I was responding to the statements made by the AC, not necessarily to Trump's own views.
Either way, are you fucking kidding about not being anti-immigration? Or pro-war? Maybe it would have been more accurate to say he's pro-war crime?
Well he's certainly anti- illegal immigration. But he is pro-immigration for "good guys", and wants better screening to keep out radical islamist terrorists. I'm real anti-war, but I don't see anything pro-war in what he actually says. Clinton is WAY more pro-war than trump, and so is Rubio. He makes a lot of off-the-cuff remarks, and the media always uses the worst snippits to "discuss". But when he talks in-depth about stuff his position seems pretty reasonable. Especially compared to where the others actually stand. My favorite in this cycle is Ben Carson, even though he's actually more pro-war than Trump, I like him on everything else. But, he's not doing very well.
If not Trump, then who do you recommend I vote for?
A Democratic member of congress and Democratic national senator from your state.
Just FYI, we have a pretty damned good President now who has for five years asked Congress to do basic stuff, like not give tax credits to companies for their exporting American jobs, and instead give those tax credits to companies bringing jobs into the United States. No go from the Republicans. They listen to people like Carly Fiorina.
So stop focusing so much on the presidency. No matter who is President, if we have an old-school Republican congress, American workers, including American IT workers, are going to be screwed.
I can't tell if you're trolling, or if you really do get all your information from your Facebook friends...
Sorry, I'm confused... What exactly is "refreshing" about an anti-gay, anti-women, anti-abortion, anti-immigration, pro-war Republican?
The only accurate label you have included is anti-abortion (and, yet, he is pro-Planned Parenthood). He's running for the Republican nomination, but is hardly a Republican (in fact, not long ago he was a Democrat). In fact, he's simply lighting a match to the tinderbox that the Republican party made themselves into. Let it burn, baby, let it burn!
Trump was able to fail in business over and over again because his friends supported him. It is reasonable to believe he'll pay back that debt while in office.
That's actually not right. He had businesses that failed, and bankruptcy law saved his personal wealth. AFAIK he never got personal loans or special treatment from "friends". I can't tell where he owes anyone. People that work for him are very happy with having him as a boss. That includes his kids, who are all well-spoken, clearly well-adjusted, very well educated, and have productive careers. That says a lot.
Excellent point! I was forwarded this information in a email from long-time friend. I had to dig to find the source, which was apparently an editorial from Investor Business Daily - Here is the link. There is no by-line.
I don't know why more people don't realize this. Trump was a Democrat up until 1999. Now, maybe my tinfoil's on too tight, but I can't help but to wonder if The Donald is more of a Trojan horse intent on handling Clinton the oval office in November.
Plenty of people - usually the kind that follow politics fairly closely - also wonder the same thing. Maybe there's something to it.
But, frankly, I think even Trump was taken aback by the success he has had. No one really expected it, even Trump. You can kind of see it in the way his attitude seems to have changed once it started to look like he may actually pull off the nomination. So, that kind of makes any sort of plan to be an ineluctable Republican nominee to help Hillary gain the White House not really seem like a credible theory.
Another problem with the theory, as is is becoming clear right now, is that unless Trump does something to really turn off a majority of his current support (and consider that nothing he has said so far has done anything like that), he is likely to win in a contest with Hillary. And that's because, like all recent elections, this one will be close enough to come down to turn-out on election day. And Hillary is simply not going to be able to generate that turnout. Sure, all the Democrats that vote every election will come out, hold their nose and vote for Hillary. But she simply doesn't excite people. And she is hated enough that plenty of Democrat voters will simply stay home. In contrast, Trump is bringing out plenty of NEW and occasional voters. Every Republican primary and caucus has generated a much higher than usual turnout. And Trump is winning.
Bernie is a political hack? I'm a conservative and not really a fan of Bernie's politics but I've always viewed him as one of the very few politicians in Washington with any sort of integrity at all. Frankly I would take him over Hillary any day despite her so called "centrist" policies. The former Senator from Goldman Sachs is hardly going to be a friend to the "people."
I agree with you about that - Bernie clearly believes everything he says. I do think he's honest - as far as it goes. I'm not sure that really makes up for his incompetence.
He was a ne’er-do-well into his late 30s.
