A better example of my point is what happened to Cruz's polling numbers when it was just him, Trump, and Kasich. The party aligned behind Cruz, not behind Kasich (with the message being "he's the only one that can get the votes to beat Trump"). And the effect was obvious
Sure is. Trump got a MAJORITY of the delegates from every single state from April 19th on. Pretty much the entire last 2 months. All consolidation did was make Trump stronger. So if anything, "insider support" only helps alternate candidates.
If you want another example of perception vs reality, just look at third parties.... because mainstream opinion has...
No, because of an effect called Duverger's Law. Any elective system with first-past-the-post voting is subject to it, and no amount of railing against the people trying to accurately report how voters behave is going to change that. The best a 3rd party vote could hope to do is destroy the weakest of the two existing parties, and the last time that happened in the USA was the middle of the 1800's. Give it a shot today if you like. Its your vote. But I wouldn't hold my breath.
A) I'm not sure why that "credibility" exists in the first place. Russian Intelligence services aren't exactly known for their honesty.
B) If you are the DNC, how are you going to prove a fictitious email from this packet never existed? Even if no such email exists on your servers, that doesn't mean it never existed, and besides people will just claim you purged the evidence and it's all part of your conspiracy.
I haven't noticed anyone asserting the emails are not genuine.
...and why is that? Honestly curious here. Emails are plain text. So trivial to modify that it hardly merits the word "hacking". The Russians who are currently the only source of these emails certainly had the motive, means, and opportunity to modify them.
And you can trust what's in them? Remember email format is plain text. Trivial to modify with no traces. If someone's going to hack the servers, and trying to stir things up, there's no way they'd leave the contents alone too.
You seriously underestimate the power of perception in this country. The vast majority of the superdelegates (of which Debbie Wasserman Schultz is one of, btw) supported Hillary from day 1 of the primaries, with the prevailing message being "Bernie stands no chance at winning the primaries because of the massive delegate gap
Go ask Republican Nominee Jeb Bush how much perception and blatant support from the national committee dictates everyone's votes.
Oh, I'm sorry. Were you unaware the system was rigged long ago? Between the DNC's internal schemes to anoint Hillary and whole idea of "superdelegates," you don't have much in the way of say-so about who gets the DNC nomination.
Sanders didn't lose because of any "internal schemes". He lost because less actual Democratic voters preferred him. That's all on him.
Let's look at the Caucuses and Superdelegates. Caucuses are every bit as "undemocratic" as the Superdelegates, but you don't hear complaints about those, because Sanders used that fact to win most of those. Then in the last month of the campaign, there was an active campaign from the Sanders people to get SD's to switch their votes to him, and ignore how their states voted. For that one glorious month, the Superdelegates were just great according to Sanders.
Sander's people's real problem isn't that the "system was rigged". Never has been. Their problem is that the system wasn't rigged enough in their favor.
I'm a watch person, so I'd be buying a watch either way.
If I get a phone call or text while driving, I don't have to pull over to check to see if its safely ignored (the typical scenario), or something I'll get in big trouble if I ignore until I'm at my destination (always possible with the spousal unit).
I never have to set the time
I can change the face look to suit the occasion, rather than having to purchase multiple watches for the purpose. So its like I have a whole drawer of watches to chose from, but without the clutter or expense.
The fitness/sleep tracking stuff is nice too. Particularly sleep. I often have a surprisingly wrong view of how much sleep I'm getting.
That is a damn shame. As someone living smack in the middle of the US, the first two shows I got addicted to on Netflix were Irish and Kiwi. Part of the attraction to me is the idea that I can pick pretty much any show created by any mind in the English-speaking world. More if I don't mind subtitles.
I guess its probably a contractual issue with the producers (typically in the US different people own the domestic and foreign rights), but that still massively sux.
And on that note, there are lots of things that are bigoted that the left doesn't seem to have a problem perpetuating. For example, it's considered totally acceptable to bash rednecks and Christians, even though doing so is by definition bigotry. How many times on an internet forum do you see people say "murica'"? Again, by definition that is bigotry. Have a look at the "unfair campaign"; again, bigotry. Need I go on? Why is bigotry acceptable so long as it's popular?
If by "acceptable" you mean "most people don't have a problem with it, or at least don't find it appalling", then I think you just defined "popular". Still, that doesn't prevent you from being bothered by such things, and telling people why. Again, freedom of speech means we both get to have our opinions. If most of the country finds yours appalling, I'd postulate that's probably your problem, not theirs.
