That makes sense, I suppose.... but still, the bottom line is that we're paying to watch a lot of commercials. They should strike some kind of deal there, but there's no pressure on them to, I would suppose because most cable companies have a monopoly in their regions. We all want ala carte in our cable subscriptions, but it'll never happen because there's no profitability in it for them. They use bundles to pad the losses they'd take from crap programming and crap channels, like the, "Watch Paint Dry" channel or the, "Watch the Kardashians's Lawn Grow" channel.
I'm already paying them so I can watch commercials almost half the time. That's just stupid. Program to commercial ratio seems to be about 60:40 these days, but I really should use a timer to verify. It feels more like 50:50, I'm trying to be objective. My wife won't agree to cut the cord because of local news and sports - two things I can get from the 'net or don't care about. There's got to be a good counter argument for that, between Roku, Netflix, Hulu, etc.. I've got killer Internet bandwidth right now at 200mb download speeds. (about 20mb up).
Well, Flynn already got tied up in that, certainly. But I'd say it's a whole lot more than just a bit of speculation at this point, it's 24/7 accusations, detractors looking zealously for any way to get trump out of office but where so far any actual evidence is minuscule and most of it seems based on hearsay and rumor So far. If they're going to come up with some hard evidence, they're going to need to do it soon. I suspect much of it is political revenge for the Bhengazi hearings. US politics is like a swing, each switch of the party controlling the WH creates more nastiness and division, and a wider swing then the last administration. We're going to fly off the swing set entirely soon.
Well, it may have been ill-advised for Trump to do, but the analogy given was to use a gun illegally, not ill-advisedly. There aren't likely to be any actual legal ramifications or trouble from law enforcement regarding Trump's converstation, because as stated, he can legally do that, as POTUS. Political ramifications maybe, but not legal.
The president may very well have the right to declassify secret information and reveal it to anyone he wants, but that doesn't mean he should do that. It might be like the fact that people in the US, with some exceptions, have the right to own guns but their use is not unlimited - you can't use them in any way you want to without getting into big trouble with law enforcement.
"The president may very well have the right to declassify secret information and reveal it to anyone he wants"
You're kind of contradicting yourself then. That sounds pretty much like carte blanche. Besides that whole issue reeking of the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory for which there is still no evidence.
Agreed it should be illegal, but how is yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre in any way hate speech? It's a really bad prank, not an expression of hate. I would suggest something like defamation of character, where one can be sued for falsely impugning someone's character, and some jurisdictions even treat it as a criminal, not civil, matter.
You realize that's the equivalent of saying, "I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you"...? Well I guess I found the snowflake that gets butthurt when confronted with common sense annoyance over the lunacy of extreme progressive rantings. Next you know, they'll be banning certain fonts, like they do free speech and any other symbol of the week they denote as "hate". You're cool with that? Of course you are, so long as it reflects your PoV. Maybe I'll start writing conservative mantras in chalk with Blackletter at the nearest college campus and watch them go in total lockdown mode.
This article is just trashy, nothing to see here. So, everything with an old English/German font means "Nazi" now, does it? It couldn't possibly just reflect medieval culture, or Frankenstein, or Dracula, or harken back to any number of other things more mundane in the past several hundred years. Nope, it's Hitler. I guess, if you're really that shallow. But nothing is more telling of the actual SJ undercurrent and intent of this article than these last few paragraphs, strangely comparing Clinton's and Trump's campaign logos:
Hillary Clinton ran for president with a slick logo befitting a Fortune 100 company. It had detractors, but I think we’ll remember it fondly as a symbol of what could have been—clarity, professionalism, and restraint.
Donald Trump countered with a garish baseball cap that looked like it had been designed in a Google Doc by the man himself. This proved to be an effective way of selling Trump’s unique brand.
I guess even fonts offend these people now. They're losing their minds.
