Bitcoin does suck as a currency due to expensive and time consuming transactions. But it does have some potential as a place to store value. IE Swiss bank accounts were all the rage, as they were a single number that didn't have to be tied to any person or company directly.
> all transactions be made public on the network and tied to a unique set of numbers corresponding to particular "wallets."
True with every use of a wallet they will lose some of their anonymity. But Bitcoin is still similar to the swiss accounts of old, it is a number that you can still create new wallets simply. If use is high enough, and enough other currencies setup exchanges, it will be possible to go into and out of Bitcoin using other currencies and also having too many transactions to realistically track a complete history.
Bitcoin will likely have to change (but it has that built into it's design.) IE to have some big money take over and create stability and the protocol will have to evolve for things like: A faster exchange, and likely it's limited supply will change as well. This spike has gotten it attention and everyone to know the name. But after the big crash, a big change will likely have to come about to save it.
FYI, the study more or less confirms your results. They compared using a fitness tracker to a "control group" that was more closely tracking calorie intake. Both groups lost weight, the fitness tracker group lost less in the long run. no word on which group improved their health more...
for Corporate IT management. If you have a PC/Server lock-up (or have a user/virus disable remote management.) They do not have to locate the PC, to push updates and cold boot/restart...
Another example is a UPS shutdown without forcing a power cycle of the UPS (and thus all devices on the UPS) you can boot a single PC.
> Besides, all they have to do is blow up the dams upstream of YOUR house. With a armed mobile populace, it is in the interest of everyone to maintain a rule of law respected by most as at least fair enough. If the rule of law breaks down, for example if the make a full frontal attack, they could easily kill me. Guns come in after that, IE after I die if my family sees no redress, and decides to fight back, they don't have to just go after the military or a politician directly, but they can go after the family, friends, and their families and friends of the corrupt.
Those in power, can probably go pretty far before enough people will resort to this type of terrorism to bring fear/change. But it is hanging over the heads of people in power, that you can only protect so many, and have a quality of life.
In a Russia type of environment, where you have classes in society that are rarely crossed, and most classes without enough resources for recourse. Putin can go much further, as long as he takes care of the class he associates with. Very limited chance for the thousands to organize against his associates. In the US that would be a lot more difficult to maintain a protected class willing to be the buffers at risk for a tyrant against a armed populace.
> Someone needs to enter the correct pin. Not really, the software they flash could just start pounding through the 9999 combinations. > one key stored in the CPU (which cannot be extracted by any means) Not really, if it is in the CPU, then their firmware can access it. If Apple can update the phone without unlocking first, they could write a update that dumps the keys, and hash to the screen, or usb drive, etc and let the FBI break the password off the device.
With a insecure short numeric password, sufficient access to the hardware will allow the best encryption to fail.
> If you're doing something that might lead to your arrest, disable FaceId.
Right, but how do you know that? My neighbor was arrested for being home (well, and his wife was having an affair with a ex-officer/border-patrol, and convinced him her husband was a horrible man, worth fucking over.)
Similar to the 2 people will have the same birthday in a group larger than 25 people. If they are comparing enough data points from your life, to a high enough number of crimes; the likelyhood you match enough details in common with one of them will be high, even if you have never committed one.
> If you are relying on code obscurity for a security product you are already fucked.
If your relying on anti-virus for your primary security, you are already fucked. It is the barn door was left open and the horse is out, try and close the barn door solution. It is important that it doesn't have back doors, but everything else is just a last hope that it saves you.
Providing the source to eyes that may make malware, if they don't also provide vulnerability feedback or sales to mcafee is useless. Especially as AV is a cat and mouse product, where they attempt to detect malware, and the malware attempts to evade. It doesn't fit as nicely into a open security model.
How about right hand unlocks, left hand dead-shorts the battery.
If you destroy it after you were asked to hand it over, then that would likely be destroying evidence (a crime.) If the data was encrypted, and only the method to unlock changed. It would be much tougher to make a case against you.
> fictional book BEFORE 9/11 that speculated on hijacked planes
Tom Clancy "Debt of Honor"; was reported to be based on real foiled or changed terrorist plots. The 911 commission report also talked about the many times the government had intercepted plans to do this exact thing, before and after the book was published. So it wasn't anything brand new, by the author. It just wasn't presented to the right people at the right time in the right way to counter.
Also we do have to measure the costs vs the risks of something happening, you cannot realistically secure every risk, and still have free productive lives, many risks are worth taking.