If you're curious specifically about those specific things, I'd suggest contemplating for a few minutes why its funny when a little kid gets angry and punches an adult in the groin, but not funny at all when an adult does it to a little kid. Context matters.
Frequent posts from The Guardian and BBC cover important events in the US that local media fail to report. This should make us wonder why American news media aren't on top of these stories.
One thing I'd suggest any American try: Find yourself a local broadcast of BBC America and listen to them interview someone. They actually follow-up their questions if the subject isn't answering, and if the subject is BS'ing will freely tell them so to their face. Its like reporters are supposed to be.
The best is when they interview an American populist politician. One of those people who is used to spouting coded racist/classist language, or even flat out lies, without the interviewee calling them on it. There's always that moment of stunned silence where the subject realizes they are actually going to have to think in this interview.
I'm not sure what's happened to their American counterparts. I think there's a culture of deference that perhaps owes a bit to our cultural desire to keep things polite. Also, I think here an interviewer realizes the person they are talking with is way more popular than they are, and they really don't want to deal with legions of ticked supporters. Those BBC interviewers just don't care about any of that.
So now we are down to $500 billion in extra costs, which is a much more realistic figure. The federal government collects $2.4 trillion in income taxes, so the 50% of households and companies which pay any incomes taxes today would need to pay 20% more. I pay a little over $30k per year in federal income taxes, so this would mean almost $6500 in extra taxes for me personally.
But I would get something for this money
About $10,000 according to the article. Not a bad deal.
So are you telling me Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, Safari, IE/Edge, Opera and Vivaldi won't send sensitive data to the UK or the USA?
No, nobody is saying that. That's a strawman entirely of your own construction. But they aren't an open cesspool of centralized information thievery either (unless you pick up some malware, which is of course quite likely).
But even if the implications of your comment were true (which it isn't), I'd be much more comfortable with my personal data going to countries that have rule-of-law than countries that don't. If a US-based person tries to blackmail you, you can have them arrested for that. If they do it to enough people long enough, they eventually *will* be arrested for that. If a Chinese person does it, the best you can hope for is to raise enough of a stink that they are forced to use some of their blackmail money to pay off a local official.
All that said, he could have stayed as long as the Conservative party wanted him, but it's reasonable for him to step down after losing.
Very much so. If you strongly disagree with a decision, and can't see how to do it without causing a disaster, you are definitely not the person to be implementing it. Let someone who thought it was a good idea show you what nuance you were missing.
Rust is a general-purpose, multi-paradigm, compiled programming language sponsored by Mozilla Research.[11] It is designed to be a "safe, concurrent, practical language", supporting pure-functional, imperative-procedural, and object-oriented styles.
...The goal of Rust is to be a good language for creating highly concurrent and highly safe systems,[22] and programming in the large. This has led to a feature set with an emphasis on safety, control of memory layout, and concurrency. Performance of idiomatic Rust is comparable to the performance of idiomatic C++.
Already got one of those. Its called Ada. There's a free mature compiler available for it for pretty much every platform that GCC works on.
But I guess Rust would be superior if you think Ada had the right idea on everything substantial, but really need curly-braces in your language. Or if you'd prefer a language whose features are still in so much flux that a working program you write today will likely not compile with next year's compiler. So its got that going for it.
Yes, its almost as if he was just saying stuff he didn't really believe about an opponent to get himself elected, when the only real difference he had with her was political. Like he's a politician or something.
If I had an English version of the old Nethack Scroll of Genocide, I'd use it on this word. The implication here is that racial minorities are just fine with their treatment in this country until some jerk comes along and points out to them how bad they have it. Like they've got no clue whatsoever how their own lives are going, and what is responsible for it. If everyone would just keep pretending there are no problems, there will be no problems.
Anyone who would use this word is clearly one of the people who'd blame the little kid for the Emperor having no clothes, because that damn brat pointed it out.
Well, I'm invested largely in S&P 500 indexed funds. According to analysts, those are doing about twice as good as Trump's businesses. So if business acumen is your yardstick, you should vote for me long before you vote for Trump.
Slashdot Mirror
A better example of my point is what happened to Cruz's polling numbers when it was just him, Trump, and Kasich. The party aligned behind Cruz, not behind Kasich (with the message being "he's the only one that can get the votes to beat Trump"). And the effect was obvious
Sure is. Trump got a MAJORITY of the delegates from every single state from April 19th on. Pretty much the entire last 2 months. All consolidation did was make Trump stronger. So if anything, "insider support" only helps alternate candidates.
