You're a monster, Alphabet.
Your heart's an empty hole.
Your brain is full of spiders.
You've got garlic in your soul, Alphabet.
I wouldn't touch you with a
Thirty-nine and a half foot pole!
Given that Trump is about to use the NSA to get back at people who have argued with him over the years it is hardly surprising that people are getting out before he gets inaugurated.
I, for one, look forward to the WikiLeaks dump of Rosie O'Donnel's e-mails.
Well, if it isn't partisanship clouding your thinking, I guess it must be something else.
Ok so now, there is no evidence of any hacking, I thought that was what Obama was looking for.
You're going in circles. I clearly stated above that hacks occurred, and that their existence was beyond refute. Maybe you should re-read my posts before you comment any further.
Not sure what you're point is, other than to assume I am something I am not.
My point has been and continues to be that you cannot claim hypocrisy on the part of Obama for ordering a review of the hacks that occurred during the election just because he criticized Trump's baseless allegations of voter fraud. Hacking and voter fraud are two different crimes, yet you continue to conflate the two because for some reason you really really want to call the President a hypocrite. You can call him whatever you like, but your arguments supporting your label don't add up.
I find it hilarious that you think that "vote fraud" and "hacking" are some how not the same in regards to corrupting the outcome of an election.
You're still not thinking clearly. I merely point out that when Obama (rightly) criticizes Trump for his unfounded claims of voter fraud, Obama is not being hypocritical (as you claim) by ordering a review of the hacking activities that occurred during the election. The FACT that these hacking activities occurred isn't open for debate, while allegations of voter fraud are completely without evidence.
It's also worth noting that Obama's review isn't about investigating hacks of voting machines (of which there is ZERO evidence) that would have corrupted the vote count. It's about the hacks of the systems of various political organizations and the resulting information leaks and their possible effects on the outcome of the election. This investigation isn't about calling into question the legitimacy of the election; Trump's baseless allegations clearly were.
Vote Fraud it Vote Fraud. It is either "mythical" or it is real.
Hacking the DNC and airing their dirty laundry isn't voter fraud. Did it influence the election? Perhaps. But it still isn't voter fraud and it's astonishing that anyone in their right mind would conflate the two.
There is plenty of hypocrisy by both (R) and (D) here. Its just that the Hypocrsy of the (D) is really clear this time.
LOL, now I understand. You're one of those unfortunate souls whose partisanship dictates their logic. "Oooo, the Ds are WAY more hypocritical than the Rs!" Really?!?
You're just pissed that they were caught.
Huh? Who was caught doing what? Never mind. In any event, I'm not pissed about the election or anything to do with it. My guy won.
Funny how something "mythical" became "real" simply because the Democrats lost an election.
Apparently your prejudices have overwhelmed your ability to reason.Your article refers to Trump's unfounded claims of voter fraud in order to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election, while the President's review of the known hacking activities does no such thing.
Unfounded allegations of fraud != hacks supported by actual evidence. See how one of these things is not like the other? The fact that you draw an equivalence between the two indicates weak-minded thinking on your part.
Don't pop a Republican's fantasy bubble. It's all they have.
They also have the House, the Senate, the Presidency, the Supreme Court, and a majority of State Governors and Legislatures. Not bad for a party living in la la land.
Time for the FTC to Break Google up into multiple companies and separate the Search and Ads so that Google Search can be used with Bing Ads and Bing search can be used with Google Ads
Not one of us deserves to live in the ensuing paradise such a scheme would create.
(BTW, the FTC doesn't break up companies. That's the job of the DOJ)
THIS. A thousand times this. I can't even get my head around what "online bullying" is supposed to be. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but [words] will never hurt me"? Are people these days really that sensitive? Get real.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL, it's in the very first line of TFA: http://www.computerworld.com/a...
Thanks for your post, I had not heard of the Shift Coinbase card before. What advantages do you feel it has over a typical Visa?
No mod points today so I'll just say thanks for that link. Good read.
Your heart's an empty hole.
Your brain is full of spiders.
You've got garlic in your soul, Alphabet.
I wouldn't touch you with a
Thirty-nine and a half foot pole!
...
Merry Christmas everybody!
Didn't see anything about it in TFA...anyone know what these CPUs will cost?
https://www.cyberscoop.com/nsa...
Given that Trump is about to use the NSA to get back at people who have argued with him over the years it is hardly surprising that people are getting out before he gets inaugurated.
I, for one, look forward to the WikiLeaks dump of Rosie O'Donnel's e-mails.
Are the drivers expected to turn a hose on the passengers groping each other in the back?
