Most of them left, they left because they were driven out, because the German government made it plenty clear they should get-the-fuck-out. The fast ones left, the slow ones or ones who didn't get the message got put in camps. There is also, literally no evidence of the so-called "Final Solution" ever being articulated much less made into policy. The Germans are nothing if not meticulous and weren't of the type to follow verbal orders, processes would have been created, documented, passed along the chain of command, etc. There would be evidence of this, but there isn't. Think about it friend.
The gas, couldn't have been used, that part of the story was/is bullshit. There weren't enough resources to burn bodies, it would have taken shit-tons of wood to incinerate the bones into ashes. Face it pal, it wasn't like you've been told, not at all my friend.
The Nazis actually helped many Jews relocate to Palestine, it was known as the transfer program and ran for years until the start of the war.
I guess that makes the Nazis complicit in two holocausts.
Not that I know of. I suspect Google's been disappearing unpleasant facts on their News product for a while now.
"The holocaust never happened" is not an unpleasant fact - it's an out-and-out lie.
Which holocaust? The Jewish one or the Palestinian one or the Armenian one or the Native American one?
Which of these are we not allowed to say never happened? I know many Israelis would like to deny the Palestinian one and many 'Murcans would like to deny the Native American one. And of course the Turks would like to deny the Armenian one.
He said after the contract was signed. Presumably all permits would have been worked out by that time.
Also, while he's waiting on the permits and contract to be signed he could be loading up all the needed equipment, getting his people ready, making arrangements for passage on ships and/or planes, and getting the logistics down. Before the ink is dry he'd already have the stuff moving so if, as others above had said, it takes 20 days to get to Australia by boat, that leaves him 80 days to do the work.
Ambitious? Certainly. Doable? Only one way to find out.
yeah then theres customs clearance! Good luck with that, Elon! Especially given that the Aussies will probably deliberately hold it up to get their free batteries.
If there's a rush, they'd hire an entire ship to do the LA to SYD run in under 2 weeks. If that's not possible, then air freight would be trivial. There are a number of C-130s in civilian hands, and you can pack quite a bit in one of those.
Its about 7500km LA to SYD
Range on a c-130 is 3791km with max payload.
Are there any civilian aircraft that can refuel a c-130 in flight?
Prepare the land, build the slabs, put all the supporting infrastructure in place.
Sure, but all of that can be done while the batteries are in transit. The batteries are manufactured near Reno, so they would be shipped out of either Oakland or Long Beach. Transit time to Adelaide would be about 30 days at standard speed. A faster ship would cost more, and there is no point if the infrastructure isn't ready. 30 days is enough time for a slab and metal frame building. Ideally, you want the batteries installed at distributed locations near point of use.
30 days to actually physically move them.
Add another 30 days at either end for customs clearance so thats 90 days. In fact if the Aussies know what they are doing they'd deliberately slow down the customs clearance so that it can't possibly be completed in under 100 days.
If the batteries will be made in Nevada, and shipped to Australia, I'm curious to know how they plan to transport them. It seems to me the most logical way would be by boat but could they get there quickly enough? If these are lithium ion batteries would it be possible to ship them by air given all the shipping restrictions that are placed on lithium ion batteries currently? If they go by boat how would they be packed to minimize the chance of a catastrophe en route?
What I'd do is, once they agree in principle, ship them ahead of signing the actual contract.
In the goal of increased security, it's exceedingly unlikely that a larger bank is storing anything password related in plain text. Banks are beyond that stuff these days. Procedures and software are audited, etc etc - nobody but mom and pop sites would be able to fly under the radar of the harm to reputation that would occur if it turned out that your bank passwords were being stored in plaintext.
The banks probably aren't using systemd. If they did and systemd added password management to its toolkit I bet the banks would have better security!
Aren't there any consumer protection laws that can help you in the US?
In North America there tend to be vendor protection laws rather than consumer protection laws. Good luck taking something defective back to the store; many shops have signs up saying "All sales are final, no returns or exchanges".