If you want another example of perception vs reality, just look at third parties. ... because mainstream opinion has ...
No, because of an effect called Duverger's Law. Any elective system with first-past-the-post voting is subject to it, and no amount of railing against the people trying to accurately report how voters behave is going to change that. The best a 3rd party vote could hope to do is destroy the weakest of the two existing parties, and the last time that happened in the USA was the middle of the 1800's. Give it a shot today if you like. Its your vote. But I wouldn't hold my breath.
A) I'm not sure why that "credibility" exists in the first place. Russian Intelligence services aren't exactly known for their honesty.
B) If you are the DNC, how are you going to prove a fictitious email from this packet never existed? Even if no such email exists on your servers, that doesn't mean it never existed, and besides people will just claim you purged the evidence and it's all part of your conspiracy.
I haven't noticed anyone asserting the emails are not genuine.
...and why is that? Honestly curious here. Emails are plain text. So trivial to modify that it hardly merits the word "hacking". The Russians who are currently the only source of these emails certainly had the motive, means, and opportunity to modify them.
And you can trust what's in them? Remember email format is plain text. Trivial to modify with no traces. If someone's going to hack the servers, and trying to stir things up, there's no way they'd leave the contents alone too.
You seriously underestimate the power of perception in this country. The vast majority of the superdelegates (of which Debbie Wasserman Schultz is one of, btw) supported Hillary from day 1 of the primaries, with the prevailing message being "Bernie stands no chance at winning the primaries because of the massive delegate gap
Go ask Republican Nominee Jeb Bush how much perception and blatant support from the national committee dictates everyone's votes.
Oh, I'm sorry. Were you unaware the system was rigged long ago? Between the DNC's internal schemes to anoint Hillary and whole idea of "superdelegates," you don't have much in the way of say-so about who gets the DNC nomination.
Sanders didn't lose because of any "internal schemes". He lost because less actual Democratic voters preferred him. That's all on him.
Let's look at the Caucuses and Superdelegates. Caucuses are every bit as "undemocratic" as the Superdelegates, but you don't hear complaints about those, because Sanders used that fact to win most of those. Then in the last month of the campaign, there was an active campaign from the Sanders people to get SD's to switch their votes to him, and ignore how their states voted. For that one glorious month, the Superdelegates were just great according to Sanders.
Sander's people's real problem isn't that the "system was rigged". Never has been. Their problem is that the system wasn't rigged enough in their favor.
Or Tercel. My Pebble doesn't cost significantly more than a cheap watch from Sears.
That is a damn shame. As someone living smack in the middle of the US, the first two shows I got addicted to on Netflix were Irish and Kiwi. Part of the attraction to me is the idea that I can pick pretty much any show created by any mind in the English-speaking world. More if I don't mind subtitles.
I guess its probably a contractual issue with the producers (typically in the US different people own the domestic and foreign rights), but that still massively sux.
And on that note, there are lots of things that are bigoted that the left doesn't seem to have a problem perpetuating. For example, it's considered totally acceptable to bash rednecks and Christians, even though doing so is by definition bigotry. How many times on an internet forum do you see people say "murica'"? Again, by definition that is bigotry. Have a look at the "unfair campaign"; again, bigotry. Need I go on? Why is bigotry acceptable so long as it's popular?
If by "acceptable" you mean "most people don't have a problem with it, or at least don't find it appalling", then I think you just defined "popular". Still, that doesn't prevent you from being bothered by such things, and telling people why. Again, freedom of speech means we both get to have our opinions. If most of the country finds yours appalling, I'd postulate that's probably your problem, not theirs.
If you're curious specifically about those specific things, I'd suggest contemplating for a few minutes why its funny when a little kid gets angry and punches an adult in the groin, but not funny at all when an adult does it to a little kid. Context matters.
Frequent posts from The Guardian and BBC cover important events in the US that local media fail to report. This should make us wonder why American news media aren't on top of these stories.
One thing I'd suggest any American try: Find yourself a local broadcast of BBC America and listen to them interview someone. They actually follow-up their questions if the subject isn't answering, and if the subject is BS'ing will freely tell them so to their face. Its like reporters are supposed to be.
The best is when they interview an American populist politician. One of those people who is used to spouting coded racist/classist language, or even flat out lies, without the interviewee calling them on it. There's always that moment of stunned silence where the subject realizes they are actually going to have to think in this interview.
