointing your crooked fingers and saying "See! Orange man BAD! REALLY bad!" The truth is that you and your leaders just don't like him, want to get rid of him, being reasonable or even factual about it doesn't matter. He's got to go and the ends justify the means, ANY means.
Don't you understand how this hysteria is being used? How this whole campaign is really an appeal to anger that has to keep advancing the level of outrage because the voters are growing tired of being angry? Eventually this won't work anymore, the shrill voices will have deafened all the ears that matter. Given the current volume level, I suspect we are rapidly approaching the end, where it won't matter how ridiculous and loud the pundits get. Just watch then, just keep your ear plugs in..
"What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world."
See, that's where you let your intelligence get the best of you. The intent of polls is to measure the current status of opinion. Polls are USED, however, to suggest to those who prefer not to think critically HOW they should be thinking. As much as people like to assert that they'll make up their own mind, if they have an extreme minority opinion, they tend to change sides.
See, that's where your critical reading skills failed you..
Nobody but political punditry pay attention to their results and then only when they support their political ideas, otherwise nobody looks at the results or takes them seriously.
I fully understand how these polls are used and by who. However, my point is they are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
Oh, and one more thing... This story is about something that happened BEFORE Trump threw his hat in the presidential ring... Like a whole year before. This episode had exactly zero affect on the election results...
Oh yea, Trump is a really bad guy as a result? Oh we have proof!
For Pete's sake people. Yea, Trump is FAR from perfect, but we ALL knew that BEFORE the election so tell me something I didn't know before he won. Just in case you thought there was any doubt, the Billy Bush Access Hollywood tape should have clued everybody in as to what kind of guy Trump was and is. So why do we have to keep digging up stuff about Trump to beat him with? What's the point of reporting on such things?
Trump's voters didn't care about it back then, at least most didn't. Such stories, designed to separate Trump from his base, actually don't and may in fact further solidify his base because they see all this as unfair and biased reporting. The media ignores his accomplishments and bellows on about his character flaws, real and imagined. Why do you suppose Trump talks about "fake news" all the time? It's like he's vaccinating his supporters from even believing the media, at all, so it won't matter in October 2020 what the other side pops up with as an October surprise.
Personally, I grow very weary of all the "bombshell" revelations about Trump that are no surprise at all. I'm sorry but I've been assailed by better stories than this that turned out to be pointless. Let the guy be president and attack him on what he does and says in that capacity and let's forget all these "before the campaign" escapades "Oooo Look Orange man bad" stores. Like this one, they are pointless to the point of irrelevancy, much like bantering on about White Water or some such.
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
If this actually did happen then I have to question what lows Trump would stoop to just to become president. We are literally talking about a worthless poll that nobody really cares about. If he is willing to cheat on this to become a president, then I am sure that he did many other unethical things to get where he is now. But anyone who thought Trump was an ethical person prior to his presidential run was not paying attention to anything Trump actually does. He has quite an unsavory reputation in the business world for trying to cheat contractors out of everything he possibly can.
I have not doubt it happened, nor do I hold up Trump as a paragon of virtue. That's not why I voted for him over Hillary, who is no paragon of virtue herself, but we dare not list her ethical and moral issues, lest it be twisted into some other way to bash Trump.
I'm discussing how this attempt to rig some meaningless online poll is relevant? How on earth did this affect anything?
Now you step up and say.. Well if he'd do THIS, what else has he likely done? "Obviously he's a really bad bad guy!" you say. I'm to the point where I DO NOT CARE what your theories are, but what you can prove. Until we actually have something that's important and that sticks, I sit back and chuckle wondering how long the TDS can keep this craziness up. It's been a long list of unsubstantiated claims from dubious sources for 3 years now that haven't proven to be true. Good luck with your theories.
What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world.
The importance is online polls were repeatedly cited by the Trump campaign to show support for Trump. Yes, even though they are unscientific and frequently gamed.
With our media's philosophy of "we can't possibly point out just how stupid this is", stories were written as if Trump was as popular as the online polls indicated. Or at least there were stories about how online polls conflicted with real polls.
Which then builds a narrative about a candidate. Which then influences who people vote for.
