I'm not sure about that. When the plane's several kilometers in the air, and there aren't immediately dangerous features around, and there aren't any other planes too close, an autopilot failure is unlikely to cause a problem that has to be addressed immediately. Airliners have certain separation rules, IIRC, while I'm expected to drive within a couple of meters of other people on a normal basis. If the driver just to my left makes a sudden right swerve, I have to react immediately to avoid a crash. Except at takeoff and landing, aircraft with good autopilots are unlikely to be in such urgent situations.
I'd accuse the RNC of being malicious assholes, myself, but that's not something you do a criminal investigation over. It's a free country, and it isn't illegal to be a malicious asshole.
Hillary is quite competent in general, although she really screwed up with the classified emails. For a politician at her level, she's not particularly dishonest, and in fact was one of the most honest campaigners in her campaign so far. Arrogance is something you're going to get out of serious Presidential candidates who will make decent Presidents. Nobody's going to work that hard to be President without being arrogant.
Lynch agreed to abide by the FBI's recommendation, which is reasonable. The FBI is less subject to political pressure, and headed by a guy with a Republican background. She'd announced her intention before Bill "had public relations with that woman". Why do you think that not prosecuting is her fault?
From a future president, we demand integrity, honesty, and competence, and she lacks all of those.
If you're not using a really restricted meaning of "we", such as "a few friends and I", you're talking about an alternate universe. The US public has never demanded all that from their Presidents.
Clinton is very competent in general. She's fairly honest, as serious Presidential candidates go. She has more integrity than often given credit for, and has been attacked unfairly a lot in the past few decades..
If Snowden came back, he'd face a fair trial, and would be found guilty. The courtroom is not the place to decide whether a serious violation of the law was done with laudable intent, and shouldn't be punished. There are other avenues for that.
Snowden deliberately took a very large amount of classified information and sent it to people not authorized to receive it. Clinton carelessly left a relatively small amount of classified information (some of which she had classification authority over) in the wrong place, and there's no evidence anyone unauthorized had access to it. These are not the same thing.
While I admire Snowden's release of information about spying on people in the US, I'm not happy about his release of information about the US spying abroad. I don't feel as strongly about Clinton's carelessness, since there's no evidence of harm.
I take it you prefer that the workings of government at the highest level be held up occasionally for technical reasons? I'd be perfectly happy to allow cabinet-level officials of either party make those decisions for themselves.
Corney said that she'd be subject to administrative sanctions if she still worked for the government, but that prosecutions were normally reserved for much more egregious cases than Clinton's, involving actual deliberate leaking of much larger amounts of classified material. There's no real evidence that Clinton let classified material into the hands of people without the requisite clearances, and she was careless rather than malicious.
There's a large amount of room between "did things right" and "should be criminally prosecuted", and Corney decided Clinton was in that area, well to the prosecution side.
Bill Clinton lied under oath to an irrelevant question in a trial that should have been thrown out earlier. I'm not saying he did the right thing, but he was pushed into that situation illegitimately. Some time after that, the judge threw out the case because, if all claims Paula Jones made were absolutely and incontrovertibly true, it didn't add up to illegal behavior. (It did pretty well establish that he was a jerk.) The trial was ostensibly about sexual harassment, not consensual sexual activity. It looks like a deliberate and successful attempt to ambush him.
There's lots of people out there who think that Hillary did something seriously wrong on Benghazi, something that over a dozen intensely hostile Congressional inquiries couldn't find. Try to find other people in politics that have been subjected to the same continuing attacks as the Clintons, and we'll talk.
Clinton had a private email server, but not for the purpose of violating security regs. She did not transmit classified information in a manner that harmed the US. There is no sound reason to think she deliberately meant to mishandle classified material. You're making crap up because you don't like her.
She screwed up. The FBI did not think this warranted criminal prosecution. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of her judgment, and Corney made it clear what he thought of her judgment.
