"The department also has a policy of not taking unnecessary action close in time to Election Day that might influence an electionâ(TM)s outcome. These rules have been followed during Republican and Democratic administrations."
Clinton's campaign made great hay with this particular October Surprise. That was the election where Clinton displaced Bush, denying him a second term and giving us the FIRST Clinton Presidency.
Ross Perot pulled down more than three times the difference between Clinton and Bush. Clinton was 7% short of a popular-vote majority.
Any bets on whether at least a third of Perot's votes, or at least enough of those (plus conservative voters who just didn't vote for president) to flip a few states and their electoral votes, were people who would have voted for Bush but were disgusted by this and voting for Perot as a protest?
Did everyone suddenly forget how to use pen and paper for records?
Do they not have paper they can write on till the computer system is back up and then retroactively enter the data in?
Paper and pen records started being replaced as far back as the '60 (when my father, an administrator in a major hospital, replaced hand-copying the patients' name and medical record number onto each form - using up more of the nurses' time than actually caring for the patient - with imprinting this info using a credit-card-style hospital card and a credit-card-bill imprinter).
They take too much of the health-care professionals' time, leading to enormously increased cost, reduced and delayed treatment, and increased medical errors.
Switching back to paper and pen records and tracking, on short notice, is NOT an option. When the computers are down, as with a major disaster emergency, patient history is no longer available and treatment must be done solely on currently-visible signs and symptoms. (So most patients are offloaded to sites where the I.T. equipment is still up.)
The major (unanswered) question here which will really matter is how more than standard materials these solar roof tiles will cost.
Actually, it's the INSTALLED price difference that matters. Labor is about 60% of the cost of a current-technology new roof, about half-again the material costs.
If, compared to the type of roofing that would have been used instead, the new roof (even with the added wiring) is easier/quicker (and thus cheaper) to install (and repair, since warranty costs may be included in roofing projects), the project could come out the same, or even less expensive, despite moderately more expensive material.
There's also the lifetime issue: Most roofing material wears out with time. If the solar cells don't degrade too rapidly, the glass-based roofing tiles might end up with a substantially longer lifetime than the just-a-roof alternative. (Computing the relative cost of that involves interest rates and amortization.)
The as-installed difference (in current and future cost) is the real cost of the power from the roof. Even if the material is somewhat more expensive, that still could come out zero, or even negative.
Great concept, but the technology isn't quite there yet.
Actually, the technology - both photovoltaic and battery - has just gotten there over the last couple years. (Inverters have been there a while but have been improving as well, thanks to Moore's Law.)
It's good to see Musk trying to deploy it commercially.
It's easy to fall into the "It's always 12 (or whatever) years out" fallacy. Sometimes the new inventions DO lead to a practical design and it becomes profitable to actually build and and sell it now, even if it will be obsoleted by an improved version in a couple years.
One of the big drivers of battery (and inverter) technology, by the way, is electric automobiles. Musk has been honing the bleeding edge of that curve for quite a while now. With photovoltaic generation having "crossed over" grid power price-performance - even without subsidies - for much of the potential sites in the continental US, merging it with the new ultra-efficient, ultra-fast battery technologies and high-end, smart, peak-power-tracking/charge control/inverter designs to form a total system makes good business sense.
Please stop linking to or even mentioning Wikipedia. Starting now. See how good it feels to bask in a flow of information free of ass hat manipulation!
What makes you think other information sources - encyclopedias, news outlets, books, etc. - aren't subject to "ass hat manipulation"?
At least with Wikipedia the information gets a chance to get out (and into the page history) before some ass hat gatekeeper decides to shut it down or distort it beyond recognition.
Are you actually asserting that demand is level 24 hours a day?
It can come very close.
In California, for example, a very large part of the demand is pumping water through aquaducts. By placing reservoirs along the way and doing most of the pumping during times of low electrical demand, California electrical utilities used to be able to keep the power demand nearly constant - and can still keep it much more level than in many other places.
Also: Coal plants can provide baseload, while wind and solar together do a great job of shaving peaks: Higher wind corresponds to higher HVAC load as well as higher generation. Solar not only tracks the air conditioning requirements but also comes close to tracking the daily load peaking - and solar plus wind tracks it even better, since the lake effect makes an afternoon-through-evening hump in wind generation.
at a power output proportional to the CUBE of the windspeed.
is this relevant somehow?