In New Zealand, police Taser guns are fitted with a camera that starts recording video as soon as the Taser is switched on. Footage of some incidents has led to police being criticised for their excessive and illegal use of Tasers.
Consider that most states never stop a cop from being a cop there is no off duty. When they no longer have any more powers than any other citizen can they remove the camera.
Just what powers do you think a beat Cop has that you don't?
The power to shoot you dead without being effectively investigated. Especially if you are non-white. Though in states with a 'stand your ground' law this point is moot.
It's not hard if camera video unavailable for any reason it should be no different than civil court if you refuse to produce records you assume they show things in the worst light possible.
This means by law a fatal shooting without camera footage means the cops is automatically tried and convicted for murder unless other footage is available so show his innocence. Oddly they will start insuring their camera's work.
Guilty until proven innocent?
That could actually work.
For everyone else its innocent until proven guilty.
For people like politicians, cops, lawyers its the other way around. I mean thats what ordinary people assume anyway, right?
Cops have a right to privacy too, to some extent. That doesn't mean the camera shouldn't be always on, but it does mean that there should be some rules and regulations to protect the privacy of everyone being filmed, including the cops themselves. Rules that determine when the footage may be used and for what purposes. For example: not to be used for job performance reviews, nor to check how many donuts each cop consumes on the job. Only to be used for training purposes with the consent of everyone in the video (or properly anonymized). Proper process for using the videos in after-action reviews. Access to the videos to be regulated and audited. Etc. The cops should be certain that if they harass someone or use undue violence, it will be on film and can be used against them. But they should also be certain that the videos will only be used as evidence in case of complaints or interventions where some violence occurred, and that they won't be done for publicly picking their nose or not being polite enough to a member of the public.
Simple solution to the problem of them forgetting to turn the camera on: Make it so they can forget to turn it off.
Have you ever wonder why so much of the misconduct allegations have not been proven? If you are predisposed to think ALL the accusations are false, and ALL the police officers are saints ALL the time, you are biased.
I saw no such predisposition. Ponder the difference between "rare" and "non-existent" or "so much" and "all".
Its essentially the same apparatus that investigates them as protects them. It cannot be relied on. Its like investigating top politicians for organised child abuse (as they are trying to do in the UK and not really getting anywhere).
Some English people feel terribly distressed when they see foreigners wearing their foreign clothing in the street.
Not me. I'd rather be able to recognise a foreigner.
Indeed, there should be legislation to ensure that all French men wear a beret, striped jersey and a string of onions around their necks while visiting the UK. Can't be too careful!
That is truly one of the most desperate and incompetent attempts at a hybrid strawman/trolling that I can recall seeing...
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it!
The sad part is I've actually heard my English relatives suggest such a thing (the clothing thing). They actually feel really infuriated when they see people wearing foreign clothes on the streets of England. I'm not making it up, I wish I were. And they are not alone in this. Many English people really are terribly xenophobic.
Slashdot Mirror
"Holocaust" and "genocide" are not synonyms. The Holocaust is a specific attempted genocide, namely that against the Jews by the Germans.
So is there some requirement on how many people are killed before it counts as a holocaust? Does it have to be more than 1 millon?
Thanks again, good link. I noticed though that it only allowed the emigration of 60,000 German Jews to Palestine.
I wonder if its possible, today, to trace the descendants of those who went via this program.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Most of them left, they left because they were driven out, because the German government made it plenty clear they should get-the-fuck-out. The fast ones left, the slow ones or ones who didn't get the message got put in camps. There is also, literally no evidence of the so-called "Final Solution" ever being articulated much less made into policy. The Germans are nothing if not meticulous and weren't of the type to follow verbal orders, processes would have been created, documented, passed along the chain of command, etc. There would be evidence of this, but there isn't. Think about it friend.