It is not clear whether Trump connects to the insecure networks while at his family’s properties. When he travels, the president is provided with portable secure communications equipment. Trump tracked the military strike on a Syrian air base last month from a closed-door situation room at Mar-a-Lago with secure video equipment.
So it appears he is not using those networks for government business, as best as anyone can tell. Also,I looked up ProRepublica, they seem to have a very liberal, anti-Trump stance IMO. There's an agenda there, and that supports my other assertion. All in all, this is just more hyper-ventilating over something trivial, because "Trump". It's self defeating. In all this noise, when something major finally does happen involving Trump, it'll be diminished by all the previous crying of wolf.
Yes, and it obviously worked, as 200something episodes will tell.
What Star Trek did right back then, and what it utterly fails at here, is that diversity is a good thing, but beating it into people with a sledgehammer is not. You see, people don't like that. Uhura was a black female as the communications officer. Back then that was an "impossibility". Not only a woman, not only a black person, but a black woman as an officer!
The real impact of it all was, though, that it was treated as a non-issue. They didn't parade her and try to "make a point" out of it, "look we are so progressive, we have a black female officer!". No, it was treated as normal. Which made in my opinion the even stronger point.
On one hand, I agree: they did it right; they didn't make a big deal of Lt. Uhuru's character; she was treated as equally as anyone else on the ship without so much as a second thought, which was so well done. She got no more or no less attention than a character of her rank and position would warrant. She was just another character of the cast. I think that made it easier to accept for a lot of people. OTOH, back in the wider real world, this casting was still a bit of culture shock, and could hit like a sledgehammer just by it's very existence. Nichelle Nichol's recalls how at one point, she was going to quit the show (I don't remember why) but MLK talked her into staying, because of the message it sent. But I guess you're right in that the show wasn't promoted ad nauseum with social justice mantras like shows today sometimes are, everyone tripping over each other to out virtue-signal the other. It just was. That's the best way to integrate. Or as Morgan Freeman says, "The way to stop racism is to stop talking about it". Of course by that he didn't mean ignore it, but for everyone to simply make race a non-issue, stop stirring the pot, and just treat everyone the same.
This whole story screams spin to me, by simple omission of critical details and wording. Humans tend to fill in the blanks with their imaginations. Note that the article states only that they "found 3 weakly encrypted WLANs". Not a word on what other WLANs they may have found (or maybe couldn't detect). So why assume the 3 that they mentioned that they found are the **only** 3 WLANs that they actually found? This article is likely a half-truth, made to create a particular impression. "Hey, we detected 5 WLANs at Mar-a-lago, but look, 3 of them are a security joke! Let's harp on that. " People are going way out of their way to bash Trump with glee, so this seems not at all improbable. They don't say anything like, "all of the WLANs we found were insecure", or even, "all three WLANS we could detect were insecure", nor do they say, "3 out of the 4 WLANS we found were weakly encrypted" either. This is vague-speak. Obviously, there are going to be a few normal consumer grade WLANs there, it's a freaking public resort, first and foremost. It's also possible that Trump doesn't use the wireless at all if he's conducting business there, it seems likely his WH security people would recommend using cabled LAN only. He may not be that tech saavy, but the staff should be.
"White supremacist"? That's pretty funny considering the democrat party had nothing to offer this election cycle but old white people. But how is anything GP said relate to that accusation? You're just pigeonholing now. Besides, I seem to recall Obama mocking Romney over his concern of the Russians and all the democrats laughed and laughed, oh what a good chuckle they had over that. Turns out Romney had a point, but now the Dems have taken the ball and run right out of the stadium with it.
The right ignores accusations and charges too often. I don't know if it's because they think if they don't feed them attention it'll just go away, or that they don't want to dignify them with a response, or if they're trying to take the high road, or if they just overestimate people's intelligence, or if they're just that deep in a echo chamber, or they're afraid of saying the wrong thing and making it worse; but they kinda suck at defense PR, especially since GW Bush's term.