He explained his family couldn’t imagine his “success,” because “my brother and I and Mom and Dad grew up in a three-and-a-half-room rent-controlled apartment in Brooklyn, and we never had a whole lot of money.”
It wasn’t as bad as he says. His family managed to send him to the University of Chicago. Despite a prestigious degree, however, Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington.
One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.
Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shitty carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”
Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.
The only thing he was good at was talking non-stop about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”
So he tried politics, starting his own socialist party. Four times he ran for Vermont public office, and four times he lost — badly. He never attracted more than single-digit support — even in the People’s Republic of Vermont. In his 1971 bid for U.S. Senate, the local press said the 30-year-old “Sanders describes himself as a carpenter who has worked with ‘disturbed children.’ ” In other words, a real winner.
He finally wormed his way into the Senate in 2006, where he still ranks as one of the poorest members of Congress. Save for a municipal pension, Sanders lists no assets in his name. All the assets provided in his financial disclosure form are his second wife’s. He does, however, have as much as $65,000 in credit-card debt.
Sure, Sanders may not be a hypocrite, but this is nothing to brag about. His worthless background contrasts sharply with the successful careers of other “outsiders” in the race for the White House, including a billionaire developer, a world-renowned neurosurgeon and a Fortune 500 CEO.
Probably not. But they do know the other lying mother fuckers in the race aren't interested in helping them. The entire establishment that's been fucking them hates Trump so it's kind of an enemy of my enemy thing. If you've noticed, the more the elite in the Republican party band together against The Donald the more support he gathers. Yeah, Donald ain't all that but then they're pretty sure the other guys are going to keep on fucking them just like they have for the past few decades.
Jesis fucking Christ, Trump doesn't need to sell out to big money, he *is* big money.
Which gives rise to another not inconsequential benefit of seeing him elected as president - he will owe no one a cushy prestigious position in his administration. Instead, he will put leaders in place the same way he does in his businesses: solely based on merit. Best qualified to do the job instead of political operatives and fundraising "bundlers".
Having the chance to place actually competent people in charge of the Federal administrations and agencies should be something everyone supports. And something that has been sorely lacking for quite some time.
Trump is playing a simple role, just like you said, he's playing into what people said they wanted. But the people who want his ideology in power are driven by a crippling fear for the future. Rest assured, no good will come from a leader who plays on fear, rather than quells it.
Not really. They are mostly driven by the experience of being shafted by the politicians who have lied to them for the most of their lives. It's pay-back for what the Republican party has done to their dwindling supporters. It's the hens of dishonest politics, the political consultant class, and the media pundits coming home to roost.
As it currently is you need to register to own a hobby drone, but not to own a gun.
You can buy a drone with cash, anywhere, no questions asked. You cannot buy a gun without 2 forms of identification, a federal background check, and possibly a wait a few days for the background check to clear. Lots of people cannot buy the gun at all and will be arrested for trying. MANY states ALSO require you to have a license before you can buy a gun - for instance, in you need a license first to buy a gun.
Maybe you are trolling, or stupid. But now you are at least a little more informed.
They are obviously not regulated enough when people who should not have guns get their hands on them and there are gun show loopholes around any regulations.
There is no "gun show loophole" - that's just propaganda.
This just shows exactly how America is really messed up. There is going to be massive regulation framework for the operation of a 2 kilo drone. But the operation of a gun with massive more kinetic energy doesn't require any regulation.
If you really think that, you're seriously misinformed.
Cook is absolutely right to be concerned about precedent. If they are forced to create a crack for this phone, it will just open the flood gates. The FBI has already admitted they have about 12 other phones they need Apple to crack for them. And another LEO agent told an ABC news reporter that he has been holding on to about 150 phones that would also be entering the pipeline.
So maybe "undue burden" might be hard to argue in this one particular case, but setting the precedent absolutely creates a whole new business process that Apple will need to take care of, and one that is nothing but cost and bad press for them.
So I wanted to to clarify - do you mean $100/month for the 15 GB, or $100 for 15 GB that doesn't expire?
It expires, but only after a year. That is, the 15 GB I bought in January will still be available in August, but it will be gone after the NEXT January.
When I went to college back in the 1980's it was pretty freakin cheap to go to a state school. Tuition was very low and affordable - the people that got loans (at market prices, not rates fixed by congress) paid them off pretty quick. It's outrageous that a state school should cost as much as it does. Bloated, inefficient, and overpaid administration is a major issue.