The gas, couldn't have been used, that part of the story was/is bullshit. There weren't enough resources to burn bodies, it would have taken shit-tons of wood to incinerate the bones into ashes. Face it pal, it wasn't like you've been told, not at all my friend.
The Nazis actually helped many Jews relocate to Palestine, it was known as the transfer program and ran for years until the start of the war.
I guess that makes the Nazis complicit in two holocausts.
Not that I know of. I suspect Google's been disappearing unpleasant facts on their News product for a while now.
"The holocaust never happened" is not an unpleasant fact - it's an out-and-out lie.
Which holocaust? The Jewish one or the Palestinian one or the Armenian one or the Native American one?
Which of these are we not allowed to say never happened? I know many Israelis would like to deny the Palestinian one and many 'Murcans would like to deny the Native American one. And of course the Turks would like to deny the Armenian one.
Are you going to pick and choose?
The UK is going to need to save money what with the Brexit crash. Mind you
There is always money for governments.
They just tax more.
GB has much lower tax when we have in Sweden.
Brexit will mean theres less overall income for the UK government to tax...
why not start with the US?
The US doesn't care much for energy preservation, the environment and so on.
It's not seen as a problem and a conspiracy in Europe by normal people and political leaders.
The UK is going to need to save money what with the Brexit crash. Mind you, after Brexit Google could probably buy the UK.
Yes. We get it. You are an idiot. No need to drive the point home further.
You are just systemdphobic
He said after the contract was signed. Presumably all permits would have been worked out by that time.
Also, while he's waiting on the permits and contract to be signed he could be loading up all the needed equipment, getting his people ready, making arrangements for passage on ships and/or planes, and getting the logistics down. Before the ink is dry he'd already have the stuff moving so if, as others above had said, it takes 20 days to get to Australia by boat, that leaves him 80 days to do the work.
Ambitious? Certainly. Doable? Only one way to find out.
yeah then theres customs clearance! Good luck with that, Elon! Especially given that the Aussies will probably deliberately hold it up to get their free batteries.
If there's a rush, they'd hire an entire ship to do the LA to SYD run in under 2 weeks. If that's not possible, then air freight would be trivial. There are a number of C-130s in civilian hands, and you can pack quite a bit in one of those.
Its about 7500km LA to SYD
Range on a c-130 is 3791km with max payload.
Are there any civilian aircraft that can refuel a c-130 in flight?
Prepare the land, build the slabs, put all the supporting infrastructure in place.
Sure, but all of that can be done while the batteries are in transit. The batteries are manufactured near Reno, so they would be shipped out of either Oakland or Long Beach. Transit time to Adelaide would be about 30 days at standard speed. A faster ship would cost more, and there is no point if the infrastructure isn't ready. 30 days is enough time for a slab and metal frame building. Ideally, you want the batteries installed at distributed locations near point of use.
30 days to actually physically move them.
Add another 30 days at either end for customs clearance so thats 90 days. In fact if the Aussies know what they are doing they'd deliberately slow down the customs clearance so that it can't possibly be completed in under 100 days.
If the batteries will be made in Nevada, and shipped to Australia, I'm curious to know how they plan to transport them. It seems to me the most logical way would be by boat but could they get there quickly enough? If these are lithium ion batteries would it be possible to ship them by air given all the shipping restrictions that are placed on lithium ion batteries currently? If they go by boat how would they be packed to minimize the chance of a catastrophe en route?
What I'd do is, once they agree in principle, ship them ahead of signing the actual contract.
Why couldn't they hash & store each character separately - so it's effectively multiple short passwords?
Better yet, rot 13 each character twice.
In the goal of increased security, it's exceedingly unlikely that a larger bank is storing anything password related in plain text. Banks are beyond that stuff these days. Procedures and software are audited, etc etc - nobody but mom and pop sites would be able to fly under the radar of the harm to reputation that would occur if it turned out that your bank passwords were being stored in plaintext.
The banks probably aren't using systemd. If they did and systemd added password management to its toolkit I bet the banks would have better security!
