Oh, and by "we", I mean "baby boomers". I'm gen X and wasn't old enough to vote when all this shit really started in the 80s.
I'm a boomer - but I voted against pretty much all of this stuff. And campaigned against it, too. Virtually nobody I ever voted for was elected.
As for the political institutions: The generations before ours held onto power until quite recently (and have bequeathed it to individuals who are their ideological colleagues among later generations). Their crooked lock on the voting process has kept them in power. Look at the ages of the congresscritters and presidents. Even Bill Clinton was a pre-boomer - conceived DURING WWII, and growing up in a cohort where children were scarce and pampered, rather than a flood to be "channelled" into government-approved career paths (by threat of the draft during the Vietnam adventure).
Don't fall for the "blame the boomers" line: It's another instance of the power elite playing divide-and-conquer, to cut you off from potential allies.
... most of the shmucks that ask for numbers like this use robo callers.
And the schmucks in question are normally cluefull enough to program their robots to NOT call the "premium content" number ranges. (Which is also what anyone programming a service that includes a callback feature should also do.)
Not doing this for cellphone ranges or numbers on do-not-call list doesn't impact a phone-pimp's bottom line. Trying to scam a pay-to-talk line does. It might not cost enough to bankrupt them, if their scam is lucrative enough - but even for those it would be a drain on the swag.
Divide by 365 for days in a year. Be generous and then divide again only by two (rather than, say, six or eight as is typical for painkillers). You're already talking 730 doses for ONE drug for ONE chronic pain patient.
So numbers like 265, 541, and 562 fewer doses correspond to less than one patient per doctor. Even the 1,826 for painkillers is less than the 2190 annual doses of a 6-per-day prescription for one chronic pain patient.
Yes, with 854,698 active physicians in the U.S., it does add up. But generic painkillers, antidepressants, and the like are cheap. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the more than $400 billion US market for all prescription drugs - or likely even the amount the drug companies spend on Congress to lobby for the drug war.
For me the big take-aways from this article are:
* The impact of Medical Marijuana on overall drug company revenue is miniscule. Unless a fad catches on among doctors and they start switching some classes of patients en masse to M.J., the drug companies are unlikely to see any substantial drop in revenue, and would be ahead to save the lobbying money.
* They might be much FARTHER ahead to start selling, reasonably cheaply, purified, standard-dose, convenient oral tablets of the several active compounds. Especially if they can get the government to declare them "orphan drugs" or some new category, so they don't have to spend a bunch on research or accept large-scale liability for possible side-effects, and can let the non-drug-company-funded researchers in the medical community continue to identify the conditions (such as intractable seizures) that these compounds improve.
When you develop a network technology that can handle numerous transmitters on the same frequency---some of which are far more powerful than the one you're listening to---go ahead and let the rest of us know.
It's a class of modulation schemes called "spread spectrum". Been around for decades. If it's done right you can't even tell there are other signals out there unless you know THEIR spreading codes because they look too much like thermal background noise.
Yes, they "make the grass taller" and the total bandwidth is still limited by Shannon's criteria (with the interfering signals acting as "noise" in the "signal-to-noise-ratio" term.) So being located too close to "someone shouting" still makes it hard to hear. (Like being next to a waterfall.)
On the other hand, licensing doesn't seem to do what it claims, either. I've got a vehicle with a Sirius satellite receiver, and some company has, over the last couple years, been installing what appear to be cellular mini-towers that create block-wide dead zones all over Silicon Valley. (Some of them make my 2G phone drop connections, too, and some other spots kill the phone without killing the satellite feed.) The zones are too large for the 4-second buffer to cover. My commute is about 14 miles, almost all on 880 and/or 680 in Fremont and Milpitas (if I don't shunpike) and I can't find a route with less than four dead spots for the phone and three for Sirus-XM.
The President does not control H-1B. Congress does.
The President DOES control the INTERPRETATION and the ENFORCEMENT of the rules - including choosing to avoid enforcing them.
When the laws are not enforced, businessmen who follow the law are at a severe competitive disadvantage to those who violate them. In a highly competitive market this quickly shakes out so that there are two categories of businessmen:
- Those who violate the law and get all the contracts.
- Those who don't violate the law, don't win any contracts, and are now out of business.
We saw that up close and personally when we did some home improvement a few years back. We couldn't find ANY contractors whose line workers weren't illegal aliens.
(We discovered this in the case of, and had it explained by, our siding contractor,. We went to take photographs of the added wiring in the walls when the siding was off, and all his workers became very upset that cameras were in use.)
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the EM spectrum is a shared resource?
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the audio spectrum is a shared resource?
Why don't we have a Federal Speech Commission regulating the use of the audio spectrum? Just think: If everyone talks at once, nobody can hear each other. If some people talk louder they drown others out. If people talk at night they keep others awake. And so on.
By the same arguments used to claim regulation of the radio spectrum is necessary to smooth functioning of radio communications, it is also necessary for the smooth functioning of speech.
So we need to be licensed before we can talk. Some of us would be licensed only talk in low growly voices and others in high squeeky voices, to better avoid interference. All of us would be limited to speak below an assigned loudness level an only in certain places. Certain words would be prohibited, as would advocacy of the consumption of certain products (such as cigarettes). Some subject (such as "adult" activities) could only be talked about during restricted hours. Special licenses would be needed for high-power amplifiers, such as megaphones. I could go on.
That pesky First Amendment puts a big roadblock in the way of common-sense regulation of speech, without which SO much less audio communication can take place.
You generate a 10mhz signal, then add it to a 20ghz sine wave.