Yes, very. The steeply up-bending curve means that wind generators that are able to make use of high winds - which only happen for a tiny fraction of the time - have a peak power rating far above the average power they are able to produce in normal winds. So the peak power vastly overstates their average contribution.
The issue is that power capacity comparisons overstate the total amount of energy you get out of the renewable generation equipment over the long haul because coal generation can run near capacity all the time and renewables (excluding water power) only a small part of the time.
I'm quite supportive of renewable energy. (I'm a major participant on one of the renewable energy tech discussion boards, too.) But while it's very GOOD that renewable power has passed coal in power capacity, even with near-ideal load-levelling storage, it will take about another factor of three before it surpasses coal in providing usable energy to the loads.
... they overtake coal for amount generated per unit time.
Renewables may have higher total peak, but coal plants have level output and can run 24/7, while sun is only about a third of the day and wind varies with the weather - at a power output proportional to the CUBE of the windspeed.
LTE is already pretty darn fast, so losing a little performance isn't going to make that big of a deal. It's not as if you can torrent to your hearts content without killing your cell phone bill.
The issue isn't just speed. It's also range.
At any given speed, the Qualcom can support it at substantially lower signal levels. 6ish dB in a lot of cases, a bit less in some, enormously more in others.
Look at the graphs in TFA. In addition to some specific pathologies that penalize the Intel chip farther, the bulk of the graph has the drop off looking similar but with the Qualcom shfited 5 or 6 dB to the right. (Those squares are 5 dB wide.)
6 dB is four times the effective signal strength, which corresponds to twice the range. That maps into four times the area served at that speed from a single cell tower (important in sparsely-served areas), deeper penetration into buildings and the like (in more heavily-covered areas). It can also map into more data pushed before a given area and channel allocation's bandwidth is saturated. 3 dB corresponds to twice the effective signal strength, 1.4ish times the radius, twice the area served.
If the modems were equivalent and the problem just the layout of the board and antenna, you'd expect the two curves to be the same shape but just offset. The shape is substantially different, so (board issues or not) something else is going on.
The crime is making orders with the intent to cancel before being fulfilled.... The intent to cancel, in order to create a false market perception, is the crime.... a pattern of cancelled-while-unfulfilled orders, combined with other orders that profit from the market perception that the unfulfilled orders create, is a very clear establishment of such intent.
Is it also an establishment of intent if you (as a large financial firm) deploy, in actual trading on real markets with real money, an algorithm that exhibits such behavior? If, in addition, you KEEP it deployed even after its behavior is noticed and complained about in public media of the sort likely to be read by trading professionals?
And it is something that the traders at Goldman Sachs can make a fortune without doing.
But it's something that they can make a BIGGER fortune by DOING. And something that can count toward the rise of individuals and groups through the corporate ladder and pay scale.
While don't recall if G.S. was specifically one of the organizations complained about (and am not going to spend the time right now digging through archives to check), I DO recall com"plaints about high-speed traders taking advantage of the cancellation features of the online market engines in just this way.
One of the advantages of shaving milliseconds off the communication delays and algorithms that was specifically mentioned (once the pattern was observed) was the ability to send an order and a cancellation in rapid enough succession that it could not be pounced on (and thus didn't really risk money), sending price signals that tricked competing, slightly less high-speed or well-tuned, algorithms into making other bad trades from which their operators lost and the perpetrators gained.
The only poll that showed that was the LA Times poll,...
Which "that" are you referring to?
- If it's who's ahead, you have some point - though the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times "Daybreak" poll is NOT the only one showing Trump ahead by at least a small margin. (In fact it shows them neck-and-neck, crossing back-and-forth, and has Hillary up by 0.3% just now.)
- If it's how the musdslinging is changing the voters' preferences, it's not fully over that poll's one-to-two-week report delay + smoothing yet.
In particular (for both cases) I note that this morning's Rasmussen daily tracking poll has Trump slightly ahead AND is starting to have any dings to Trump from the spate of allegations within horizon. Yet they see no such dings (and comment about their absence in the accompanying analysis).
[USC/L.A. Times] is a bit notorious because it polls the same people at each iteration.