Aren't there any consumer protection laws that can help you in the US?
In North America there tend to be vendor protection laws rather than consumer protection laws. Good luck taking something defective back to the store; many shops have signs up saying "All sales are final, no returns or exchanges".
On average, twice as many whites are shot by police than blacks.
Thats an interesting statistic especially since there are WAY more than twice as many whites in the USA as there are blacks. 72% vs 12%
You are saying HALF as many blacks are shot by police than whites. Thats very disproportionate shooting of blacks by police.
In New Zealand, police Taser guns are fitted with a camera that starts recording video as soon as the Taser is switched on. Footage of some incidents has led to police being criticised for their excessive and illegal use of Tasers.
Weapon of choice: Are Tasers being abused? http://www.stuff.co.nz/good-re...
Police Taser use against man ruled excessive http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/n...
Do you get ACC coverage if the cops tase you?
Consider that most states never stop a cop from being a cop there is no off duty. When they no longer have any more powers than any other citizen can they remove the camera.
Just what powers do you think a beat Cop has that you don't?
The power to shoot you dead without being effectively investigated. Especially if you are non-white. Though in states with a 'stand your ground' law this point is moot.
It's not hard if camera video unavailable for any reason it should be no different than civil court if you refuse to produce records you assume they show things in the worst light possible.
This means by law a fatal shooting without camera footage means the cops is automatically tried and convicted for murder unless other footage is available so show his innocence. Oddly they will start insuring their camera's work.
Guilty until proven innocent?
That could actually work.
For everyone else its innocent until proven guilty.
For people like politicians, cops, lawyers its the other way around. I mean thats what ordinary people assume anyway, right?
Cops have a right to privacy too, to some extent. That doesn't mean the camera shouldn't be always on, but it does mean that there should be some rules and regulations to protect the privacy of everyone being filmed, including the cops themselves. Rules that determine when the footage may be used and for what purposes. For example: not to be used for job performance reviews, nor to check how many donuts each cop consumes on the job. Only to be used for training purposes with the consent of everyone in the video (or properly anonymized). Proper process for using the videos in after-action reviews. Access to the videos to be regulated and audited. Etc. The cops should be certain that if they harass someone or use undue violence, it will be on film and can be used against them. But they should also be certain that the videos will only be used as evidence in case of complaints or interventions where some violence occurred, and that they won't be done for publicly picking their nose or not being polite enough to a member of the public.
Simple solution to the problem of them forgetting to turn the camera on: Make it so they can forget to turn it off.
Of course, proven police misconduct is so rare
Have you ever wonder why so much of the misconduct allegations have not been proven? If you are predisposed to think ALL the accusations are false, and ALL the police officers are saints ALL the time, you are biased.
I saw no such predisposition. Ponder the difference between "rare" and "non-existent" or "so much" and "all".
Its essentially the same apparatus that investigates them as protects them. It cannot be relied on. Its like investigating top politicians for organised child abuse (as they are trying to do in the UK and not really getting anywhere).
If they got nothing to hide they have nothing to worry about.
Its a cop in the USA. If they do something illegal I'd assume nothing happens.
Some English people feel terribly distressed when they see foreigners wearing their foreign clothing in the street.
Not me. I'd rather be able to recognise a foreigner.
Indeed, there should be legislation to ensure that all French men wear a beret, striped jersey and a string of onions around their necks while visiting the UK. Can't be too careful!
That is truly one of the most desperate and incompetent attempts at a hybrid strawman/trolling that I can recall seeing...
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it!
The sad part is I've actually heard my English relatives suggest such a thing (the clothing thing). They actually feel really infuriated when they see people wearing foreign clothes on the streets of England. I'm not making it up, I wish I were. And they are not alone in this. Many English people really are terribly xenophobic.
Didn't the UK just vote to get away from the non-white EU?
Right, because the UK did so want to be part of the white EU but not the non-white EU (mainly Spain, Greece and Italy).
Oh wait, do Slavs count as white...?