A good old slippery slope argument. In your extreme you didn't have enough details. In order for your extreme to happen, that AI would also have to be so cheap and plentiful, that the resources to re-produce it over and over were meaningless. In reality I think you are proving the point, that as we free up human resources with technology, we are opening open those resources to pursue things like this perfect machine. Technology has always freed up humans to do more. We have more people with higher education degrees than in any point in other point in history. That is because of automation. To hit the holly grail of cheap self sustaining AI machines will require billions of man years of effort. So now you have filled all the slack jobs created by automation during the foreseeable future. Throw in colonizing other planets, cold nuclear fusion power, and a few million other scientific dreams that we just don't have the resources to focus on today and were set for jobs for several lifetimes. And I know your likely going to claim not everyone today is smart enough to contribute to those goals? Boom another million+ man hour problem we just don't have the resources today to solve, that we need to, you just filled in all of those jobs that this author failed to mention.
I personally think the government should look after the current citizens. Some of that is what jobs do we have a under-supply of, and is that under-supply hurting more people than it is helping. If Engineers are creating (good) jobs and we have a under-supply of engineers, then we should let more in. The rate needs to be controlled, you don't want to create a oversupply, and drive out education and training... Perhaps medical should be judged on that they are improving lives (through treatment) and have that be a criteria as well. Personally I do think having a premium on doctors, that require so much education, to drive minimizing the over-use may have more longer term value. The development of programs like IBM's Watson, and driving to create lower education jobs to take off more work for doctors. But with that said, part of this program, is that education is reasonable. So definitely changes to H1B that would drive better outcomes to society are needed. And that is tied into improving access to education in the country would be part of that.
Wow, where do you get this crap from? >I've heard of is pesticide residues in common foods. For instance: glyphosate glyphosate is not a pesticide, it is a herbicide. > They literally drench crops in it just before harvest to increase yield. how would that increase yield? Roundup only kills plants, doesn't fertilize, doesn't directly affect bugs... The only reason to spray, is early enough in the growth cycle that the weeds do not compete with the crop. People with these theories really think farmers are idiots, that they would pay more for resistant crops, so they can then spend more on herbicide, they are not. They are spending more on resistant crops, so they can spray less herbicide, but at the most beneficial time. No more pre-emergent sprays, no more spraying and tilling under weeds in the fall, spray once when the crop is at their most vulnerable stage to weeds, after they are growing, but long before harvest.
I personally don't disagree. I prefer to be in control of my fate, even if the odds are not entirely in my favor. I do suspect the bottom half of drivers likely cause most accidents though. Also as autonomy cars become more common, they will work together more, getting safer along the way. Since the cars will follow the laws, they will not be at legal fault for the accidents that occur, and the accidents they do encounter will almost certainly be less lethal. So if they are less at fault, fewer deadly accidents, it will be better for society; even if they can't avoid some accidents that the better drivers could.
> cannot be AT LEAST as flawless and safe as a human vehicle operator, then it has no business operating a vehicle at all.
Leaves lots of room for computers. Doesn't have to beat the best driver in their best condition, just has to beat the average driver, the sleepy drugged up ones, the vindictive ones...
Their are many things autonomy beats your average driver at today, and getting that on the road will be a big advantage. That is obviously step one (same as light vehicles today) Get it to save sleepy drivers from leaving their lanes, get it to slow down rigs driven past their safe limits, get it to warn of hazardous drivers and conditions... Then it will be take over the low hanging jobs like clearing railway and shipping terminals. Take over long haul interstate, so one driver can can handle more miles safely. Like oil and coal power, Trucking is likely not sustainable (at least at current levels.) So it does need re worked anyway, so they will figure out what can be automated and what can be optimized, and eliminated that a computer may not be able to handle as well. Since computers can control many more variables more precisely likely that will result in trucks and docks, and containers optimized for those conditions, and removing those hard for automation.
Autonomy is already controlling bigger rigs with more precision than 90% of truck drivers today can. (3500HP mining trucks going over 50 mph with a million pounds carrying thousands of gallons maintaining 3" precision in backing, also railways, steel mills, ships.) So yes the software and hardware is not complete today for OTR, but 20 years ago most people said internet banking would never happen also.