The thing that makes Karma worth using in my book—and the thing I personally use it for—is its "Refuel" plan, where you can get data for $10 a gigabyte. That's a reasonable price,
Seems high to me. I pay $100 for 15 GB on my smart phone plan, and that includes unlimited talk, text, and no-hassle hot-spot (so built-in wi-fi to 4G LTE). Yea, it's bulk, but I use most of that. It rolls over, so in the summer when I'm wandering more, I have plenty of extra allotment that I built up during the winter. If I do go over, it's $10 / GB if I do nothing, but I get notifications so I can just bump up my plan for the month, which is much cheaper.
I guess I should have said "The FreeNAS Community page states under Minimum Hardware Requirements that at least 8 GB of RAM are required for current version of FreeNAS."
I plan to use ZFS for my personal NAS. I'll have 4TiB of storage (spinners) and 2GiB of RAM.
So are you using a Linux distro? I looked at doing something similar, but FreeNAS now needs 8 GB of RAM. I just want something like a home-built Synology. Small and efficient. I had pretty much ruled out using ZFS though.
I love ZFS for my database servers. It plays very well with PostgreSQL
I wasn't aware of that, but I don't use PostgreSQL for anything except one application, and it requires a LOT of resources. Most of my small stuff is SQLite and legacy MySQL. ZFS, I think, would kill MySQL.
It's beautiful for RAID1.
Seems like overkill for that, IMHO, but I've only had 1 failure on an mdadm mirror, and recovery was a snap, so I never looked for any other software solutions. I'm not sold on ZFS yet, but you've given me enough to want to take another look.
Slashdot Mirror
I was responding to the statements made by the AC, not necessarily to Trump's own views. Either way, are you fucking kidding about not being anti-immigration? Or pro-war? Maybe it would have been more accurate to say he's pro-war crime?
Well he's certainly anti- illegal immigration. But he is pro-immigration for "good guys", and wants better screening to keep out radical islamist terrorists. I'm real anti-war, but I don't see anything pro-war in what he actually says. Clinton is WAY more pro-war than trump, and so is Rubio. He makes a lot of off-the-cuff remarks, and the media always uses the worst snippits to "discuss". But when he talks in-depth about stuff his position seems pretty reasonable. Especially compared to where the others actually stand. My favorite in this cycle is Ben Carson, even though he's actually more pro-war than Trump, I like him on everything else. But, he's not doing very well.
If not Trump, then who do you recommend I vote for?
A Democratic member of congress and Democratic national senator from your state.
Just FYI, we have a pretty damned good President now who has for five years asked Congress to do basic stuff, like not give tax credits to companies for their exporting American jobs, and instead give those tax credits to companies bringing jobs into the United States. No go from the Republicans. They listen to people like Carly Fiorina.
So stop focusing so much on the presidency. No matter who is President, if we have an old-school Republican congress, American workers, including American IT workers, are going to be screwed.
I can't tell if you're trolling, or if you really do get all your information from your Facebook friends...
Sorry, I'm confused... What exactly is "refreshing" about an anti-gay, anti-women, anti-abortion, anti-immigration, pro-war Republican?
The only accurate label you have included is anti-abortion (and, yet, he is pro-Planned Parenthood). He's running for the Republican nomination, but is hardly a Republican (in fact, not long ago he was a Democrat). In fact, he's simply lighting a match to the tinderbox that the Republican party made themselves into. Let it burn, baby, let it burn!
Now THAT is refreshing!
Trump was able to fail in business over and over again because his friends supported him. It is reasonable to believe he'll pay back that debt while in office.
That's actually not right. He had businesses that failed, and bankruptcy law saved his personal wealth. AFAIK he never got personal loans or special treatment from "friends". I can't tell where he owes anyone. People that work for him are very happy with having him as a boss. That includes his kids, who are all well-spoken, clearly well-adjusted, very well educated, and have productive careers. That says a lot.
Excellent point! I was forwarded this information in a email from long-time friend. I had to dig to find the source, which was apparently an editorial from Investor Business Daily - Here is the link. There is no by-line.
You're an idiot.
Terrific analysis! Kudos to you for such an original come-back. I'm humbled.
God forbid we have a commoner in there.