I am so Partisan, I am a Libertarian!
Well, if it isn't partisanship clouding your thinking, I guess it must be something else.
Ok so now, there is no evidence of any hacking, I thought that was what Obama was looking for.
You're going in circles. I clearly stated above that hacks occurred, and that their existence was beyond refute. Maybe you should re-read my posts before you comment any further.
Not sure what you're point is, other than to assume I am something I am not.
My point has been and continues to be that you cannot claim hypocrisy on the part of Obama for ordering a review of the hacks that occurred during the election just because he criticized Trump's baseless allegations of voter fraud. Hacking and voter fraud are two different crimes, yet you continue to conflate the two because for some reason you really really want to call the President a hypocrite. You can call him whatever you like, but your arguments supporting your label don't add up.
Cheers!
I find it hilarious that you think that "vote fraud" and "hacking" are some how not the same in regards to corrupting the outcome of an election.
You're still not thinking clearly. I merely point out that when Obama (rightly) criticizes Trump for his unfounded claims of voter fraud, Obama is not being hypocritical (as you claim) by ordering a review of the hacking activities that occurred during the election. The FACT that these hacking activities occurred isn't open for debate, while allegations of voter fraud are completely without evidence.
It's also worth noting that Obama's review isn't about investigating hacks of voting machines (of which there is ZERO evidence) that would have corrupted the vote count. It's about the hacks of the systems of various political organizations and the resulting information leaks and their possible effects on the outcome of the election. This investigation isn't about calling into question the legitimacy of the election; Trump's baseless allegations clearly were.
Vote Fraud it Vote Fraud. It is either "mythical" or it is real.
Hacking the DNC and airing their dirty laundry isn't voter fraud. Did it influence the election? Perhaps. But it still isn't voter fraud and it's astonishing that anyone in their right mind would conflate the two.
There is plenty of hypocrisy by both (R) and (D) here. Its just that the Hypocrsy of the (D) is really clear this time.
LOL, now I understand. You're one of those unfortunate souls whose partisanship dictates their logic. "Oooo, the Ds are WAY more hypocritical than the Rs!" Really?!?
You're just pissed that they were caught.
Huh? Who was caught doing what? Never mind. In any event, I'm not pissed about the election or anything to do with it. My guy won.
Before you state something as a fact, you might want to check to see if it is so.
If you really think that ordering this review is not within the President's authority, you are nine kinds of high.
Further this is 100% contrary to what Obama said here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Funny how something "mythical" became "real" simply because the Democrats lost an election.
Apparently your prejudices have overwhelmed your ability to reason.Your article refers to Trump's unfounded claims of voter fraud in order to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election, while the President's review of the known hacking activities does no such thing.
Unfounded allegations of fraud != hacks supported by actual evidence. See how one of these things is not like the other? The fact that you draw an equivalence between the two indicates weak-minded thinking on your part.
Don't pop a Republican's fantasy bubble. It's all they have.
They also have the House, the Senate, the Presidency, the Supreme Court, and a majority of State Governors and Legislatures. Not bad for a party living in la la land.
That's Apple financing US deficits.
FTFY
Apple should sue Samsung for copying the iPhone...oh wait
Time for the FTC to Break Google up into multiple companies and separate the Search and Ads so that Google Search can be used with Bing Ads and Bing search can be used with Google Ads
Not one of us deserves to live in the ensuing paradise such a scheme would create.
(BTW, the FTC doesn't break up companies. That's the job of the DOJ)
The worst?
I didn't say "worst". You did. Forget about echo chambers, you're hearing things that aren't there.
Oh, it was just a feature. Whew! What a relief. For a second there, I thought it might be malware.
Hissing or fake engine noise.
How about they let customers decide on what sound is made? Then I can look forward to being hit by some hipster in a Tesla playing Daft Punk.
Maybe he will be the best POTUS ever
He'll have to work very hard to be worse than the last two.
And very obviously so. I don't know how anyone with half a brain would mistake it for a reputable news site.
THIS. A thousand times this. I can't even get my head around what "online bullying" is supposed to be. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones will break my bones, but [words] will never hurt me"? Are people these days really that sensitive? Get real.
Will Twitter ever be able to justify their stock price with a value proposition?
I am of like mind on the auto-convert thing. Thanks for the left handed tip...clever! I'll give it a go.
"There is nothing more modern than timeless concepts such as these."
Sorry Paola, you've set a very low bar for what qualifies as art. Better than a crucifix submerged in a glass of urine, but not by much.
Government gave you your pretty little thing....why do you hate it so much?