You would have to have something factual to dispute. There has only been one other director of the FBI fired, and he was asked to step down first, and refused. If it was about access to confidential information, anyone who knows anything about secrecy, knows the most important thing is to stop their access by making sure those who give them access are alerted to stop them, that was never done by Trump, Comey's office didn't know either. That along with your side rant about supposed lies, without any proof. I mean what was the point of that anyway? My only reference to media coverage was from video of trump admitting the Russia investigation was on his mind when he fired Comey, no bias possible their.
>And who can't keep the story straight? The Trump Administration or the Leftist media who has been caught lying repeatedly? "Comey asked for money to investigate and was fired" which was a lie. "The Deputy AG said he would resign" was a lie, as is nearly everything else they claim in their FAKE news.
To my knowledge, none of them have been denied by anyone with direct knowledge. Deputy only said he wasn't going to, never said he didn't tell anyone he didn't plan to. The only other denials are all "not that I am aware of, by those not involved." So your showing your inability to distinguish "truth" They may, or may not be true, but only your political bias turns them into "lies". Their is no reason to go further into your logic, as I am sure you will just keep changing the subject away from the facts. Trumps statements that "When I decided to [fire Comey], I said to myself, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story."
The full thing is on tape, direct from Trumps mouth.
Incompetence and maliciousness often look the same, and the presence of one doesn't rule out the other.
Of course the democrats were political pandering with both comments, same for the republicans. That doesn't reduce the optics of this. Their is a standard for political positions like this where you make a clean transition by asking for the person to step down, and they always resign in these type of positions. Outright firing would be seen as a attempt to cause disgrace to the person, a person Trump had complimented many times for his handling of those previous matters. Trump followed this even with Flynn, a person who lied to his administration and brought disgrace to them. That Comey was about to testify before congress, at least partially about the Russian investigation into his campaign and he was removed immediately, without consideration for a replacement and didn't have time to even wait for him to be notified in person to pull this off. Clearly it wasn't about what Comey did last year. That the administration can't keep the story straight about the firing, and Trump brought up the Russia investigation in the dismissal letter, as well as Trump bringing it up in his interview with Lester Holt that it was one of the issues while responding to a question about the Comey firing.
It isn't proof of anything, other than the admin story that this was all about Hillary can only be true if Trump is totally incompetent.
> Quebec produces more than half the quantity of electricity that US produces itself
Not sure what your trying to say, Quebec produces total capacity of 2,990 MW While the us produces 1,068.4 Gigawatts(GW) so the US is 350* larger producer. US has 80Gw of hydro power, so the US is 25* larger producer of hydro power.
Even then your under selling it. The rule was put in place because of a concerning new practice by a few in the industry. It wasn't just a theoretical problem, it was a real problem that needed stopped before a dangerous practice took foothold. Now the green light is on, it will now take legislative action to stop, as they are now forbidden from enforcing any similar rules.
I am no supporter of Obama, although I did vote for him over McCain for his promise of less war, and am glad we didn't have McCain, but he didn't fulfill many of his promises, so I didn't vote for him over Romney. But he did OK better than you show..
> The number on health care did go up. But since you had no choice any more it had to go up.
Went up at a slowed rate. People payed their bills, thus taking many of the costs from the States/Hospitals and shifting them to the people (and to the federal government.) while decreasing bankruptcy due to healthcare expenses. ACA was a improvement, but is not enough. The extreme rate increases in AZ last yeare are exaggerated as they only went up in the marketplace by that amount, most people with insurance didn't have much of a rate increase here. Congress ended much of the enforcement and budgeting for the ACA, this allowed the insurance companies to fold the plans with high risk people, and keep the plans with low risk, putting more high risk people into the marketplace.
>As for the economy as a whole obama saw the greatest increase of 2.9%. Which is lower than Jimmy Carters 5.6% and Bush Primes of 3.8%
He also took over during the start of a huge depression started before him. It is hard to predict what if's, but even as a fiscal conservative, racking up a deficit during bad times is OK. Regan/Bush,etc racking them up during good times was much worse. I didn't agree with Obamas methods, but for the limitations put on him when a bunch of do nothing republicans entered the picture, he did OK considering.
>The number of unemployment did go down but the number not in the labor force actually went up by 13.5%.
Actually 3.1% according to your sources, and that was due to boomers reaching retirement age, and retiring.