And Trump's campaign is obviously the inventor of such tactics? (sarc off)
Come on, everybody plays this game. I'm great, I'm winning! It's called a political campaign. Trump didn't invent this and BOTH campaigns clearly made similar claims based on the same kinds of evidence.
Where did it come from? Was there a water containing moot that got crashed into? Or did a comet crash into an object orbiting Saturn, or did Saturn pass though a comet debris field and collect the objects?
That's the problem. Comets are slushy mud balls, not pure water. So the rings are not just some parts of a comet that got caught in orbit around Saturn, at least not directly. It's also why I'm asking the question. IF it's not possible for the rings to have come from a comet because of their composition, where did they come from?
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
Um.. Isn't that what I said? Political pundits are the only people who care about online poll results and only because it's bait for the unwary.
But the whole thing is irrelevant anyway. It's like the old saying "There are lies, damnable lies and Statistics" where online polls are the last thing on that list.
The turnout models skewed towards Hillary and the pollsters under estimated the appeal of the outsider, inexperienced Trump. In generally the polls where pretty close though, if you consider their the margin of error which is usually around 3-4% for most polls. What happened was they where all off in their turn out models by 2-3% and that upped the chances for a Hillary win when you looked at the numbers.
Polling is more of an art form than an exact science. It's really hard to predict who's going to vote, and adjust your data collection techniques to match what the actual vote counts will be. It's always a guess. When huge unknowns (such as a candidate like Trump) are in play, it's even harder to get it right.
Cohen now compromised by Obama's Deep State in an effort to defame the good name of our God-Emperor.
Let's face it, Cohen is compromised of his own doing, Obama had nothing to do with it. He's just a dirty lawyer who had wealthy friends and tastes who got caught stretching the law and lying about it.
I'm struggling to find the technical aspect of this. Because the polls he was trying to rig are online? Or is this nothing more than orange-tinged clickbait?
The technical aspects of this are basically what you think. Asking for some IT guy to create a way to click though online polls to skew them in the way that you want.
What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world. They basically are like the junk science of perpetual motion or energy from nothing of the polling world. Nobody but political punditry pay attention to their results and then only when they support their political ideas, otherwise nobody looks at the results or takes them seriously.
Go right ahead and stuff one in your head sir. You try it first, I'm going to sit back and watch the show.
Like the failed experiment we knew as "Google Glasses" didn't really take off after all the hype, so this little idea will go. Some folks will try it, others will scoff at them while the majority will realize how foolish the idea is and ignore it all. However in this case, what are you going to do with it when technology upgrades and the chip in your head ages like an unfortunate tat?
Slashdot Mirror
You left out a decimal point. In 2019, the budget will be $4.407 billion. The government will have revenue of $3.4 trillion, leaving a trillion dollar deficit (and growing) during what's supposed to be "the greatest economy in history, just a tremendous economy".
Who's zooming whom?
AFTER a 15% tax cut remember... BUT you are mixing up your numbers. 1.1 Trillion is the increase in the national debt, of which only $799 Billion is from the budget deficit.
But I have a question for ya... Where you upset with Obama for his deficits and how much he was adding to the national debt? Where you upset with the ACA passing because of it's obvious costs? What about the QE1, QE2, QE3, and QEForever spending? Any of that bother you?
As a % of GDP the debt is increasing, but at a lower rate of increase, since Trump took office. IF we are really worried about the federal debt, or even the budget deficit, what are YOU planning to put on the chopping block to balance the budget?
IF you are really serious about this deficit and national debt thing, I expect you to act on this and start cutting the budget across the board too, not just complaining about how a one time $5.7 Billion is going to break us. Be consistent, act on what you claim to believe.
Oh wait.. This ISN'T about the money is it? Democrats dropped $1 Trillion over 10 years on the ACA with a continued ever increasing entitlement without batting an eyelash (or taking time to actually read the bill), Of course that was something THEY wanted, so they where just dandy with writing that check and committing the government to writing bigger and bigger checks forever.
IF I was a democrat, I'd recommend that you not use the "we cannot afford this" argument card. It's a non starter. The reality is this expenditure is a way to save money over the decades to come, or certainly make our border protection efforts more effective and less costly. It would reduce the governmental service costs that get spent on illegals by more than the initial investment in just a few short years. Plus the lives saved alone (Both the illegals who die trying to cross the border and those who die from the drugs disease that illegally cross the border) would be worth every penny.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You don't get the debt under control by spending more on something with zero value.