Credit card debt only racks up fast if you don't think of it as actual payment. Some people do have this problem, and should avoid credit cards, and some don't. I don't use debit cards online, but never had a problem locally. I normally don't really care if people know what I'm buying.
For privacy purposes, the advantage of using traceable reward cards and credit cards is that it establishes a pattern. If I paid for everything with cash, it would be harder to find out information about me that I don't mind sharing, but it would indicate that I do use cash for a lot of purchases. If I pay for most things with credit cards, but carry useful amounts of cash, I believe I can conceal what I want to conceal better.
There are things about me that you are not going to find out online. I am pretty open and traceable in those parts of my life I don't mind sharing with everybody, but that isn't everything.
In what way is trying to scan an image on my phone more convenient than using my credit card? I carry one all the time anyway, and it's less likely to need recharging at an inconvenient time than my phone. There are some places online that have my credit card information, for my convenience, but in those cases I can't just swipe a card and have them receive the money, like I do at Walmart and other local stores.
You'd be surprised at how little someone from the Neolithic would recognize. Most food crops have been heavily modified from their natural form. It used to be by hybridization and selective breeding and things like that, but it's still genetic engineering.
I'm highly intelligent, and I don't particularly care about my image. If you like me the way I am, fine. If not, you can go away. As an introvert, I have all the good friends I really need (although I don't mind picking up more). I suspect you'll find this is true for lots of highly intelligent people on the autism spectrum.
I don't need to go cheap on a purchase of less than a thousand dollars I make about every three years, and so I get what I want. I have an iPhone, a cheap Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and an Ubuntu desktop, and all of these are very good at what I want them for.
This is the United States, not a really civilized nation. There often isn't a price difference between a plan with a subsidized phone and one without. It's possible to get a lot cheaper plans if all you want to do is make phone calls, but if that's what you wanted you wouldn't buy an expensive smartphone in the first place. It's often possible to change carriers, but someone might have reasons for wanting to be on a particular carrier.
It's very possible that the subsidy was free in the sense that GP couldn't get a cheaper but still adequate plan without it.
The camera on my iPhone is amazing, considering its inherent limitations. It's excellent for the photography I do.(by which you can tell I'm not a professional), and I have no need for a DSLR. Since Apple presumably whats to show what it can do, they find photographers who are better than I am to showcase the pictures. I don't see the issue here.
If I wanted to take the best pictures, I'd have a DSLR. Since I want to take decent pictures, and don't care about really high quality, I use the phone I always have with me, even if it doesn't have fancy lenses or other equipment, is very space-limited, and isn't easy to hold still for photography. It's a very good solution for my use case.
What do you mean by "the actual work at Bletchley Park"? I'm not suggesting you get your information from the movie "The Imitation Game" (which gets the imitation game itself way wrong), but it's been long enough for some serious history to have been done, and that's less likely to be "bullshit" than what someone who calls the serious history "bullshit" says.
Turing did a lot of good work, including a method of mathematically representing computation that we use extensively today.
Removable batteries are a tradeoff, and not everyone wants one. My iDevices are and have been much sturdier than paper cards, and indeed keeping cards in my pocket next to my iPhone seems to help protect them. I really haven't found anything I want to run on a phone that's not in the App Store, and I haven't yet had anyone from Apple show up, hold me at gunpoint, and force me to run all of the Apple-supplied software, which doesn't take up that much of my storage anyway. There's plenty of Apple Stores around where I live, and they've always been fairly fast, courteous, and reasonable on the rare occasions when I've needed repair.
When I've called Apple's support lines, I've talked to native English speakers who know what they're talking about and try to be helpful. This doesn't seem to be universally true in the field.
My anecdotal evidence is that I've never had an iPod, iPhone, or iPad memory go bad. It's easier for removable memory to get damaged or lost. Both have advantages.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure about that. When the plane's several kilometers in the air, and there aren't immediately dangerous features around, and there aren't any other planes too close, an autopilot failure is unlikely to cause a problem that has to be addressed immediately. Airliners have certain separation rules, IIRC, while I'm expected to drive within a couple of meters of other people on a normal basis. If the driver just to my left makes a sudden right swerve, I have to react immediately to avoid a crash. Except at takeoff and landing, aircraft with good autopilots are unlikely to be in such urgent situations.