I didn't do a good explanation of the exception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... does it better. Basically what I was trying to say (copied from the wikipedia article)
"the Fourth Amendment balance between the interests of the Government and the privacy right of the individual is also struck much more favorably to the Government at the border"
This is part of the justification for why a warrent is not required and that the probable cause standard is lowered. I do see some need for this, but applying this to electric records... A) I really don't agree B) it is still legally contested. Also the distinction that only american citizens have full constitutional protections at the boarder is also not right in my opinion. Especially when applied in that 100 mile boarder zone, IE until a person shows their papers they are not constitutionally protected.
> the current precedent is that the fourth amendment doesn't apply at the border.
It applies to US citizens at the boarder. EFF is a bit tongue in cheek when they call it a constitution free zone. The current ruling (as I understand) is that crossing the boarder is probable cause and because it is needed to perform the governments constitutional right to secure our boarders inspecting possessions is allowed.
That they extended that to searching records, held in devices. And that they can hold even citizens for a couple days and impose a fine if they do not unlock devices when they cross... is a big stretch to the rules in my opinion.
You cannot assume the system was shutdown before the attack occurs. You would still want to protect the integrity of the entire file system. The goal of this encryption would be so that any part of the system that doesn't have the encryption key cannot get to the encrypted data. So if I can attack at the bios of the HD, or HD controller, I could re-write/usr/bin/passwd... if those were not encrypted, to then allow the running system to give up encrypted data once that program is accessed by any process running with the keys. If encrypted data is written through a compromised data path, all the compromised component could do is corrupt the file, it would not be able to make precise changes.
> But of course you won't do one full cycle a day.
The price thrown around appears to be around $250 / kwhr for this system with batteries. If you want them to add only $.05/kwhr (current price of electric generation from fossil.) then they need 5000 cycles to get down to that price. That would be 15 years of life if cycled to capacity only once a day. Granted it may be 4 cycles of 1/4 capacity per day... Although the batteries will probably be less than 1/2 the cost of the system to replace (especially in 15 years) if they are the only part that fails, but you want some capital return on your investment as well.
> I'd expect a 20 year warranty though.
Yeah, and if it was my money paying for it and not the taxpayers, I would need that guarantee to be from Musk's personal money as well. I think it might be a 50:50 chance for Tesla to not declare bankruptcy at least once in the next 20 years.
Slashdot Mirror
> I have never seen the value of cryptocurrency
Bitcoin does suck as a currency due to expensive and time consuming transactions. But it does have some potential as a place to store value. IE Swiss bank accounts were all the rage, as they were a single number that didn't have to be tied to any person or company directly.
> all transactions be made public on the network and tied to a unique set of numbers corresponding to particular "wallets."
True with every use of a wallet they will lose some of their anonymity. But Bitcoin is still similar to the swiss accounts of old, it is a number that you can still create new wallets simply. If use is high enough, and enough other currencies setup exchanges, it will be possible to go into and out of Bitcoin using other currencies and also having too many transactions to realistically track a complete history.
Bitcoin will likely have to change (but it has that built into it's design.) IE to have some big money take over and create stability and the protocol will have to evolve for things like: A faster exchange, and likely it's limited supply will change as well. This spike has gotten it attention and everyone to know the name. But after the big crash, a big change will likely have to come about to save it.
FYI, the study more or less confirms your results. They compared using a fitness tracker to a "control group" that was more closely tracking calorie intake. Both groups lost weight, the fitness tracker group lost less in the long run. no word on which group improved their health more...
> What is the alleged upside to Intel ME?
For a laptop or home PC, none.
for Corporate IT management. If you have a PC/Server lock-up (or have a user/virus disable remote management.) They do not have to locate the PC, to push updates and cold boot/restart...
Another example is a UPS shutdown without forcing a power cycle of the UPS (and thus all devices on the UPS) you can boot a single PC.
> Besides, all they have to do is blow up the dams upstream of YOUR house.
With a armed mobile populace, it is in the interest of everyone to maintain a rule of law respected by most as at least fair enough. If the rule of law breaks down, for example if the make a full frontal attack, they could easily kill me. Guns come in after that, IE after I die if my family sees no redress, and decides to fight back, they don't have to just go after the military or a politician directly, but they can go after the family, friends, and their families and friends of the corrupt.
Those in power, can probably go pretty far before enough people will resort to this type of terrorism to bring fear/change. But it is hanging over the heads of people in power, that you can only protect so many, and have a quality of life.
In a Russia type of environment, where you have classes in society that are rarely crossed, and most classes without enough resources for recourse. Putin can go much further, as long as he takes care of the class he associates with. Very limited chance for the thousands to organize against his associates. In the US that would be a lot more difficult to maintain a protected class willing to be the buffers at risk for a tyrant against a armed populace.