Ah.. So Democrats are now deficit hawks? Oh that's rich.. I seem to recall the ACA being pretty expensive over 10 years and nobody on that side of the isle batting an eyelash about it. In fact, the ACA was projected to cost $1 Trillion over 10 years and established a new entitlement that would continue to suck federal funds FOREVER at an ever increasing cost per year. Building a wall is a ONE TIME expense. After that, you just have to maintain it which is a fraction of the original cost. But a wall is now too expensive? Not to mention that that IF we actually build the wall, we can make the money we spend on patrolling and protecting the border more effective, effectively reducing future costs.
But we all know this isn't about the money. It never was about the money and arguing about it based on cost is not going to work out for those who oppose the wall.
IF you are all upset over Trump trying to come back to congress for more wall funding, fund the whole thing, ONCE. Just offer him $200 Billion for a physical barrier on the border with the stipulation that it won't be repeated. He will take the deal for sure and I'll bet ya that he actually builds a wall with the cash this time.
Why is everything here getting so political? I read about this on every other news feeds, I don't need it here as well.
Then WHY did you click on this story and post a comment?
It's not like it wasn't readily apparent what this story was about and what the comments would look like.
Out of those 800,000 people, are there enough people with student loans, mortages, CC balances, and other normal debts, that when they stop paying them could be the catalyst to another debt crisis?
IF that's all it takes to topple the economy, the house of cards NEEDS to be toppled.
Still, seems to me that $5.7 Billion is a small price to pay out of a $44 Trillion budget. But this isn't about the money, and never was.
Yea, but the cost of opening the government is $5.7 Billion.... Out of a $44~ Trillion budget.
It's like arguing over $57 dollars for a fencing in the back yard to keep the kids safe when you make $44,000 / year and refusing to pay any of the utility bills, buy gas for the car or give the kids milk money for school until the demand for the fence is dropped.
I say we write the $57 dollar check so the kids can have their milk money and you can put gas in the car.
In the mean time, blame who you want...
They are on their backup data route....
So, did the necessary routers adjust their route tables? They did. Data is flowing? It is? Well all went as planned then.
Apart from the bandwidth being limited and the network latency going way up, how's this big news? I mean, they can still get to Slashdot so they aren't missing anything important, right? (sarc off)
Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon
I hear maybe seven notes quoted at a time. Only a corrupt court could uphold a copyright claim on that.
I think they can for as few as a 5 note progression. Cord progressions are not copyrightable but identifiable phrases in a melody are.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/band-are-victims-of-obstinate-rule-of-law-20100205-niie.html
There are now computers searching though thousand of hit songs looking for obscure musical phrases in order to sue the producers of the hits (who presumably have money) on behalf of the copyright holders who got "violated" in some technically provable but random way. And I agree, it's a stupid thing that courts decide such suits the way they do, but that's civil law for you.
or it fails. Free them to worship, with all visual and audible alacrity, Most High!
To the Moon!
I know you are making a bit of a joke, but there are actually fair use rules for this.
You are free to claim "fair use" for copyrighted music performed DURING a worship service in a specific location, i.e. during a "live" service. However, you may not broadcast radio or TV, webcast, or even record and distribute copies of such music without permission (a license). Also, you may NOT print or project lyrics from copyrighted music or text from copyrighted books without a first getting written permission from the copyright holder.
9 movies each?
James Bond, or more accurately the 007 franchise has 24 films. This franchise is wearing really thin as they are out of original Fleming stores to make films out of now.
Planet of the Apes has 5 in the original series and 3 remakes, for a total of 8, but really only 5 stories. But it's dead for now.
Star Trek was one of the "few" I had in mind, but those that use the original story line characters as part of the main plot are limited. If you include all the various TV series offshoots, they've made a bunch of these films.
Batman is dead after 14 films, a few of which were basically remakes of older films.
But all this illustrates just how hard it is to keep a franchise going past about three films.
How's this a surprise?
Disney is about making money, not about art or entertainment. Their primary focus is to turn a profit on the movie they are making. So, if cutting corners makes them more money, if not consulting with the creators of the franchise or taking their advice looks like it will produce more profit, they are going to do it.