Jesus, stop trolling already. Read past the part you keep getting stuck at. Read the following sentences after the one you keep quoting. You're citing the original findings. The very next sentence advises that the study has since been updated, and it turns out longer term intake of the compound does in fact increase endurance.
This, in a nutshell. Whenever a new product comes to market, especially one that fills a needed niche, initial sales are going to boom, provided the thing works decently. Not everyone in the word wants a tablet. Once the people who want one have gotten one, sales are going to taper off, assuming no particular competitor's device just hit the market and is markedly better. If MS is making a big deal out this, it sounds to me like it's just a marketing excuse to perpetuate planned obsole$cence. Not all change is good, but sometimes change is made just for the sake of change, or maybe to justify certain people's stale positions in the company.
"Through a phenomenon called "dissimilarity cascades," we place greater stress on personal and cultural differences than on similarities"
A prime example of this is in being someone who tries to be politically moderate, agreeing and/or disagreeing with various tenets of both sides of the political spectrum. Rather than making a bond with everyone through a few common threads, you just alienate everyone instead of half of everyone. Right wingers will focus only on those issues with which they disagree, and Left wingers will focus only on those issues on which they disagree. You'll be accused of a lack of principles, or a spine, and hit with any number of No True Scotsman fallacies. Any similarities are taken for granted and ignored. It doesn't matter that, as a moderate, you'd prefer to think for yourself and not toe any particular party line on every subject. If you're a pro-choice republican, for example, you're pretty much on your own: ostracized from the right for the pro-choice view, and ostracized from the left for being registered republican. If you're a democrat who believes in gun rights or are pro-life, the same applies.
Slashdot Mirror
That makes sense, I suppose.... but still, the bottom line is that we're paying to watch a lot of commercials. They should strike some kind of deal there, but there's no pressure on them to, I would suppose because most cable companies have a monopoly in their regions.
We all want ala carte in our cable subscriptions, but it'll never happen because there's no profitability in it for them. They use bundles to pad the losses they'd take from crap programming and crap channels, like the, "Watch Paint Dry" channel or the, "Watch the Kardashians's Lawn Grow" channel.
I'm already paying them so I can watch commercials almost half the time. That's just stupid. Program to commercial ratio seems to be about 60:40 these days, but I really should use a timer to verify. It feels more like 50:50, I'm trying to be objective.
My wife won't agree to cut the cord because of local news and sports - two things I can get from the 'net or don't care about. There's got to be a good counter argument for that, between Roku, Netflix, Hulu, etc.. I've got killer Internet bandwidth right now at 200mb download speeds. (about 20mb up).
Well, Flynn already got tied up in that, certainly. But I'd say it's a whole lot more than just a bit of speculation at this point, it's 24/7 accusations, detractors looking zealously for any way to get trump out of office but where so far any actual evidence is minuscule and most of it seems based on hearsay and rumor So far. If they're going to come up with some hard evidence, they're going to need to do it soon. I suspect much of it is political revenge for the Bhengazi hearings. US politics is like a swing, each switch of the party controlling the WH creates more nastiness and division, and a wider swing then the last administration. We're going to fly off the swing set entirely soon.
Well, it may have been ill-advised for Trump to do, but the analogy given was to use a gun illegally, not ill-advisedly. There aren't likely to be any actual legal ramifications or trouble from law enforcement regarding Trump's converstation, because as stated, he can legally do that, as POTUS. Political ramifications maybe, but not legal.
But then we won't be entertained by any more, " crazy Florida man does xyz " stories.
Save Orlando at least. DisneyWorld and Universal are there.
The president may very well have the right to declassify secret information and reveal it to anyone he wants, but that doesn't mean he should do that. It might be like the fact that people in the US, with some exceptions, have the right to own guns but their use is not unlimited - you can't use them in any way you want to without getting into big trouble with law enforcement.