> Someone needs to enter the correct pin.
Not really, the software they flash could just start pounding through the 9999 combinations.
> one key stored in the CPU (which cannot be extracted by any means)
Not really, if it is in the CPU, then their firmware can access it. If Apple can update the phone without unlocking first, they could write a update that dumps the keys, and hash to the screen, or usb drive, etc and let the FBI break the password off the device.
With a insecure short numeric password, sufficient access to the hardware will allow the best encryption to fail.
> If you're doing something that might lead to your arrest, disable FaceId.
Right, but how do you know that? My neighbor was arrested for being home (well, and his wife was having an affair with a ex-officer/border-patrol, and convinced him her husband was a horrible man, worth fucking over.)
Similar to the 2 people will have the same birthday in a group larger than 25 people. If they are comparing enough data points from your life, to a high enough number of crimes; the likelyhood you match enough details in common with one of them will be high, even if you have never committed one.
> Chelsea Manning was pardoned by President Obama
Her sentence was commuted by Obama, big difference from a pardon.
> If you are relying on code obscurity for a security product you are already fucked.
If your relying on anti-virus for your primary security, you are already fucked. It is the barn door was left open and the horse is out, try and close the barn door solution. It is important that it doesn't have back doors, but everything else is just a last hope that it saves you.
Providing the source to eyes that may make malware, if they don't also provide vulnerability feedback or sales to mcafee is useless. Especially as AV is a cat and mouse product, where they attempt to detect malware, and the malware attempts to evade. It doesn't fit as nicely into a open security model.
If you destroy it after you were asked to hand it over, then that would likely be destroying evidence (a crime.) If the data was encrypted, and only the method to unlock changed. It would be much tougher to make a case against you.
> fictional book BEFORE 9/11 that speculated on hijacked planes
Tom Clancy "Debt of Honor"; was reported to be based on real foiled or changed terrorist plots. The 911 commission report also talked about the many times the government had intercepted plans to do this exact thing, before and after the book was published. So it wasn't anything brand new, by the author. It just wasn't presented to the right people at the right time in the right way to counter.
Also we do have to measure the costs vs the risks of something happening, you cannot realistically secure every risk, and still have free productive lives, many risks are worth taking.
> Let's take this to the extreme.
A good old slippery slope argument. In your extreme you didn't have enough details. In order for your extreme to happen, that AI would also have to be so cheap and plentiful, that the resources to re-produce it over and over were meaningless. In reality I think you are proving the point, that as we free up human resources with technology, we are opening open those resources to pursue things like this perfect machine. Technology has always freed up humans to do more. We have more people with higher education degrees than in any point in other point in history. That is because of automation. To hit the holly grail of cheap self sustaining AI machines will require billions of man years of effort. So now you have filled all the slack jobs created by automation during the foreseeable future. Throw in colonizing other planets, cold nuclear fusion power, and a few million other scientific dreams that we just don't have the resources to focus on today and were set for jobs for several lifetimes. And I know your likely going to claim not everyone today is smart enough to contribute to those goals? Boom another million+ man hour problem we just don't have the resources today to solve, that we need to, you just filled in all of those jobs that this author failed to mention.
I personally think the government should look after the current citizens. Some of that is what jobs do we have a under-supply of, and is that under-supply hurting more people than it is helping. If Engineers are creating (good) jobs and we have a under-supply of engineers, then we should let more in. The rate needs to be controlled, you don't want to create a oversupply, and drive out education and training... Perhaps medical should be judged on that they are improving lives (through treatment) and have that be a criteria as well. Personally I do think having a premium on doctors, that require so much education, to drive minimizing the over-use may have more longer term value. The development of programs like IBM's Watson, and driving to create lower education jobs to take off more work for doctors. But with that said, part of this program, is that education is reasonable. So definitely changes to H1B that would drive better outcomes to society are needed. And that is tied into improving access to education in the country would be part of that.
Wow, where do you get this crap from?
>I've heard of is pesticide residues in common foods. For instance: glyphosate
glyphosate is not a pesticide, it is a herbicide.