But let's face it. The original Star Wars concept was at best 3 movies and it's been down hill since The Empire Strikes Back and we are waiting for installment 9? This franchise has been driven into the ground and milked for all it was worth and then some (pun intended). Few franchises last this long with Rocky and Star Trek being about all I remember.
Disney bought an old used up sports car, that had 200,000 miles, poor tires and a bad front end out of somebodies barn. I'm not surprised they are having difficulty making money on it's restoration. Such work is a labor of love, not profit, and Disney is about the latter. I'm thinking this franchise is about over.
Again.. From my view, you are just making stuff up here. Orange man bad! Orange man Bad!
IF you where honest about this and what you actually KNOW (and not just suspect) I'm afraid you'd be a lot less confident about just how bad Trump really is. But no, we have to take 3 years of foaming at the mouth, outlandish accusations that don't have ANY basis in law or fact and a media that is fully invested in bringing the guy down, regardless of their journalistic standards getting trampled in the dust.
Seriously, I've heard a whole pile of charges being made, which are ludicrous on their face, yet we've been regaled for days over them. Like firing James Comey is somehow obstruction of justice, or his "Go easy on Flynn" statement being proof of it too.. And that's just two examples of bogus charges which consumed MONTHS of breathless news coverage.
This is absolutely ludicrous yet folks like you run headlong into the fray, repeating the unfounded charges as if they where facts and pointing your crooked fingers and saying "See! Orange man BAD! REALLY bad!" The truth is that you and your leaders just don't like him, want to get rid of him, being reasonable or even factual about it doesn't matter. He's got to go and the ends justify the means, ANY means.
Don't you understand how this hysteria is being used? How this whole campaign is really an appeal to anger that has to keep advancing the level of outrage because the voters are growing tired of being angry? Eventually this won't work anymore, the shrill voices will have deafened all the ears that matter. Given the current volume level, I suspect we are rapidly approaching the end, where it won't matter how ridiculous and loud the pundits get. Just watch then, just keep your ear plugs in..
"What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world."
See, that's where you let your intelligence get the best of you. The intent of polls is to measure the current status of opinion. Polls are USED, however, to suggest to those who prefer not to think critically HOW they should be thinking. As much as people like to assert that they'll make up their own mind, if they have an extreme minority opinion, they tend to change sides.
See, that's where your critical reading skills failed you..
Nobody but political punditry pay attention to their results and then only when they support their political ideas, otherwise nobody looks at the results or takes them seriously.
I fully understand how these polls are used and by who. However, my point is they are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
Oh, and one more thing... This story is about something that happened BEFORE Trump threw his hat in the presidential ring... Like a whole year before. This episode had exactly zero affect on the election results...
Oh yea, Trump is a really bad guy as a result? Oh we have proof!
For Pete's sake people. Yea, Trump is FAR from perfect, but we ALL knew that BEFORE the election so tell me something I didn't know before he won. Just in case you thought there was any doubt, the Billy Bush Access Hollywood tape should have clued everybody in as to what kind of guy Trump was and is. So why do we have to keep digging up stuff about Trump to beat him with? What's the point of reporting on such things?
Trump's voters didn't care about it back then, at least most didn't. Such stories, designed to separate Trump from his base, actually don't and may in fact further solidify his base because they see all this as unfair and biased reporting. The media ignores his accomplishments and bellows on about his character flaws, real and imagined. Why do you suppose Trump talks about "fake news" all the time? It's like he's vaccinating his supporters from even believing the media, at all, so it won't matter in October 2020 what the other side pops up with as an October surprise.
Personally, I grow very weary of all the "bombshell" revelations about Trump that are no surprise at all. I'm sorry but I've been assailed by better stories than this that turned out to be pointless. Let the guy be president and attack him on what he does and says in that capacity and let's forget all these "before the campaign" escapades "Oooo Look Orange man bad" stores. Like this one, they are pointless to the point of irrelevancy, much like bantering on about White Water or some such.