"The president may very well have the right to declassify secret information and reveal it to anyone he wants"
You're kind of contradicting yourself then. That sounds pretty much like carte blanche.
Besides that whole issue reeking of the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory for which there is still no evidence.
Agreed it should be illegal, but how is yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre in any way hate speech? It's a really bad prank, not an expression of hate.
I would suggest something like defamation of character, where one can be sued for falsely impugning someone's character, and some jurisdictions even treat it as a criminal, not civil, matter.
That would make it 1,000 times worse.
We have the best fonts, I'll tell you.
You realize that's the equivalent of saying, "I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you"...?
Well I guess I found the snowflake that gets butthurt when confronted with common sense annoyance over the lunacy of extreme progressive rantings. Next you know, they'll be banning certain fonts, like they do free speech and any other symbol of the week they denote as "hate". You're cool with that? Of course you are, so long as it reflects your PoV. Maybe I'll start writing conservative mantras in chalk with Blackletter at the nearest college campus and watch them go in total lockdown mode.
Or Weyland-Yutani. This is how you get weaponized xenomorphs.
This article is just trashy, nothing to see here. So, everything with an old English/German font means "Nazi" now, does it? It couldn't possibly just reflect medieval culture, or Frankenstein, or Dracula, or harken back to any number of other things more mundane in the past several hundred years. Nope, it's Hitler. I guess, if you're really that shallow.
But nothing is more telling of the actual SJ undercurrent and intent of this article than these last few paragraphs, strangely comparing Clinton's and Trump's campaign logos:
I guess even fonts offend these people now. They're losing their minds.
Two there are not. Three is right out.
..being naughty in his sight.
There's gotta be a Kim and Kanye joke someone can make out of this, but I'm stumped.
From the article itself:
http://gizmodo.com/any-half-de...
It is not clear whether Trump connects to the insecure networks while at his family’s properties. When he travels, the president is provided with portable secure communications equipment. Trump tracked the military strike on a Syrian air base last month from a closed-door situation room at Mar-a-Lago with secure video equipment.
So it appears he is not using those networks for government business, as best as anyone can tell.
Also,I looked up ProRepublica, they seem to have a very liberal, anti-Trump stance IMO. There's an agenda there, and that supports my other assertion.
All in all, this is just more hyper-ventilating over something trivial, because "Trump". It's self defeating. In all this noise, when something major finally does happen involving Trump, it'll be diminished by all the previous crying of wolf.
Yes, and it obviously worked, as 200something episodes will tell.
What Star Trek did right back then, and what it utterly fails at here, is that diversity is a good thing, but beating it into people with a sledgehammer is not. You see, people don't like that. Uhura was a black female as the communications officer. Back then that was an "impossibility". Not only a woman, not only a black person, but a black woman as an officer!
The real impact of it all was, though, that it was treated as a non-issue. They didn't parade her and try to "make a point" out of it, "look we are so progressive, we have a black female officer!". No, it was treated as normal. Which made in my opinion the even stronger point.
On one hand, I agree: they did it right; they didn't make a big deal of Lt. Uhuru's character; she was treated as equally as anyone else on the ship without so much as a second thought, which was so well done. She got no more or no less attention than a character of her rank and position would warrant. She was just another character of the cast. I think that made it easier to accept for a lot of people.
OTOH, back in the wider real world, this casting was still a bit of culture shock, and could hit like a sledgehammer just by it's very existence. Nichelle Nichol's recalls how at one point, she was going to quit the show (I don't remember why) but MLK talked her into staying, because of the message it sent. But I guess you're right in that the show wasn't promoted ad nauseum with social justice mantras like shows today sometimes are, everyone tripping over each other to out virtue-signal the other. It just was. That's the best way to integrate.
Or as Morgan Freeman says, "The way to stop racism is to stop talking about it". Of course by that he didn't mean ignore it, but for everyone to simply make race a non-issue, stop stirring the pot, and just treat everyone the same.