I'd accuse the RNC of being malicious assholes, myself, but that's not something you do a criminal investigation over. It's a free country, and it isn't illegal to be a malicious asshole.
Hillary is quite competent in general, although she really screwed up with the classified emails. For a politician at her level, she's not particularly dishonest, and in fact was one of the most honest campaigners in her campaign so far. Arrogance is something you're going to get out of serious Presidential candidates who will make decent Presidents. Nobody's going to work that hard to be President without being arrogant.
Lynch agreed to abide by the FBI's recommendation, which is reasonable. The FBI is less subject to political pressure, and headed by a guy with a Republican background. She'd announced her intention before Bill "had public relations with that woman". Why do you think that not prosecuting is her fault?
If you're not using a really restricted meaning of "we", such as "a few friends and I", you're talking about an alternate universe. The US public has never demanded all that from their Presidents.
Clinton is very competent in general. She's fairly honest, as serious Presidential candidates go. She has more integrity than often given credit for, and has been attacked unfairly a lot in the past few decades..
"Exonerated" in the sense that what she did doesn't seem to warrant criminal prosecution, which is not how I would use the word.
If Snowden came back, he'd face a fair trial, and would be found guilty. The courtroom is not the place to decide whether a serious violation of the law was done with laudable intent, and shouldn't be punished. There are other avenues for that.
Snowden deliberately took a very large amount of classified information and sent it to people not authorized to receive it. Clinton carelessly left a relatively small amount of classified information (some of which she had classification authority over) in the wrong place, and there's no evidence anyone unauthorized had access to it. These are not the same thing.
While I admire Snowden's release of information about spying on people in the US, I'm not happy about his release of information about the US spying abroad. I don't feel as strongly about Clinton's carelessness, since there's no evidence of harm.
I take it you prefer that the workings of government at the highest level be held up occasionally for technical reasons? I'd be perfectly happy to allow cabinet-level officials of either party make those decisions for themselves.
Corney said that she'd be subject to administrative sanctions if she still worked for the government, but that prosecutions were normally reserved for much more egregious cases than Clinton's, involving actual deliberate leaking of much larger amounts of classified material. There's no real evidence that Clinton let classified material into the hands of people without the requisite clearances, and she was careless rather than malicious.
There's a large amount of room between "did things right" and "should be criminally prosecuted", and Corney decided Clinton was in that area, well to the prosecution side.
Neither is traitorous. Both have shown bad judgment.
A private email account is on someone's private server. I don't see that it matters where the server is, only who controls it and what they do.
Bill Clinton lied under oath to an irrelevant question in a trial that should have been thrown out earlier. I'm not saying he did the right thing, but he was pushed into that situation illegitimately. Some time after that, the judge threw out the case because, if all claims Paula Jones made were absolutely and incontrovertibly true, it didn't add up to illegal behavior. (It did pretty well establish that he was a jerk.) The trial was ostensibly about sexual harassment, not consensual sexual activity. It looks like a deliberate and successful attempt to ambush him.
There's lots of people out there who think that Hillary did something seriously wrong on Benghazi, something that over a dozen intensely hostile Congressional inquiries couldn't find. Try to find other people in politics that have been subjected to the same continuing attacks as the Clintons, and we'll talk.
Clinton had a private email server, but not for the purpose of violating security regs. She did not transmit classified information in a manner that harmed the US. There is no sound reason to think she deliberately meant to mishandle classified material. You're making crap up because you don't like her.
She screwed up. The FBI did not think this warranted criminal prosecution. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of her judgment, and Corney made it clear what he thought of her judgment.
Credit card debt only racks up fast if you don't think of it as actual payment. Some people do have this problem, and should avoid credit cards, and some don't. I don't use debit cards online, but never had a problem locally. I normally don't really care if people know what I'm buying.