> They literally drench crops in it just before harvest to increase yield.
how would that increase yield? Roundup only kills plants, doesn't fertilize, doesn't directly affect bugs... The only reason to spray, is early enough in the growth cycle that the weeds do not compete with the crop. People with these theories really think farmers are idiots, that they would pay more for resistant crops, so they can then spend more on herbicide, they are not. They are spending more on resistant crops, so they can spray less herbicide, but at the most beneficial time. No more pre-emergent sprays, no more spraying and tilling under weeds in the fall, spray once when the crop is at their most vulnerable stage to weeds, after they are growing, but long before harvest.
I personally don't disagree. I prefer to be in control of my fate, even if the odds are not entirely in my favor. I do suspect the bottom half of drivers likely cause most accidents though. Also as autonomy cars become more common, they will work together more, getting safer along the way. Since the cars will follow the laws, they will not be at legal fault for the accidents that occur, and the accidents they do encounter will almost certainly be less lethal. So if they are less at fault, fewer deadly accidents, it will be better for society; even if they can't avoid some accidents that the better drivers could.
Many if's, and many more years to get their.
> cannot be AT LEAST as flawless and safe as a human vehicle operator, then it has no business operating a vehicle at all.
Leaves lots of room for computers. Doesn't have to beat the best driver in their best condition, just has to beat the average driver, the sleepy drugged up ones, the vindictive ones...
Their are many things autonomy beats your average driver at today, and getting that on the road will be a big advantage. That is obviously step one (same as light vehicles today) Get it to save sleepy drivers from leaving their lanes, get it to slow down rigs driven past their safe limits, get it to warn of hazardous drivers and conditions... Then it will be take over the low hanging jobs like clearing railway and shipping terminals. Take over long haul interstate, so one driver can can handle more miles safely. Like oil and coal power, Trucking is likely not sustainable (at least at current levels.) So it does need re worked anyway, so they will figure out what can be automated and what can be optimized, and eliminated that a computer may not be able to handle as well. Since computers can control many more variables more precisely likely that will result in trucks and docks, and containers optimized for those conditions, and removing those hard for automation.
Autonomy is already controlling bigger rigs with more precision than 90% of truck drivers today can. (3500HP mining trucks going over 50 mph with a million pounds carrying thousands of gallons maintaining 3" precision in backing, also railways, steel mills, ships.) So yes the software and hardware is not complete today for OTR, but 20 years ago most people said internet banking would never happen also.
You would have to have something factual to dispute. There has only been one other director of the FBI fired, and he was asked to step down first, and refused. If it was about access to confidential information, anyone who knows anything about secrecy, knows the most important thing is to stop their access by making sure those who give them access are alerted to stop them, that was never done by Trump, Comey's office didn't know either. That along with your side rant about supposed lies, without any proof. I mean what was the point of that anyway? My only reference to media coverage was from video of trump admitting the Russia investigation was on his mind when he fired Comey, no bias possible their.
>And who can't keep the story straight? The Trump Administration or the Leftist media who has been caught lying repeatedly? "Comey asked for money to investigate and was fired" which was a lie. "The Deputy AG said he would resign" was a lie, as is nearly everything else they claim in their FAKE news.
To my knowledge, none of them have been denied by anyone with direct knowledge. Deputy only said he wasn't going to, never said he didn't tell anyone he didn't plan to. The only other denials are all "not that I am aware of, by those not involved." So your showing your inability to distinguish "truth" They may, or may not be true, but only your political bias turns them into "lies". Their is no reason to go further into your logic, as I am sure you will just keep changing the subject away from the facts. Trumps statements that "When I decided to [fire Comey], I said to myself, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story."
The full thing is on tape, direct from Trumps mouth.
Incompetence and maliciousness often look the same, and the presence of one doesn't rule out the other.
Of course the democrats were political pandering with both comments, same for the republicans. That doesn't reduce the optics of this. Their is a standard for political positions like this where you make a clean transition by asking for the person to step down, and they always resign in these type of positions. Outright firing would be seen as a attempt to cause disgrace to the person, a person Trump had complimented many times for his handling of those previous matters. Trump followed this even with Flynn, a person who lied to his administration and brought disgrace to them. That Comey was about to testify before congress, at least partially about the Russian investigation into his campaign and he was removed immediately, without consideration for a replacement and didn't have time to even wait for him to be notified in person to pull this off. Clearly it wasn't about what Comey did last year. That the administration can't keep the story straight about the firing, and Trump brought up the Russia investigation in the dismissal letter, as well as Trump bringing it up in his interview with Lester Holt that it was one of the issues while responding to a question about the Comey firing.