Commoners actually work and are productive. Sanders is no commoner. He's a leach.
well, solely based on his assessment of whether they'll advance his goals - not quite the same thing.
His stated goal - "Make America Great Again" - that is, to advance the cause of improving the country itself - I'd say it is the same thing.
I don't know why more people don't realize this. Trump was a Democrat up until 1999. Now, maybe my tinfoil's on too tight, but I can't help but to wonder if The Donald is more of a Trojan horse intent on handling Clinton the oval office in November.
Plenty of people - usually the kind that follow politics fairly closely - also wonder the same thing. Maybe there's something to it.
But, frankly, I think even Trump was taken aback by the success he has had. No one really expected it, even Trump. You can kind of see it in the way his attitude seems to have changed once it started to look like he may actually pull off the nomination. So, that kind of makes any sort of plan to be an ineluctable Republican nominee to help Hillary gain the White House not really seem like a credible theory.
Another problem with the theory, as is is becoming clear right now, is that unless Trump does something to really turn off a majority of his current support (and consider that nothing he has said so far has done anything like that), he is likely to win in a contest with Hillary. And that's because, like all recent elections, this one will be close enough to come down to turn-out on election day. And Hillary is simply not going to be able to generate that turnout. Sure, all the Democrats that vote every election will come out, hold their nose and vote for Hillary. But she simply doesn't excite people. And she is hated enough that plenty of Democrat voters will simply stay home. In contrast, Trump is bringing out plenty of NEW and occasional voters. Every Republican primary and caucus has generated a much higher than usual turnout. And Trump is winning.
Bernie is a political hack? I'm a conservative and not really a fan of Bernie's politics but I've always viewed him as one of the very few politicians in Washington with any sort of integrity at all. Frankly I would take him over Hillary any day despite her so called "centrist" policies. The former Senator from Goldman Sachs is hardly going to be a friend to the "people."
I agree with you about that - Bernie clearly believes everything he says. I do think he's honest - as far as it goes. I'm not sure that really makes up for his incompetence.
He was a ne’er-do-well into his late 30s.
He explained his family couldn’t imagine his “success,” because “my brother and I and Mom and Dad grew up in a three-and-a-half-room rent-controlled apartment in Brooklyn, and we never had a whole lot of money.”
It wasn’t as bad as he says. His family managed to send him to the University of Chicago. Despite a prestigious degree, however, Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington.
One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.
Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shitty carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”
Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.
The only thing he was good at was talking non-stop about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”
So he tried politics, starting his own socialist party. Four times he ran for Vermont public office, and four times he lost — badly. He never attracted more than single-digit support — even in the People’s Republic of Vermont. In his 1971 bid for U.S. Senate, the local press said the 30-year-old “Sanders describes himself as a carpenter who has worked with ‘disturbed children.’ ” In other words, a real winner.
He finally wormed his way into the Senate in 2006, where he still ranks as one of the poorest members of Congress. Save for a municipal pension, Sanders lists no assets in his name. All the assets provided in his financial disclosure form are his second wife’s. He does, however, have as much as $65,000 in credit-card debt.
Sure, Sanders may not be a hypocrite, but this is nothing to brag about. His worthless background contrasts sharply with the successful careers of other “outsiders” in the race for the White House, including a billionaire developer, a world-renowned neurosurgeon and a Fortune 500 CEO.
Probably not. But they do know the other lying mother fuckers in the race aren't interested in helping them. The entire establishment that's been fucking them hates Trump so it's kind of an enemy of my enemy thing. If you've noticed, the more the elite in the Republican party band together against The Donald the more support he gathers. Yeah, Donald ain't all that but then they're pretty sure the other guys are going to keep on fucking them just like they have for the past few decades.
Perfectly stated. Mod parent up!
Jesis fucking Christ, Trump doesn't need to sell out to big money, he *is* big money.
Which gives rise to another not inconsequential benefit of seeing him elected as president - he will owe no one a cushy prestigious position in his administration. Instead, he will put leaders in place the same way he does in his businesses: solely based on merit. Best qualified to do the job instead of political operatives and fundraising "bundlers".
Having the chance to place actually competent people in charge of the Federal administrations and agencies should be something everyone supports. And something that has been sorely lacking for quite some time.
