One number that might be good to know is the number of legal voters who have actually been de-registered under the existing system. From what I can read, that number is zero, and so the system may actually be working properly. If they have enough years of data to determine that every one that checked with the same address was a proper deletion, then that would support not waiting two years.
This lawsuit is about potential abuse, there is no evidence of actual abuse, and its not clearly stated exactly how it would be abused. More info needed.
More than 99 percent of voter fraud identified by a GOP-backed program is false
So then for the GOP it’s working 100% as designed. Sounds like a feature not a bug in their perspective.
It was working properly. The software was not intended to identify voter fraud. It simply spits out lists of voters who have duplicated name and birthdates in the system for further checking. It seems that 1% of these turn out to be fraud when checked. It also seems that at some point it was improperly used without the required checks (further reading required to get the details on that as well).
Of course, understanding that requires ignoring misleading headlines.
What I am curious about is the race angle, that this somehow targets people of color. Are people of color more likely to have the same name and birthdate as someone else?
"they" said it. Those hypothetical people that exist to help make arguments. Now, maybe somebody said it, but it was never generally thought by any group or sect that it would be impossible.
Regardless, because somebody might have said it, we all must bear with the false arguments that use it forever.
I see you purposely left out nuclear from the supply side increase. If that was intentional, it tells me you hold an anti-nuclear stance as more important that emissions reduction, and are willing to throw out the one scale-able solution that is presently generating the most CO2 emission free electricity. In other words, not really that serious about pursuing all solutions. If it was inadvertent, then so be it, but expecting dramatic demand reduction is to ignore socioeconomic factors.
Luckily even for those of you that continue to fear irrationally, CO2 production will inevitably decline in the coming decades as solar and other forms of renewable energy take over for real, now that that are close to actually making more sense than fossil fuels.
Luck is the key word there, because despite huge increase in solar and wind, we are see NO improvement in CO2 emissions. As long as so many cling to the oversimplified dream that simply adding solar and wind and EVs will make enough of a difference, we will fail.
We need all the tools in the toolbox, particularly nuclear, to stand a chance. We can't hope for breakthroughs as a strategy. We must consider the socioeconomic aspects of solutions as well. But, unfortunately we'll just hear more of the same 'more solar, more wind, hope for battery storage' mantra... the definition of insanity.
Net neutrality means you pay the same whether you have a cheap or expensive mix of traffic.
Absolutely wrong. NN means all traffic of any given type is treated equally. "cost' of the traffic is not even considered. NN means all video traffic is treated equally, etc. It does not prevent treating video traffic differently than non-video traffic, nor bundling of traffic types.
I said that a few days ago and got modded troll when it should be insightful.instead of tryin to keep up with the joneses,maybe try just doing you and you will see it isn't so bad
I noticed they say "ISP"s, but this is really mobile providers, not cable ISP. Also, the plans themselves seem pretty reasonably priced, and provide users with choice. Seems to me like this is more a twitter reaction than a thoughtful one. Net Neutrality does not prevent services from separating traffic types, only from treating same type traffic different depending on the source.
Its also funny because there have been/. articles that are offended that the FCC in the US moved to credit mobile services as ISP access.
Also the Russiagate narrative was 'Trump paid foreigners to get opposition intelligence to influence a US election'. No evidence of that came out. What did come out was that the DNC paid FusionGPS to get the Steele dossier. The one which accused Trump of hiring Russian prostitutes to pee on Obama's bed. Basically it was a bunch of gossip.
Still consider, Steele was a foreigner. And the DNC paid him for opposition research. Which he may have got from Russian intelligence. To influence a US election. I.e. the exact thing they accused Trump of.
It's always struck me as rather naive that the FSB would think that getting Trump elected would solve all their problems and that they'd be try to swing the election for him. It's much more likely that they just want to create chaos in the US and will oppose any US POTUS. In fact both Bush and Obama aimed for a better relationship with Russia. Bush said he'd looked into Putin's eyes and seen a good man (McCain quipped that 'when I look into Putin's eyes I see the letters K, G and B'). Obama and Clinton tried their reset policy and Clinton sold Russian uranium. None of that helped of course - Putin invaded Georgia when Bush was POTUS and invaded Ukraine when Obama was POTUS and Clinton was secretary of state.