I'm not sure what's happened to their American counterparts. I think there's a culture of deference that perhaps owes a bit to our cultural desire to keep things polite. Also, I think here an interviewer realizes the person they are talking with is way more popular than they are, and they really don't want to deal with legions of ticked supporters. Those BBC interviewers just don't care about any of that.
So now we are down to $500 billion in extra costs, which is a much more realistic figure. The federal government collects $2.4 trillion in income taxes, so the 50% of households and companies which pay any incomes taxes today would need to pay 20% more. I pay a little over $30k per year in federal income taxes, so this would mean almost $6500 in extra taxes for me personally.
But I would get something for this money
About $10,000 according to the article. Not a bad deal.
In no time at all, other mappers gave the 'island' its own natural geography, created a website, and designed T-shirts and a national flag
China is now claiming null island as "historic Chinese territory".
Mozilla and Google have world-class security experts working for them, and when you use generic Firefox/Chrome, you get their security
Why didn't you also mention Microsoft here? *innocent blink*.
So are you telling me Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, Safari, IE/Edge, Opera and Vivaldi won't send sensitive data to the UK or the USA?
No, nobody is saying that. That's a strawman entirely of your own construction. But they aren't an open cesspool of centralized information thievery either (unless you pick up some malware, which is of course quite likely).
But even if the implications of your comment were true (which it isn't), I'd be much more comfortable with my personal data going to countries that have rule-of-law than countries that don't. If a US-based person tries to blackmail you, you can have them arrested for that. If they do it to enough people long enough, they eventually *will* be arrested for that. If a Chinese person does it, the best you can hope for is to raise enough of a stink that they are forced to use some of their blackmail money to pay off a local official.
The robots are designed by Knightscope and come equipped with self-navigation, infra-red cameras and microphones
In the future, parents should check for a pulse to make sure their children are not undead before taking them to any mall with robots. Safety first.
Because we need more spying.
Well, Daniel Craig is retiring. You're going to have to get a new 007 from somewhere....
All that said, he could have stayed as long as the Conservative party wanted him, but it's reasonable for him to step down after losing.
Very much so. If you strongly disagree with a decision, and can't see how to do it without causing a disaster, you are definitely not the person to be implementing it. Let someone who thought it was a good idea show you what nuance you were missing.
It is a very secure web browser. If you run that web browser, the Government of China feels far more secure.
You westerners look at everything backwards.
If you want a mature language with all the same design goals as Rust, look at Ada.
Rust is a general-purpose, multi-paradigm, compiled programming language sponsored by Mozilla Research.[11] It is designed to be a "safe, concurrent, practical language", supporting pure-functional, imperative-procedural, and object-oriented styles.
...The goal of Rust is to be a good language for creating highly concurrent and highly safe systems,[22] and programming in the large. This has led to a feature set with an emphasis on safety, control of memory layout, and concurrency. Performance of idiomatic Rust is comparable to the performance of idiomatic C++.
Already got one of those. Its called Ada. There's a free mature compiler available for it for pretty much every platform that GCC works on.
But I guess Rust would be superior if you think Ada had the right idea on everything substantial, but really need curly-braces in your language. Or if you'd prefer a language whose features are still in so much flux that a working program you write today will likely not compile with next year's compiler. So its got that going for it.
I've been PC gaming since 1995, and the only old games of mine that I've ever wanted to play but couldn't any more in the intervening 20 decades are
Much apologizing. Mathematics not Zathras's skill
What happened to "she's not fit" for the office?
Yes, its almost as if he was just saying stuff he didn't really believe about an opponent to get himself elected, when the only real difference he had with her was political. Like he's a politician or something.
... racebaiting ...
If I had an English version of the old Nethack Scroll of Genocide, I'd use it on this word. The implication here is that racial minorities are just fine with their treatment in this country until some jerk comes along and points out to them how bad they have it. Like they've got no clue whatsoever how their own lives are going, and what is responsible for it. If everyone would just keep pretending there are no problems, there will be no problems.
Anyone who would use this word is clearly one of the people who'd blame the little kid for the Emperor having no clothes, because that damn brat pointed it out.
How are YOUR businesses doing?
Well, I'm invested largely in S&P 500 indexed funds. According to analysts, those are doing about twice as good as Trump's businesses. So if business acumen is your yardstick, you should vote for me long before you vote for Trump.