Trump is playing a simple role, just like you said, he's playing into what people said they wanted. But the people who want his ideology in power are driven by a crippling fear for the future. Rest assured, no good will come from a leader who plays on fear, rather than quells it.
Not really. They are mostly driven by the experience of being shafted by the politicians who have lied to them for the most of their lives. It's pay-back for what the Republican party has done to their dwindling supporters. It's the hens of dishonest politics, the political consultant class, and the media pundits coming home to roost.
You are the one who is seriously misinformed:
https://www.faa.gov/news/press... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As it currently is you need to register to own a hobby drone, but not to own a gun.
You can buy a drone with cash, anywhere, no questions asked. You cannot buy a gun without 2 forms of identification, a federal background check, and possibly a wait a few days for the background check to clear. Lots of people cannot buy the gun at all and will be arrested for trying. MANY states ALSO require you to have a license before you can buy a gun - for instance, in you need a license first to buy a gun.
Maybe you are trolling, or stupid. But now you are at least a little more informed.
They are obviously not regulated enough when people who should not have guns get their hands on them and there are gun show loopholes around any regulations.
There is no "gun show loophole" - that's just propaganda.
This just shows exactly how America is really messed up. There is going to be massive regulation framework for the operation of a 2 kilo drone. But the operation of a gun with massive more kinetic energy doesn't require any regulation.
If you really think that, you're seriously misinformed.
Cook is absolutely right to be concerned about precedent. If they are forced to create a crack for this phone, it will just open the flood gates. The FBI has already admitted they have about 12 other phones they need Apple to crack for them. And another LEO agent told an ABC news reporter that he has been holding on to about 150 phones that would also be entering the pipeline.
So maybe "undue burden" might be hard to argue in this one particular case, but setting the precedent absolutely creates a whole new business process that Apple will need to take care of, and one that is nothing but cost and bad press for them.
Gates doesn't seem to think he said what people are saying he said. He was quoted today saying "I was disappointed because that doesn’t state my view on this."
Nuanced? Or freaking out about the blow-back?
He has been writhing Windows guides for a long time
I've been writhing from Windows for a long time, myself.
So I wanted to to clarify - do you mean $100/month for the 15 GB, or $100 for 15 GB that doesn't expire?
It expires, but only after a year. That is, the 15 GB I bought in January will still be available in August, but it will be gone after the NEXT January.
When I went to college back in the 1980's it was pretty freakin cheap to go to a state school. Tuition was very low and affordable - the people that got loans (at market prices, not rates fixed by congress) paid them off pretty quick. It's outrageous that a state school should cost as much as it does. Bloated, inefficient, and overpaid administration is a major issue.
The thing that makes Karma worth using in my book—and the thing I personally use it for—is its "Refuel" plan, where you can get data for $10 a gigabyte. That's a reasonable price,
Seems high to me. I pay $100 for 15 GB on my smart phone plan, and that includes unlimited talk, text, and no-hassle hot-spot (so built-in wi-fi to 4G LTE). Yea, it's bulk, but I use most of that. It rolls over, so in the summer when I'm wandering more, I have plenty of extra allotment that I built up during the winter. If I do go over, it's $10 / GB if I do nothing, but I get notifications so I can just bump up my plan for the month, which is much cheaper.
so they changed what they were swelling.
Apparently, it was swelling TOO much.
I guess I should have said "The FreeNAS Community page states under Minimum Hardware Requirements that at least 8 GB of RAM are required for current version of FreeNAS."
That better?
Interesting.
I plan to use ZFS for my personal NAS. I'll have 4TiB of storage (spinners) and 2GiB of RAM.
So are you using a Linux distro? I looked at doing something similar, but FreeNAS now needs 8 GB of RAM. I just want something like a home-built Synology. Small and efficient. I had pretty much ruled out using ZFS though.
I love ZFS for my database servers. It plays very well with PostgreSQL
I wasn't aware of that, but I don't use PostgreSQL for anything except one application, and it requires a LOT of resources. Most of my small stuff is SQLite and legacy MySQL. ZFS, I think, would kill MySQL.
It's beautiful for RAID1.
Seems like overkill for that, IMHO, but I've only had 1 failure on an mdadm mirror, and recovery was a snap, so I never looked for any other software solutions. I'm not sold on ZFS yet, but you've given me enough to want to take another look.