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
If this actually did happen then I have to question what lows Trump would stoop to just to become president. We are literally talking about a worthless poll that nobody really cares about. If he is willing to cheat on this to become a president, then I am sure that he did many other unethical things to get where he is now. But anyone who thought Trump was an ethical person prior to his presidential run was not paying attention to anything Trump actually does. He has quite an unsavory reputation in the business world for trying to cheat contractors out of everything he possibly can.
I have not doubt it happened, nor do I hold up Trump as a paragon of virtue. That's not why I voted for him over Hillary, who is no paragon of virtue herself, but we dare not list her ethical and moral issues, lest it be twisted into some other way to bash Trump.
I'm discussing how this attempt to rig some meaningless online poll is relevant? How on earth did this affect anything?
Now you step up and say.. Well if he'd do THIS, what else has he likely done? "Obviously he's a really bad bad guy!" you say. I'm to the point where I DO NOT CARE what your theories are, but what you can prove. Until we actually have something that's important and that sticks, I sit back and chuckle wondering how long the TDS can keep this craziness up. It's been a long list of unsubstantiated claims from dubious sources for 3 years now that haven't proven to be true. Good luck with your theories.
What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world.
The importance is online polls were repeatedly cited by the Trump campaign to show support for Trump. Yes, even though they are unscientific and frequently gamed.
With our media's philosophy of "we can't possibly point out just how stupid this is", stories were written as if Trump was as popular as the online polls indicated. Or at least there were stories about how online polls conflicted with real polls.
Which then builds a narrative about a candidate. Which then influences who people vote for.
And Trump's campaign is obviously the inventor of such tactics? (sarc off)
Come on, everybody plays this game. I'm great, I'm winning! It's called a political campaign. Trump didn't invent this and BOTH campaigns clearly made similar claims based on the same kinds of evidence.
Where did it come from? Was there a water containing moot that got crashed into? Or did a comet crash into an object orbiting Saturn, or did Saturn pass though a comet debris field and collect the objects?
That's the problem. Comets are slushy mud balls, not pure water. So the rings are not just some parts of a comet that got caught in orbit around Saturn, at least not directly. It's also why I'm asking the question. IF it's not possible for the rings to have come from a comet because of their composition, where did they come from?
IF they are young, where did they come from and why are they nearly pure water?
Seems to me that is the real question here...
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
Um.. Isn't that what I said? Political pundits are the only people who care about online poll results and only because it's bait for the unwary.
But the whole thing is irrelevant anyway. It's like the old saying "There are lies, damnable lies and Statistics" where online polls are the last thing on that list.
The issue was the turn out models, not the polls.
The turnout models skewed towards Hillary and the pollsters under estimated the appeal of the outsider, inexperienced Trump. In generally the polls where pretty close though, if you consider their the margin of error which is usually around 3-4% for most polls. What happened was they where all off in their turn out models by 2-3% and that upped the chances for a Hillary win when you looked at the numbers.
Polling is more of an art form than an exact science. It's really hard to predict who's going to vote, and adjust your data collection techniques to match what the actual vote counts will be. It's always a guess. When huge unknowns (such as a candidate like Trump) are in play, it's even harder to get it right.
Cohen now compromised by Obama's Deep State in an effort to defame the good name of our God-Emperor.
Let's face it, Cohen is compromised of his own doing, Obama had nothing to do with it. He's just a dirty lawyer who had wealthy friends and tastes who got caught stretching the law and lying about it.
I'm struggling to find the technical aspect of this. Because the polls he was trying to rig are online? Or is this nothing more than orange-tinged clickbait?
The technical aspects of this are basically what you think. Asking for some IT guy to create a way to click though online polls to skew them in the way that you want.
What escapes me is the importance of this revelation. Online polls are about as unscientific and irrelevant as you can get in the polling world. They basically are like the junk science of perpetual motion or energy from nothing of the polling world. Nobody but political punditry pay attention to their results and then only when they support their political ideas, otherwise nobody looks at the results or takes them seriously.
Go right ahead and stuff one in your head sir. You try it first, I'm going to sit back and watch the show.
Like the failed experiment we knew as "Google Glasses" didn't really take off after all the hype, so this little idea will go. Some folks will try it, others will scoff at them while the majority will realize how foolish the idea is and ignore it all. However in this case, what are you going to do with it when technology upgrades and the chip in your head ages like an unfortunate tat?