This whole story screams spin to me, by simple omission of critical details and wording. Humans tend to fill in the blanks with their imaginations. Note that the article states only that they "found 3 weakly encrypted WLANs". Not a word on what other WLANs they may have found (or maybe couldn't detect). So why assume the 3 that they mentioned that they found are the **only** 3 WLANs that they actually found? This article is likely a half-truth, made to create a particular impression. "Hey, we detected 5 WLANs at Mar-a-lago, but look, 3 of them are a security joke! Let's harp on that. " People are going way out of their way to bash Trump with glee, so this seems not at all improbable.
They don't say anything like, "all of the WLANs we found were insecure", or even, "all three WLANS we could detect were insecure", nor do they say, "3 out of the 4 WLANS we found were weakly encrypted" either. This is vague-speak.
Obviously, there are going to be a few normal consumer grade WLANs there, it's a freaking public resort, first and foremost. It's also possible that Trump doesn't use the wireless at all if he's conducting business there, it seems likely his WH security people would recommend using cabled LAN only. He may not be that tech saavy, but the staff should be.
Hah, says the trollflake.
Hey, I like that... "trollflake".
(checks google)
Aw crap, I wasn't the first to think of it.
"White supremacist"? That's pretty funny considering the democrat party had nothing to offer this election cycle but old white people. But how is anything GP said relate to that accusation? You're just pigeonholing now. Besides, I seem to recall Obama mocking Romney over his concern of the Russians and all the democrats laughed and laughed, oh what a good chuckle they had over that. Turns out Romney had a point, but now the Dems have taken the ball and run right out of the stadium with it.
The right ignores accusations and charges too often. I don't know if it's because they think if they don't feed them attention it'll just go away, or that they don't want to dignify them with a response, or if they're trying to take the high road, or if they just overestimate people's intelligence, or if they're just that deep in a echo chamber, or they're afraid of saying the wrong thing and making it worse; but they kinda suck at defense PR, especially since GW Bush's term.
Jesus, stop trolling already. Read past the part you keep getting stuck at. Read the following sentences after the one you keep quoting. You're citing the original findings. The very next sentence advises that the study has since been updated, and it turns out longer term intake of the compound does in fact increase endurance.
This, in a nutshell. Whenever a new product comes to market, especially one that fills a needed niche, initial sales are going to boom, provided the thing works decently. Not everyone in the word wants a tablet. Once the people who want one have gotten one, sales are going to taper off, assuming no particular competitor's device just hit the market and is markedly better.
If MS is making a big deal out this, it sounds to me like it's just a marketing excuse to perpetuate planned obsole$cence. Not all change is good, but sometimes change is made just for the sake of change, or maybe to justify certain people's stale positions in the company.
Don't expect suicidal people to voluntarily walk away from the things troubling them, they may not believe walking away is an option.
OTOH, he sort of did the ultimate walk-away, leaving his family behind to fend for itself.
Can it catch Paladin, Barbarian, Wizard, Cleric, or Bard traders too?
That seems a bit harsh, but not far off.
"Through a phenomenon called "dissimilarity cascades," we place greater stress on personal and cultural differences than on similarities"
A prime example of this is in being someone who tries to be politically moderate, agreeing and/or disagreeing with various tenets of both sides of the political spectrum. Rather than making a bond with everyone through a few common threads, you just alienate everyone instead of half of everyone. Right wingers will focus only on those issues with which they disagree, and Left wingers will focus only on those issues on which they disagree. You'll be accused of a lack of principles, or a spine, and hit with any number of No True Scotsman fallacies. Any similarities are taken for granted and ignored. It doesn't matter that, as a moderate, you'd prefer to think for yourself and not toe any particular party line on every subject.
If you're a pro-choice republican, for example, you're pretty much on your own: ostracized from the right for the pro-choice view, and ostracized from the left for being registered republican. If you're a democrat who believes in gun rights or are pro-life, the same applies.