It's also notorious for being far more accurate when it comes to predicting both the winner and the margin. (The latter can turn into the former if the race is very close, as this one is.) That repeated sampling of varying subsets of the same group is a part of the methodology that they credit for avoiding certain distortions that affect other polls.
The rationalle is explained on their web site. Give it a look.
Honest question: in what use case does systemd bother you?
I'm in a startup, still on angel funding and strapped for resources, building a multi-layered platform. One of the four-or-more layers is implemented on a machine about the power of a smartphone/credit-card-computer in the raspberry/beaglebone/etc. class. That layer needs an O.S., and it's internet-facing, so it needs to be secure - and auditable.
Posix-compatible OSes, such as Linux, should be ideal. But there's that little matter of being reasonably sure that they're not full of security holes or reliability issues, and doing so on a shoestring, using a handfull of people who have a LOT of OTHER stuff to do in order to get through the market window before the wolf gets to our door.
Even if systemd were solid as a rock and the best thing in init systems since pre-slicing was applied to bread, it's an extra complication - with its fingers in a lot of pies. That makes security auditing much harder and more time consuming. And THAT makes it "more expensive than money" for us - to the point that the current move of Linux versions to systemd may drive us to abandon Linux entirely for something else. (OpenBSD would be one contender. A plethora of other, stripped-down-to-minimal-functionality, OSes also come to mind.) (The main reason we haven't done so already is that we can't afford that effort, either, until our concept's proven and we must bite the security bullet in order to ship.)
One of the great things about pre-systemd Unix and unix-like systems was the design philosophy, which explicitly drove strong modularity, with simple modules that did single jobs and were easy to check - or encapsulate. (This was one of its big advantages over things like Windows, where all the apps were in bed with each other and any security hole in one became a security hole in many.) Systemd violates that philosophy.
Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing...
The main thing I got out of it was: He said
- he'd made a pass at a married woman,
- she'd turned him down,
- and he took "no" for an answer.
What a pity the Clintons don't seem to do that.... what he is now accused of,
It's the last four weeks of the campaign. There is no longer time for the truth of accusations to come out before election day. Now is the time when, historically, dishonest politicians and/or their supporters have a track record of making up believable lies and broadcasting them.
So now is the time that I don't believe smear stories - that don't have solid, PRE-EXISTING, evidence to support them - about candidates in a tough race.
Maybe he did something bad, maybe not. But the spate of accusations certainly seem to be nicely tuned to a narrative based on the recording. The many accusations allegedly took place years ago. If true, they could have been published months ago. Why are they only coming out now, just after the classic cut-in time for fake-story smears? The timing certainly makes them LOOK like they are lies, constructed and carefully tuned for use in the last weeks of the campaign.
his campaign wouldn't be crashing and burning.
The last polls I saw (from just after the recent debate, and substantially after the release of the recording, but before the series of accusations) had him pulling ahead by a substantial margin - like by almost the total of the "undecideds".
My impression is that the only crashing and burning going on is on the part of the Republican politicians who took this opportunity to break their agreements and oppose Trump - only to find he was the one with the bigger army of supporters.
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
The murder of Seth Rich, along with the rumor that he was Wikileak's source for the DNC leaks, puts Assange in a tough position. Whether Seth WAS his source or not, public perception that Wikileaks sources may be killed and their leaked information thus suppressed could make his sources dry up.
To counter this he has to create the perception that, if you try to plug the leak by plugging the source, it will result in the leaks being more extreme and damaging, rather than less.
One way to do that is to publish more than would normally be published, and redact it less.
Perhaps that is what is going on: As with rule 804, where hearsay from a deceased person becomes admissible, insuring that leaks from (or perceived to be from) a murder victim are extreme might help make murder of leakers less likely.
Good to know.
- How does one use it?
- How do you KNOW no systemd hair is still tangled in your system?
- Do all the components work correctly when you opt out of systemd? Nothing breaks or performs substantially more poorly?
- Are they all supported as well in both environments? No obscure "gotcha"s?
There is no free market when the government 'gets' to license spectrum.
And doubly so then they consider it "competition" when there are TWO suppliers:
- With ONE supplier (monopoly) the incentive is to charge as much as possible - until you're driving away more in customer revenue from people who do without or with less than you gain from higher prices.
