Strangely, that argument actually makes sense for roads, where it makes no sense for the Internet. It's been shown that usage fees are a far superior model for road maintenance, and it's also been shown that the higher the speed, the more damage done to the road.
Of course, back on topic - electrical signals, or pulses of light do virtually no damage to the equipment they are passing through, so that argument doesn't hold weight.
He probably was correct that he was the only one left in Nevada - he had that sewn up by a big margin, and the rest of the candidates moved on to Super Tuesday states.
Saying someone got on a plane and left Nevada is very different from saying that someone has packed it in completely...
Abolishment of all regulation is just as ridiculous as those saying that enforcing Net Neutrality is some kind of draconian over-regulation. Nobody is calling for that, because there are many regulations that are just common sense, and prevent bad actors from doing shit they shouldn't ever do.
Yeah, because the Democratic Queen's Coronation isn't funded by big business at all. Absolutely not CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs, DLA Piper, Morgan Stanley, or JPMorgan Chase.
I don't know, it's kind of fun to think of Arizona as cranky old curmudgeons that just refuse to get with the program. If everyone started doing that, it would be far less special.
A. The encryption system is such that you can't remove the data image from the phone without rendering the pinlock unusable, as it only unlocks part of the key, with the other part being generated from that phone's specific UID, which is not documented anywhere, and cannot be retrieved from the hardware. B. They don't have the couple thousand millennia it would conceivably take to "guess" an AES-256 key, and they can no longer do the much easier pin lock because of A. C. The FBI doesn't employ the hardware and software engineers necessary to completely reverse engineer an iPhone 5C, including the custom chips and firmware, nor do they have the budget necessary for such an undertaking.
The fishy smell is that you don't have a clue as to how this works.
Yeah, how dare they avail themselves of the legal system in order to fight a legal order from a judge within the legal system. What a bunch of USA-bashing terrorist-conspiring fascists!
Seriously, take a big step back and think about what you've said there. Because they don't fall in lock step behind some district court judge without question, they all deserve to be sent to prison? Have you even READ the Constitution, or any history behind that document's creation, or the people who wrote it?
If China had already asked for this, and received it, then Apple would be perjuring themselves when they tell the courts that such a version of iOS doesn't exist, and has never existed.
That's how we know. No lawyer is going to risk his career (fines, jail time, disbarment) just to keep the Apple a bit shinier.
Nobody ever claimed the iPhone 5C was "unhackable" - to wit, that is exactly what this argument is about. It is hackable, and the FBI want to compel Apple to do it.
Yeah, or he's working with an incredibly incomplete data set, which his model is based on. Considering that we know roughly the square root of jack shit about even our own corner of the galaxy, much less the rest of the universe, I think I know which side I'd put my money on.
Yeah, except that when you live by the polls, you aren't a leader. The President is supposed to be a leadership position, and if you're constantly worried about your numbers, then you're not leading - by definition you are following. A leader takes a position on an issue, popularity be damned, and brings people to their position by way of the merits of that position.
It's also important to remember the past, which is why the Electoral College exists to begin with. The guys that just got done leading a popular revolution in order to create a country were big on local representation, and even representation so that there was proportional representation. They didn't want to see a situation like they just cast off, where a larger population was under the thumb of a minority. So they came up with the idea of the House of Representatives, which is re-apportioned based on the Census every 10 years. The electoral votes apportioned to states follows exactly with the apportionment of seats in Congress - each state gets an electoral vote for each seat in Congress that it has - 2 Senators each, and 1 vote for each Representative.
This is why lately the loser of the elections like to bemoan the "popular vote" even though they still lost - it is possible to win the popular vote, but lose in the electoral college - you can run up the score in California and New York, but an 80% vote in California is still equal to a 50.1% vote in the Electoral College.
I almost hope that Trump wins the nomination process, just so it will burn the current GOP to the ground. And I say that as a registered Republican, who is ashamed of what this party has become.
Anyone smart enough to be a proper President, doesn't wan the job; it's 4 years of eating a never-empty bowl of shit, even though it's served in a very nice silver bowl.
Just remember with Hillary that whatever polls well, will be her stance on any issue. She spends more money on polling than the entire Republican clown car combined, when they are supposedly the party of corporate money interest.
But I'm sure she'll do something about Citizens United besides give speeches and hold fundraisers about how they need to outspend the Koch Brothers in order to get a fair shake; don't look at how Bernie is making waves without all that.
I have no doubt in my mind that Clinton is a very smart person - that shows through in the debates. I just don't fucking trust her at all, and am particularly concerned that the Democrats might be about to nominate someone that is a short-hair away from indictment.
I won't even mention 2008 because they could have ran Jesus Christ and he would have lost because of the damage Bush did to the Republican brand.
Unfortunately, they're too sane to get past the primary voters. The only thing that fixes the GOP at this point, is a Trump nomination which induces the spark that burns the whole party to the ground, and then it can be rebuilt from the ashes to be what it was in the early 90s before the hard-right bank into the evangelicals and nutters' arms.
He was already a Fox News commentator, and stopped doing that 3 years before running for Governor of Ohio. That also coincided with when Fox News slid completely from "barely acceptable news" into "full-blown nutso propoganda machine" though the two events were only tangentially related.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but I'm sure the Democrats will fix it. No wait, Time Warner is a Top 10 donor for Hillary, underneath 5 wall street banks.
But clearly this is a Republican problem.
Strangely, that argument actually makes sense for roads, where it makes no sense for the Internet. It's been shown that usage fees are a far superior model for road maintenance, and it's also been shown that the higher the speed, the more damage done to the road.
Of course, back on topic - electrical signals, or pulses of light do virtually no damage to the equipment they are passing through, so that argument doesn't hold weight.