Probably Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics is a better indication of how Russia sees the US. As an enemy that needs to be destroyed
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements â" extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."
And of course we found out that Russia had backed BLM and US separatist movements
Good stuff, submit it to Slashdot then shit on their efforts too.
They aren't looking for publicity, nor getting fawned over by and wide eyed fan club. What I don't understand is what people are so impressed about. Its not like its new technology, my sister lived in an off grid solar + battery home 20 years ago. Musk hooks one up in PR and he's some kind of hero, but the hospital would have fared better sooner had Musk just donated some generators.
Maybe I missed something. What is so amazing and wonderful about what he did?
I wonder you much your friend really knows since he talked about a 'barrel leak'. Nuclear spent fuel is solid and inert, kept is casks, not barrels. This is the common problem when people conflate cold war nuclear waste with spent fuel.
Spend fuel casks cannot 'leak' because they contain no liquid.
Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of a good nuclear scare session.
Storm recovery is anything but normal. People are working their asses off, many who aren't line workers are shifted to help. Musk hasn't done anything but order his underlings, just doing his job as well.
I've actually spent many shifts helping clear power lines, driveways, roads, when Hugo hit NC. My job was engineering, but they asked for volunteers to help clear the damage. Not bragging, many others did it for even longer than I, but it gave me an appreciation for what those people do, an appreciation you don't seem to have.
Each set would consist of batteries and the accompanying solar array to charge them, packaged so it could be deployed as a first response to disasters like this.The ability to get early power to critical facilities would be really valuable. The array shown here looks as though it could fit into a standard 2 TEU, to be shipped or trucked anywhere.
Gibber away all you want about your favorite Elon Musk conspiracy theory. The rest of us have long since stopped listening to you.
Generators are much more compact, easy to transport and get going. That is why FEMA has generators for this purpose. They just didn't have enough to cover every place in P.R. Look at the pictures and see how much it takes to support just this small hospital. PV and batteries make a very poor fast-deploy solution. Even Elon took this long to get one up and running.
No, it 'offers services' to 3000. Meaning there are that many potential people that might use the hospital if they needed it. It is no indication of how many are actually served in any given time period.
Why not a small ethanol engine that can recharge the battery. Normally you would plug in to recharge, the small engine would keep you charged as needed. It would only run when the battery gets low. A hybrid without the oil and gas industry (replaced by the ethanol industry yes of course)
A small charging generator does make sense for a stop and go vehicle.
The stupid part of doing this with a VTOL aircraft of any kind is the weight involved. Batteries sufficient to move your car to the next charging station would start around a pound:
Pull the cable to the internet. There is NO excuse to hook up critical infrastructure to the internet. None whatsoever! If you need constant monitoring of stuff, give someone a job to monitor. Do not, I repear, do NOT hook your systems up to the internet just to save a quick buck!
Articles like this would have you think that nuclear power plant control systems are connected to the internet, but they are not. The authors use intentionally vague wording.
Slashdot Mirror
One number that might be good to know is the number of legal voters who have actually been de-registered under the existing system. From what I can read, that number is zero, and so the system may actually be working properly. If they have enough years of data to determine that every one that checked with the same address was a proper deletion, then that would support not waiting two years.
This lawsuit is about potential abuse, there is no evidence of actual abuse, and its not clearly stated exactly how it would be abused. More info needed.
More than 99 percent of voter fraud identified by a GOP-backed program is false
So then for the GOP it’s working 100% as designed. Sounds like a feature not a bug in their perspective.
It was working properly. The software was not intended to identify voter fraud. It simply spits out lists of voters who have duplicated name and birthdates in the system for further checking. It seems that 1% of these turn out to be fraud when checked. It also seems that at some point it was improperly used without the required checks (further reading required to get the details on that as well).