- With TWO suppliers (duopoly) the market forces lead rational players to adjust prices to divide the market roughly evenly and continue to charge monopolistic prices. Price signals are enough, no forbidden collusion required.
- With THREE suppliers you're starting to get instability. If the big two make it too hard on the little guy, he may cut prices to try to grab market share, leading to a price war that drives prices down toward cost-of-goods-plus-modest-margin. Or they may manage a balancing act and prices stay high.
- With FOUR OR MORE suppliers the high-priced equilibrium is almost certain to collapse, and it gets progressively more unstable with more players.
So government communications regulatiory policy - at least in the US - is explicitly encouraging duopoly markets and monopolistic pricing structures.
Another trick to make disasters look bigger is to denominate them in dollars of damage. This boosts them in two ways:
- It multiplies them by inflation. (They're talking "decades". Damage costs of $100 in four decades ago dollars, in current dollars come to $219.46.)
- It ignores increases in target size: How many more, and more expensive, houses, vacation/retirement homes, suburbs, and other pricey buildings and infrastructure have been built out into formerly "wild" areas - still subject to wildfires - in the last 40 years?
We were warned that this trick would be used to inflate the damage from Hurricane Matthew. Now here it is being used to inflate the perception of the severity of wildfires.
Slashdot Mirror
"The department also has a policy of not taking unnecessary action close in time to Election Day that might influence an electionâ(TM)s outcome. These rules have been followed during Republican and Democratic administrations."
So I guess it was "necessary" for the FBI to leak, four days before the election that George (H. W.) Bush was himself in-the-know on Iran-Contra?
Clinton's campaign made great hay with this particular October Surprise. That was the election where Clinton displaced Bush, denying him a second term and giving us the FIRST Clinton Presidency.
Ross Perot pulled down more than three times the difference between Clinton and Bush. Clinton was 7% short of a popular-vote majority.
Any bets on whether at least a third of Perot's votes, or at least enough of those (plus conservative voters who just didn't vote for president) to flip a few states and their electoral votes, were people who would have voted for Bush but were disgusted by this and voting for Perot as a protest?
Did everyone suddenly forget how to use pen and paper for records?
Do they not have paper they can write on till the computer system is back up and then retroactively enter the data in?
Paper and pen records started being replaced as far back as the '60 (when my father, an administrator in a major hospital, replaced hand-copying the patients' name and medical record number onto each form - using up more of the nurses' time than actually caring for the patient - with imprinting this info using a credit-card-style hospital card and a credit-card-bill imprinter).
They take too much of the health-care professionals' time, leading to enormously increased cost, reduced and delayed treatment, and increased medical errors.
Switching back to paper and pen records and tracking, on short notice, is NOT an option. When the computers are down, as with a major disaster emergency, patient history is no longer available and treatment must be done solely on currently-visible signs and symptoms. (So most patients are offloaded to sites where the I.T. equipment is still up.)
The major (unanswered) question here which will really matter is how more than standard materials these solar roof tiles will cost.
Actually, it's the INSTALLED price difference that matters. Labor is about 60% of the cost of a current-technology new roof, about half-again the material costs.
If, compared to the type of roofing that would have been used instead, the new roof (even with the added wiring) is easier/quicker (and thus cheaper) to install (and repair, since warranty costs may be included in roofing projects), the project could come out the same, or even less expensive, despite moderately more expensive material.
There's also the lifetime issue: Most roofing material wears out with time. If the solar cells don't degrade too rapidly, the glass-based roofing tiles might end up with a substantially longer lifetime than the just-a-roof alternative. (Computing the relative cost of that involves interest rates and amortization.)
The as-installed difference (in current and future cost) is the real cost of the power from the roof. Even if the material is somewhat more expensive, that still could come out zero, or even negative.
Great concept, but the technology isn't quite there yet.
Actually, the technology - both photovoltaic and battery - has just gotten there over the last couple years. (Inverters have been there a while but have been improving as well, thanks to Moore's Law.)
It's good to see Musk trying to deploy it commercially.
It's easy to fall into the "It's always 12 (or whatever) years out" fallacy. Sometimes the new inventions DO lead to a practical design and it becomes profitable to actually build and and sell it now, even if it will be obsoleted by an improved version in a couple years.