For privacy purposes, the advantage of using traceable reward cards and credit cards is that it establishes a pattern. If I paid for everything with cash, it would be harder to find out information about me that I don't mind sharing, but it would indicate that I do use cash for a lot of purchases. If I pay for most things with credit cards, but carry useful amounts of cash, I believe I can conceal what I want to conceal better.
There are things about me that you are not going to find out online. I am pretty open and traceable in those parts of my life I don't mind sharing with everybody, but that isn't everything.
In what way is trying to scan an image on my phone more convenient than using my credit card? I carry one all the time anyway, and it's less likely to need recharging at an inconvenient time than my phone. There are some places online that have my credit card information, for my convenience, but in those cases I can't just swipe a card and have them receive the money, like I do at Walmart and other local stores.
And, since Walmart puts downward pressure on wages, it creates more poor people to need to shop at Walmart. It's the cycle of nature. Or something.
You'd be surprised at how little someone from the Neolithic would recognize. Most food crops have been heavily modified from their natural form. It used to be by hybridization and selective breeding and things like that, but it's still genetic engineering.
I'm highly intelligent, and I don't particularly care about my image. If you like me the way I am, fine. If not, you can go away. As an introvert, I have all the good friends I really need (although I don't mind picking up more). I suspect you'll find this is true for lots of highly intelligent people on the autism spectrum.
I don't need to go cheap on a purchase of less than a thousand dollars I make about every three years, and so I get what I want. I have an iPhone, a cheap Android tablet, a Windows laptop, and an Ubuntu desktop, and all of these are very good at what I want them for.
This is the United States, not a really civilized nation. There often isn't a price difference between a plan with a subsidized phone and one without. It's possible to get a lot cheaper plans if all you want to do is make phone calls, but if that's what you wanted you wouldn't buy an expensive smartphone in the first place. It's often possible to change carriers, but someone might have reasons for wanting to be on a particular carrier.
It's very possible that the subsidy was free in the sense that GP couldn't get a cheaper but still adequate plan without it.
The camera on my iPhone is amazing, considering its inherent limitations. It's excellent for the photography I do.(by which you can tell I'm not a professional), and I have no need for a DSLR. Since Apple presumably whats to show what it can do, they find photographers who are better than I am to showcase the pictures. I don't see the issue here.
If I wanted to take the best pictures, I'd have a DSLR. Since I want to take decent pictures, and don't care about really high quality, I use the phone I always have with me, even if it doesn't have fancy lenses or other equipment, is very space-limited, and isn't easy to hold still for photography. It's a very good solution for my use case.
What do you mean by "the actual work at Bletchley Park"? I'm not suggesting you get your information from the movie "The Imitation Game" (which gets the imitation game itself way wrong), but it's been long enough for some serious history to have been done, and that's less likely to be "bullshit" than what someone who calls the serious history "bullshit" says.
Turing did a lot of good work, including a method of mathematically representing computation that we use extensively today.
Removable batteries are a tradeoff, and not everyone wants one. My iDevices are and have been much sturdier than paper cards, and indeed keeping cards in my pocket next to my iPhone seems to help protect them. I really haven't found anything I want to run on a phone that's not in the App Store, and I haven't yet had anyone from Apple show up, hold me at gunpoint, and force me to run all of the Apple-supplied software, which doesn't take up that much of my storage anyway. There's plenty of Apple Stores around where I live, and they've always been fairly fast, courteous, and reasonable on the rare occasions when I've needed repair.
When I've called Apple's support lines, I've talked to native English speakers who know what they're talking about and try to be helpful. This doesn't seem to be universally true in the field.
My anecdotal evidence is that I've never had an iPod, iPhone, or iPad memory go bad. It's easier for removable memory to get damaged or lost. Both have advantages.
Setting a low amount of storage on the base model allows people who aren't going to put many apps or much music on their phones to save money, too.