Of course, understanding that requires ignoring misleading headlines.
What I am curious about is the race angle, that this somehow targets people of color. Are people of color more likely to have the same name and birthdate as someone else?
Yes. Exactly. And because 'they' said it, anything that goes wrong is not nearly as bad as it would have been if "'they' hadn't said it.
"they" said it. Those hypothetical people that exist to help make arguments. Now, maybe somebody said it, but it was never generally thought by any group or sect that it would be impossible.
Regardless, because somebody might have said it, we all must bear with the false arguments that use it forever.
I see you purposely left out nuclear from the supply side increase. If that was intentional, it tells me you hold an anti-nuclear stance as more important that emissions reduction, and are willing to throw out the one scale-able solution that is presently generating the most CO2 emission free electricity. In other words, not really that serious about pursuing all solutions. If it was inadvertent, then so be it, but expecting dramatic demand reduction is to ignore socioeconomic factors.
Luckily even for those of you that continue to fear irrationally, CO2 production will inevitably decline in the coming decades as solar and other forms of renewable energy take over for real, now that that are close to actually making more sense than fossil fuels.
Luck is the key word there, because despite huge increase in solar and wind, we are see NO improvement in CO2 emissions. As long as so many cling to the oversimplified dream that simply adding solar and wind and EVs will make enough of a difference, we will fail.
We need all the tools in the toolbox, particularly nuclear, to stand a chance. We can't hope for breakthroughs as a strategy. We must consider the socioeconomic aspects of solutions as well. But, unfortunately we'll just hear more of the same 'more solar, more wind, hope for battery storage' mantra... the definition of insanity.
Net neutrality means you pay the same whether you have a cheap or expensive mix of traffic.
Absolutely wrong. NN means all traffic of any given type is treated equally. "cost' of the traffic is not even considered. NN means all video traffic is treated equally, etc. It does not prevent treating video traffic differently than non-video traffic, nor bundling of traffic types.
I said that a few days ago and got modded troll when it should be insightful.instead of tryin to keep up with the joneses,maybe try just doing you and you will see it isn't so bad
I noticed they say "ISP"s, but this is really mobile providers, not cable ISP. Also, the plans themselves seem pretty reasonably priced, and provide users with choice. Seems to me like this is more a twitter reaction than a thoughtful one. Net Neutrality does not prevent services from separating traffic types, only from treating same type traffic different depending on the source.
/. articles that are offended that the FCC in the US moved to credit mobile services as ISP access.
Its also funny because there have been
all that science worked well!
Back in the old days, we called it math and statistical analysis. "data science" sounds cooler I suppose.
Also the Russiagate narrative was 'Trump paid foreigners to get opposition intelligence to influence a US election'. No evidence of that came out. What did come out was that the DNC paid FusionGPS to get the Steele dossier. The one which accused Trump of hiring Russian prostitutes to pee on Obama's bed. Basically it was a bunch of gossip.
Still consider, Steele was a foreigner. And the DNC paid him for opposition research. Which he may have got from Russian intelligence. To influence a US election. I.e. the exact thing they accused Trump of.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
It's always struck me as rather naive that the FSB would think that getting Trump elected would solve all their problems and that they'd be try to swing the election for him. It's much more likely that they just want to create chaos in the US and will oppose any US POTUS. In fact both Bush and Obama aimed for a better relationship with Russia. Bush said he'd looked into Putin's eyes and seen a good man (McCain quipped that 'when I look into Putin's eyes I see the letters K, G and B'). Obama and Clinton tried their reset policy and Clinton sold Russian uranium. None of that helped of course - Putin invaded Georgia when Bush was POTUS and invaded Ukraine when Obama was POTUS and Clinton was secretary of state.
Probably Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics is a better indication of how Russia sees the US. As an enemy that needs to be destroyed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
In the United States:
Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements â" extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."