One of the big drivers of battery (and inverter) technology, by the way, is electric automobiles. Musk has been honing the bleeding edge of that curve for quite a while now. With photovoltaic generation having "crossed over" grid power price-performance - even without subsidies - for much of the potential sites in the continental US, merging it with the new ultra-efficient, ultra-fast battery technologies and high-end, smart, peak-power-tracking/charge control/inverter designs to form a total system makes good business sense.
Please stop linking to or even mentioning Wikipedia. Starting now. See how good it feels to bask in a flow of information free of ass hat manipulation!
What makes you think other information sources - encyclopedias, news outlets, books, etc. - aren't subject to "ass hat manipulation"?
At least with Wikipedia the information gets a chance to get out (and into the page history) before some ass hat gatekeeper decides to shut it down or distort it beyond recognition.
Are you actually asserting that demand is level 24 hours a day?
It can come very close.
In California, for example, a very large part of the demand is pumping water through aquaducts. By placing reservoirs along the way and doing most of the pumping during times of low electrical demand, California electrical utilities used to be able to keep the power demand nearly constant - and can still keep it much more level than in many other places.
Also: Coal plants can provide baseload, while wind and solar together do a great job of shaving peaks: Higher wind corresponds to higher HVAC load as well as higher generation. Solar not only tracks the air conditioning requirements but also comes close to tracking the daily load peaking - and solar plus wind tracks it even better, since the lake effect makes an afternoon-through-evening hump in wind generation.
at a power output proportional to the CUBE of the windspeed.
is this relevant somehow?
Yes, very. The steeply up-bending curve means that wind generators that are able to make use of high winds - which only happen for a tiny fraction of the time - have a peak power rating far above the average power they are able to produce in normal winds. So the peak power vastly overstates their average contribution.
Moving the goal posts.
Nope. The article's author apparently thought the offence's 35 yard line was the goal post. I was just pointing out where they ACTUALLY are. B-)
We need about another seven first-downs to get there. But we ARE on our way.
The power can be stored,
The issue is not that the power can be stored.
The issue is that power capacity comparisons overstate the total amount of energy you get out of the renewable generation equipment over the long haul because coal generation can run near capacity all the time and renewables (excluding water power) only a small part of the time.
I'm quite supportive of renewable energy. (I'm a major participant on one of the renewable energy tech discussion boards, too.) But while it's very GOOD that renewable power has passed coal in power capacity, even with near-ideal load-levelling storage, it will take about another factor of three before it surpasses coal in providing usable energy to the loads.
... they overtake coal for amount generated per unit time.
Renewables may have higher total peak, but coal plants have level output and can run 24/7, while sun is only about a third of the day and wind varies with the weather - at a power output proportional to the CUBE of the windspeed.
LTE is already pretty darn fast, so losing a little performance isn't going to make that big of a deal. It's not as if you can torrent to your hearts content without killing your cell phone bill.
The issue isn't just speed. It's also range.
At any given speed, the Qualcom can support it at substantially lower signal levels. 6ish dB in a lot of cases, a bit less in some, enormously more in others.
Look at the graphs in TFA. In addition to some specific pathologies that penalize the Intel chip farther, the bulk of the graph has the drop off looking similar but with the Qualcom shfited 5 or 6 dB to the right. (Those squares are 5 dB wide.)
6 dB is four times the effective signal strength, which corresponds to twice the range. That maps into four times the area served at that speed from a single cell tower (important in sparsely-served areas), deeper penetration into buildings and the like (in more heavily-covered areas). It can also map into more data pushed before a given area and channel allocation's bandwidth is saturated. 3 dB corresponds to twice the effective signal strength, 1.4ish times the radius, twice the area served.
If the modems were equivalent and the problem just the layout of the board and antenna, you'd expect the two curves to be the same shape but just offset. The shape is substantially different, so (board issues or not) something else is going on.
... is the BATF defecating bricks.
I was going to post something about "carbonated water into wine" but vodka is more accurate.
I wonder if you'd still get only ethanol for the product if you applied this to carbonated sodas or sparkling fruit juices.
Good point! I wonder if that trump audio has been modified!