It isn't proof of anything, other than the admin story that this was all about Hillary can only be true if Trump is totally incompetent.
> Quebec produces more than half the quantity of electricity that US produces itself
Not sure what your trying to say, Quebec produces total capacity of 2,990 MW While the us produces 1,068.4 Gigawatts(GW) so the US is 350* larger producer. US has 80Gw of hydro power, so the US is 25* larger producer of hydro power.
Even then your under selling it. The rule was put in place because of a concerning new practice by a few in the industry. It wasn't just a theoretical problem, it was a real problem that needed stopped before a dangerous practice took foothold. Now the green light is on, it will now take legislative action to stop, as they are now forbidden from enforcing any similar rules.
I am no supporter of Obama, although I did vote for him over McCain for his promise of less war, and am glad we didn't have McCain, but he didn't fulfill many of his promises, so I didn't vote for him over Romney. But he did OK better than you show..
spending didn't double under Obama, Bush hid $2.7 Trillion of his spending, that Obama didn't.
> The number on health care did go up. But since you had no choice any more it had to go up.
Went up at a slowed rate. People payed their bills, thus taking many of the costs from the States/Hospitals and shifting them to the people (and to the federal government.) while decreasing bankruptcy due to healthcare expenses. ACA was a improvement, but is not enough. The extreme rate increases in AZ last yeare are exaggerated as they only went up in the marketplace by that amount, most people with insurance didn't have much of a rate increase here. Congress ended much of the enforcement and budgeting for the ACA, this allowed the insurance companies to fold the plans with high risk people, and keep the plans with low risk, putting more high risk people into the marketplace.
>As for the economy as a whole obama saw the greatest increase of 2.9%. Which is lower than Jimmy Carters 5.6% and Bush Primes of 3.8%
He also took over during the start of a huge depression started before him. It is hard to predict what if's, but even as a fiscal conservative, racking up a deficit during bad times is OK. Regan/Bush,etc racking them up during good times was much worse. I didn't agree with Obamas methods, but for the limitations put on him when a bunch of do nothing republicans entered the picture, he did OK considering.
>The number of unemployment did go down but the number not in the labor force actually went up by 13.5%.
Actually 3.1% according to your sources, and that was due to boomers reaching retirement age, and retiring.
I didn't do a good explanation of the exception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... does it better. Basically what I was trying to say (copied from the wikipedia article)
This is part of the justification for why a warrent is not required and that the probable cause standard is lowered.
I do see some need for this, but applying this to electric records... A) I really don't agree B) it is still legally contested.
Also the distinction that only american citizens have full constitutional protections at the boarder is also not right in my opinion. Especially when applied in that 100 mile boarder zone, IE until a person shows their papers they are not constitutionally protected.
> the current precedent is that the fourth amendment doesn't apply at the border.
It applies to US citizens at the boarder. EFF is a bit tongue in cheek when they call it a constitution free zone. The current ruling (as I understand) is that crossing the boarder is probable cause and because it is needed to perform the governments constitutional right to secure our boarders inspecting possessions is allowed.
That they extended that to searching records, held in devices. And that they can hold even citizens for a couple days and impose a fine if they do not unlock devices when they cross... is a big stretch to the rules in my opinion.
You cannot assume the system was shutdown before the attack occurs. You would still want to protect the integrity of the entire file system. The goal of this encryption would be so that any part of the system that doesn't have the encryption key cannot get to the encrypted data. So if I can attack at the bios of the HD, or HD controller, I could re-write /usr/bin/passwd... if those were not encrypted, to then allow the running system to give up encrypted data once that program is accessed by any process running with the keys. If encrypted data is written through a compromised data path, all the compromised component could do is corrupt the file, it would not be able to make precise changes.
> But of course you won't do one full cycle a day.
The price thrown around appears to be around $250 / kwhr for this system with batteries. If you want them to add only $.05 /kwhr (current price of electric generation from fossil.) then they need 5000 cycles to get down to that price. That would be 15 years of life if cycled to capacity only once a day. Granted it may be 4 cycles of 1/4 capacity per day... Although the batteries will probably be less than 1/2 the cost of the system to replace (especially in 15 years) if they are the only part that fails, but you want some capital return on your investment as well.
> I'd expect a 20 year warranty though.
Yeah, and if it was my money paying for it and not the taxpayers, I would need that guarantee to be from Musk's personal money as well. I think it might be a 50:50 chance for Tesla to not declare bankruptcy at least once in the next 20 years.