And of course we found out that Russia had backed BLM and US separatist movements
https://slashdot.org/comments....
You should stop being so rational if you want more /. buddies.
Good stuff, submit it to Slashdot then shit on their efforts too.
They aren't looking for publicity, nor getting fawned over by and wide eyed fan club. What I don't understand is what people are so impressed about. Its not like its new technology, my sister lived in an off grid solar + battery home 20 years ago. Musk hooks one up in PR and he's some kind of hero, but the hospital would have fared better sooner had Musk just donated some generators.
Maybe I missed something. What is so amazing and wonderful about what he did?
I wonder you much your friend really knows since he talked about a 'barrel leak'. Nuclear spent fuel is solid and inert, kept is casks, not barrels. This is the common problem when people conflate cold war nuclear waste with spent fuel.
Spend fuel casks cannot 'leak' because they contain no liquid.
Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of a good nuclear scare session.
How about these folks, it look like they've brought just as much power as Musk to PR;
http://www.krcrtv.com/news/chi...
Storm recovery is anything but normal. People are working their asses off, many who aren't line workers are shifted to help. Musk hasn't done anything but order his underlings, just doing his job as well.
I've actually spent many shifts helping clear power lines, driveways, roads, when Hugo hit NC. My job was engineering, but they asked for volunteers to help clear the damage. Not bragging, many others did it for even longer than I, but it gave me an appreciation for what those people do, an appreciation you don't seem to have.
Well, we would but don't actually have any idea who they are...
How about the line workers who have restored power to 20% of P.R. in the time it took Musk to supply power to one 35 bed hospital.
Here's an aerial video of Puerto Rico's Wind/Solar remains after the hurricane. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Wow.
Each set would consist of batteries and the accompanying solar array to charge them, packaged so it could be deployed as a first response to disasters like this.The ability to get early power to critical facilities would be really valuable. The array shown here looks as though it could fit into a standard 2 TEU, to be shipped or trucked anywhere.
Gibber away all you want about your favorite Elon Musk conspiracy theory. The rest of us have long since stopped listening to you.
Generators are much more compact, easy to transport and get going. That is why FEMA has generators for this purpose. They just didn't have enough to cover every place in P.R. Look at the pictures and see how much it takes to support just this small hospital. PV and batteries make a very poor fast-deploy solution. Even Elon took this long to get one up and running.
http://media.npr.org/assets/im...
Can't we just say "bravo" or at least "congratulations" or something?
While your at it, how about a bravo for all those people and companies helping but not seeking publicity.
Serves 3000+ people during the day.
Next...
No, it 'offers services' to 3000. Meaning there are that many potential people that might use the hospital if they needed it. It is no indication of how many are actually served in any given time period.
I wonder if new home designs, and some apartments as well, will start to include delivery closets near the front door.
If the product meets the customer's needs, its a win win I suppose.
maybe wait until his 18th birthday?
If you are old enough to fight for your country, you are old enough to have a VPN.
Why not a small ethanol engine that can recharge the battery. Normally you would plug in to recharge, the small engine would keep you charged as needed. It would only run when the battery gets low. A hybrid without the oil and gas industry (replaced by the ethanol industry yes of course)
A small charging generator does make sense for a stop and go vehicle.
The stupid part of doing this with a VTOL aircraft of any kind is the weight involved. Batteries sufficient to move your car to the next charging station would start around a pound:
https://www.amazon.com/WPS-Fea...
that's going to require a scary big drone to carry it and the drone's own power source.
Exactly. This would be highly inefficient. It would use much less energy to just have an autonomous vehicle trailer behind it and provide charge.
Pull the cable to the internet. There is NO excuse to hook up critical infrastructure to the internet. None whatsoever! If you need constant monitoring of stuff, give someone a job to monitor. Do not, I repear, do NOT hook your systems up to the internet just to save a quick buck!
Articles like this would have you think that nuclear power plant control systems are connected to the internet, but they are not. The authors use intentionally vague wording.