Pull down a copy and run it through an audio spectrum analysis program. Splices stand out like a sore thumb on a frequency-vs-time graph.
Not perpetrators, opponents.
Once it's illegal, they're perpetrators. No more or less than con men or burglars.
The crime is making orders with the intent to cancel before being fulfilled. ... The intent to cancel, in order to create a false market perception, is the crime. ... a pattern of cancelled-while-unfulfilled orders, combined with other orders that profit from the market perception that the unfulfilled orders create, is a very clear establishment of such intent.
Is it also an establishment of intent if you (as a large financial firm) deploy, in actual trading on real markets with real money, an algorithm that exhibits such behavior? If, in addition, you KEEP it deployed even after its behavior is noticed and complained about in public media of the sort likely to be read by trading professionals?
And it is something that the traders at Goldman Sachs can make a fortune without doing.
But it's something that they can make a BIGGER fortune by DOING. And something that can count toward the rise of individuals and groups through the corporate ladder and pay scale.
While don't recall if G.S. was specifically one of the organizations complained about (and am not going to spend the time right now digging through archives to check), I DO recall com"plaints about high-speed traders taking advantage of the cancellation features of the online market engines in just this way.
One of the advantages of shaving milliseconds off the communication delays and algorithms that was specifically mentioned (once the pattern was observed) was the ability to send an order and a cancellation in rapid enough succession that it could not be pounced on (and thus didn't really risk money), sending price signals that tricked competing, slightly less high-speed or well-tuned, algorithms into making other bad trades from which their operators lost and the perpetrators gained.
The only poll that showed that was the LA Times poll, ...
Which "that" are you referring to?
- If it's who's ahead, you have some point - though the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times "Daybreak" poll is NOT the only one showing Trump ahead by at least a small margin. (In fact it shows them neck-and-neck, crossing back-and-forth, and has Hillary up by 0.3% just now.)
- If it's how the musdslinging is changing the voters' preferences, it's not fully over that poll's one-to-two-week report delay + smoothing yet.
In particular (for both cases) I note that this morning's Rasmussen daily tracking poll has Trump slightly ahead AND is starting to have any dings to Trump from the spate of allegations within horizon. Yet they see no such dings (and comment about their absence in the accompanying analysis).
[USC/L.A. Times] is a bit notorious because it polls the same people at each iteration.
It's also notorious for being far more accurate when it comes to predicting both the winner and the margin. (The latter can turn into the former if the race is very close, as this one is.) That repeated sampling of varying subsets of the same group is a part of the methodology that they credit for avoiding certain distortions that affect other polls.
The rationalle is explained on their web site. Give it a look.
Honest question: in what use case does systemd bother you?
I'm in a startup, still on angel funding and strapped for resources, building a multi-layered platform. One of the four-or-more layers is implemented on a machine about the power of a smartphone/credit-card-computer in the raspberry/beaglebone/etc. class. That layer needs an O.S., and it's internet-facing, so it needs to be secure - and auditable.
Posix-compatible OSes, such as Linux, should be ideal. But there's that little matter of being reasonably sure that they're not full of security holes or reliability issues, and doing so on a shoestring, using a handfull of people who have a LOT of OTHER stuff to do in order to get through the market window before the wolf gets to our door.
Even if systemd were solid as a rock and the best thing in init systems since pre-slicing was applied to bread, it's an extra complication - with its fingers in a lot of pies. That makes security auditing much harder and more time consuming. And THAT makes it "more expensive than money" for us - to the point that the current move of Linux versions to systemd may drive us to abandon Linux entirely for something else. (OpenBSD would be one contender. A plethora of other, stripped-down-to-minimal-functionality, OSes also come to mind.) (The main reason we haven't done so already is that we can't afford that effort, either, until our concept's proven and we must bite the security bullet in order to ship.)
One of the great things about pre-systemd Unix and unix-like systems was the design philosophy, which explicitly drove strong modularity, with simple modules that did single jobs and were easy to check - or encapsulate. (This was one of its big advantages over things like Windows, where all the apps were in bed with each other and any security hole in one became a security hole in many.) Systemd violates that philosophy.
Doesn't matter who it is, failure to redact passwords, phone numbers, etc, is just wrong.