He probably was correct that he was the only one left in Nevada - he had that sewn up by a big margin, and the rest of the candidates moved on to Super Tuesday states.
Saying someone got on a plane and left Nevada is very different from saying that someone has packed it in completely...
Abolishment of all regulation is just as ridiculous as those saying that enforcing Net Neutrality is some kind of draconian over-regulation. Nobody is calling for that, because there are many regulations that are just common sense, and prevent bad actors from doing shit they shouldn't ever do.
Yeah, because the Democratic Queen's Coronation isn't funded by big business at all. Absolutely not CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs, DLA Piper, Morgan Stanley, or JPMorgan Chase.
Fuck off, you partisan hack.
I don't know, it's kind of fun to think of Arizona as cranky old curmudgeons that just refuse to get with the program. If everyone started doing that, it would be far less special.
It all depends on scale.
To that granite uplift in Utah, 4 million years is the blink of an eye!
Probably because:
A. The encryption system is such that you can't remove the data image from the phone without rendering the pinlock unusable, as it only unlocks part of the key, with the other part being generated from that phone's specific UID, which is not documented anywhere, and cannot be retrieved from the hardware.
B. They don't have the couple thousand millennia it would conceivably take to "guess" an AES-256 key, and they can no longer do the much easier pin lock because of A.
C. The FBI doesn't employ the hardware and software engineers necessary to completely reverse engineer an iPhone 5C, including the custom chips and firmware, nor do they have the budget necessary for such an undertaking.
The fishy smell is that you don't have a clue as to how this works.
Yeah, how dare they avail themselves of the legal system in order to fight a legal order from a judge within the legal system. What a bunch of USA-bashing terrorist-conspiring fascists!
Seriously, take a big step back and think about what you've said there. Because they don't fall in lock step behind some district court judge without question, they all deserve to be sent to prison? Have you even READ the Constitution, or any history behind that document's creation, or the people who wrote it?
If China had already asked for this, and received it, then Apple would be perjuring themselves when they tell the courts that such a version of iOS doesn't exist, and has never existed.
That's how we know. No lawyer is going to risk his career (fines, jail time, disbarment) just to keep the Apple a bit shinier.
Nobody ever claimed the iPhone 5C was "unhackable" - to wit, that is exactly what this argument is about. It is hackable, and the FBI want to compel Apple to do it.
Because there is this concept of a "legal precedent."
You're a certified fucking moron if you think that this case only applies to Apple, or people with Apple devices.
Yeah, or he's working with an incredibly incomplete data set, which his model is based on. Considering that we know roughly the square root of jack shit about even our own corner of the galaxy, much less the rest of the universe, I think I know which side I'd put my money on.
They do have a stake in creating press releases, for the sake of creating press releases though.
And this article and subsequent conversation is the direct result of that.
Yeah, except that when you live by the polls, you aren't a leader. The President is supposed to be a leadership position, and if you're constantly worried about your numbers, then you're not leading - by definition you are following. A leader takes a position on an issue, popularity be damned, and brings people to their position by way of the merits of that position.
Because it's automatically okay if people from the other party did it too?
Nope. Indictments all around. We are a nation of laws, and should act like it. Sell partisan horseshit somewhere else, we're all stocked up here.
It's also important to remember the past, which is why the Electoral College exists to begin with. The guys that just got done leading a popular revolution in order to create a country were big on local representation, and even representation so that there was proportional representation. They didn't want to see a situation like they just cast off, where a larger population was under the thumb of a minority. So they came up with the idea of the House of Representatives, which is re-apportioned based on the Census every 10 years. The electoral votes apportioned to states follows exactly with the apportionment of seats in Congress - each state gets an electoral vote for each seat in Congress that it has - 2 Senators each, and 1 vote for each Representative.
This is why lately the loser of the elections like to bemoan the "popular vote" even though they still lost - it is possible to win the popular vote, but lose in the electoral college - you can run up the score in California and New York, but an 80% vote in California is still equal to a 50.1% vote in the Electoral College.
What, voting 'present' on every issue that isn't a unanimous vote isn't your idea of leadership?
I almost hope that Trump wins the nomination process, just so it will burn the current GOP to the ground. And I say that as a registered Republican, who is ashamed of what this party has become.
So Trump has exactly the same conviction of belief as Hillary then - change your beliefs every time a new poll comes out.
Wonderful.
Anyone smart enough to be a proper President, doesn't wan the job; it's 4 years of eating a never-empty bowl of shit, even though it's served in a very nice silver bowl.
Just remember with Hillary that whatever polls well, will be her stance on any issue. She spends more money on polling than the entire Republican clown car combined, when they are supposedly the party of corporate money interest.
But I'm sure she'll do something about Citizens United besides give speeches and hold fundraisers about how they need to outspend the Koch Brothers in order to get a fair shake; don't look at how Bernie is making waves without all that.
I have no doubt in my mind that Clinton is a very smart person - that shows through in the debates. I just don't fucking trust her at all, and am particularly concerned that the Democrats might be about to nominate someone that is a short-hair away from indictment.
They do:
Jon Huntsman - 2012
John Kasich - 2016
I won't even mention 2008 because they could have ran Jesus Christ and he would have lost because of the damage Bush did to the Republican brand.
Unfortunately, they're too sane to get past the primary voters. The only thing that fixes the GOP at this point, is a Trump nomination which induces the spark that burns the whole party to the ground, and then it can be rebuilt from the ashes to be what it was in the early 90s before the hard-right bank into the evangelicals and nutters' arms.
He was already a Fox News commentator, and stopped doing that 3 years before running for Governor of Ohio. That also coincided with when Fox News slid completely from "barely acceptable news" into "full-blown nutso propoganda machine" though the two events were only tangentially related.