As my wife said:
"THEY read all of OUR communications. Why shouldn't WE read all of THEIRS?"
Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing ...
The main thing I got out of it was: He said
- he'd made a pass at a married woman,
- she'd turned him down,
- and he took "no" for an answer.
What a pity the Clintons don't seem to do that. ... what he is now accused of,
It's the last four weeks of the campaign. There is no longer time for the truth of accusations to come out before election day. Now is the time when, historically, dishonest politicians and/or their supporters have a track record of making up believable lies and broadcasting them.
So now is the time that I don't believe smear stories - that don't have solid, PRE-EXISTING, evidence to support them - about candidates in a tough race.
Maybe he did something bad, maybe not. But the spate of accusations certainly seem to be nicely tuned to a narrative based on the recording. The many accusations allegedly took place years ago. If true, they could have been published months ago. Why are they only coming out now, just after the classic cut-in time for fake-story smears? The timing certainly makes them LOOK like they are lies, constructed and carefully tuned for use in the last weeks of the campaign.
his campaign wouldn't be crashing and burning.
The last polls I saw (from just after the recent debate, and substantially after the release of the recording, but before the series of accusations) had him pulling ahead by a substantial margin - like by almost the total of the "undecideds".
My impression is that the only crashing and burning going on is on the part of the Republican politicians who took this opportunity to break their agreements and oppose Trump - only to find he was the one with the bigger army of supporters.
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
The murder of Seth Rich, along with the rumor that he was Wikileak's source for the DNC leaks, puts Assange in a tough position. Whether Seth WAS his source or not, public perception that Wikileaks sources may be killed and their leaked information thus suppressed could make his sources dry up.
To counter this he has to create the perception that, if you try to plug the leak by plugging the source, it will result in the leaks being more extreme and damaging, rather than less.
One way to do that is to publish more than would normally be published, and redact it less.
Perhaps that is what is going on: As with rule 804, where hearsay from a deceased person becomes admissible, insuring that leaks from (or perceived to be from) a murder victim are extreme might help make murder of leakers less likely.
LEAVE THE DNC ALONE!
I'll be glad to leave them alone - as soon as they leave US alone.
Given their past behavior, I doubt they'll EVER do that.
ubuntu comes with a no systemd option.
Good to know.
- How does one use it?
- How do you KNOW no systemd hair is still tangled in your system?
- Do all the components work correctly when you opt out of systemd? Nothing breaks or performs substantially more poorly?
- Are they all supported as well in both environments? No obscure "gotcha"s?
I'm still on 14.04.
It's also LTS, still supported for a few years. Having migrated some stuff to Upstart I have no interest in migrating them again to systemd.
Maybe some time when I have a few spare weeks. Like after I've retired or something.
There is no free market when the government 'gets' to license spectrum.
And doubly so then they consider it "competition" when there are TWO suppliers:
- With ONE supplier (monopoly) the incentive is to charge as much as possible - until you're driving away more in customer revenue from people who do without or with less than you gain from higher prices.
- With TWO suppliers (duopoly) the market forces lead rational players to adjust prices to divide the market roughly evenly and continue to charge monopolistic prices. Price signals are enough, no forbidden collusion required.
- With THREE suppliers you're starting to get instability. If the big two make it too hard on the little guy, he may cut prices to try to grab market share, leading to a price war that drives prices down toward cost-of-goods-plus-modest-margin. Or they may manage a balancing act and prices stay high.
- With FOUR OR MORE suppliers the high-priced equilibrium is almost certain to collapse, and it gets progressively more unstable with more players.
So government communications regulatiory policy - at least in the US - is explicitly encouraging duopoly markets and monopolistic pricing structures.
Another trick to make disasters look bigger is to denominate them in dollars of damage. This boosts them in two ways:
- It multiplies them by inflation. (They're talking "decades". Damage costs of $100 in four decades ago dollars, in current dollars come to $219.46.)
- It ignores increases in target size: How many more, and more expensive, houses, vacation/retirement homes, suburbs, and other pricey buildings and infrastructure have been built out into formerly "wild" areas - still subject to wildfires - in the last 40 years?
We were warned that this trick would be used to inflate the damage from Hurricane Matthew. Now here it is being used to inflate the perception of the severity of wildfires.