Actually you MULTIPLY it, which exercises a trigonometric identity that creates two new "sidebands":
- The 10 mHz signal with the frequency of each component of it shifted up by 20gHz (i.e. a component at 10 mHz would appear at 20gHz + 10 mHz, a component at 5mHz would appear at 20gHz + 5mHz, etc.)
- The 10 mHz signal with the frequency of each component of it interpreted as a NEGATIVE frequency (i.e. frequency-inverted) and shifted up by 20gHz (i.e. a component at 10 mHz would appear at 20gHz - 10 mHz, a component at 5mHz would appear at 20gHz - 5mHz, etc.)
... Probably right after the first drone-carried bomb, false-flagged as a communication company's bandwidth-booster, goes off over, or in, a stadium crowd.
Although why terrorists keep using bombs has always puzzled me, since an aerosol of a nerve agent or disease spores would do far more damage - and the latter might not even be noticed until long after the event.
Or start with firebombs at the exits. Mass murders with "fire in a crowded venue" have historically had FAR higher body counts that "deranged shooter in a gun-free zone" incidents. (Especially when the exits are blocked - usually by venue operators, in violation of fire codes, to avoid people sneaking in without paying.) Muslims might not go for this, though, since they do have a prohibition on using fire in war (though some of them seem to keep finding exceptions to that rule). But they're far from the entire population of terrorists.
It's also puzzled me why they always seem to go after crowds of ordinary people, rather than the ruling class. Cultural issues, maybe? Easier targets? An ideology that says every voter is responsible for a republic's bad deeds?
Just a reminder: this guy is a slimebag who refused to share the Saturn SH1 ROM dump...
So, in your opinion, choosing not to voluntarily help out a project by violating copyright law (and risking mill-of-the-gods grade legal retribution) makes one a "slimebag"?
Ought to fit in a BeagleBone, Raspberry, Shiva Plug, etc., or something even smaller, just fine.... plug in a USB WiFi dongle and it can advertise on the air like any other WiFi-connectable printer.
I wonder if there's an app for that?
Yet. (If there wasn't, I posted the above over 16 hours ago and it's REALLY simple to do.)
With such an app, any smartphone (of the matching O.S.) becomes a walk-around exploit delivery system.
Yes, if you share a printer using Samba you can optionally create the print$ share that windows will use when trying to download the drivers.
Interesting.
So bad guys don't even have to hack a printer to exploit this bug. They can just host a Samba print server (maybe even without a printer attached) with the nasty driver in its database. Anyone who tries to print on that "printer" from a Windows machine gets pwned.
Ought to fit in a BeagleBone, Raspberry, Shiva Plug, etc., or something even smaller, just fine. Plug it into an Ethernet LAN, or just plug in a USB WiFi dongle and it can advertise on the air like any other WiFi-connectable printer.
Add a battery, good for a few days, and they have a pocket-sized exploiter that they can carry or drop within radio range of an office, or bury in the packing material of something they mail to the victim.
If it can detect a local printer and masquerade as it, forwarding the print jobs to it, there might be no obvious sign that anything unusual was happening.
The biggest Fuck we got was the "Fight Two Wars completely without funding them" that drove the economy into a tailspin.
That got started at least as far back as when LBJ ran both the Vietnam adventure and the Great Society on the government's credit card - to the tune of progressively impoverishing future generations as the interest mounted. (And it was cited as a problem at the time.)
(WW II and the "Korean Police Action" ran partly on credit, too. But at least in those days there was some intent to actually pay it off eventually.)
The mods here went full on conservative about a decade ago.
As I understand it:
The mods are chosen algorithmically from the non-anonymous Slashdot users.
The meta-mods, who moderate the moderators' decisions (and affect the algorithm's future awarding of moderator points) are self-chosen.
Are you saying that the algorithm went right-wing? Or that the meta-moderators drove it that way?
Or are you saying that you, personally, are so left-wing that the general membership's moderation looks right-wing to you.
= = = =
A hint, though:
Many left-wingers apply social pressure to each other to conform to certain behavioral templates. This includes agreeing with a number of ideological points, regardless of whether they are consistent with observed reality - or each other.
To someone who has internalized this idea system, any questioning of any of its points is a sign of heresy or non-membership. This calls for immediate criticism - to return the straying sheep to the fold or to attack a non-member of the flock.
Such criticism often takes the form of labelling the heretical speaker as right-wing, i.e. a member of the perceived largest group of enemies.
To a true believer, any deviation honestly appears to be a product of the alleged vast right-wing conspiracy.
Police are civilians with no special powers over a citizen.
In the U.S. (generally - it is state level so may vary a bit) there is a distinction:
- Non-police citizens can only arrest for felonies.
- Police can also arrest, or issue citations, for misdemeanors and infractions (such as traffic offences).
Unfortunately, in some states (and to some extent generally, under federal law), modern gun restriction laws, and those pushing expansion of them, are creating, expanding, (and attempting to make general), zones where police may be armed and non-police citizens (absent a special permit) may not.
This trend is leading to the creation of a Samurai class, with a monopoly on being armed, a special relation to (and responsibilities toward) those in power, and the reduction of the remainder of the population to peasants.
... we're not able to participate because we are still investigating Obama's birth status and stuff.
I know you're razzing the "Birthers". But the issue of where Obama was physically born is moot. One of his parents is - and was at the time - a U.S. citizen, and that makes him "native born" for presidential eligibility purposes, regardless of where the birth took place (or the child was raised).
- There once was a requirement that, if the only U.S. citizen parent was the mother, the father needed to have been a US resident for a certain number of years. That sexism was removed long before even the Equal Rights Amendment movement.
- The time limit on reporting the birth is only for the bureaucracy to automatically issue papers, without additional bureaucratic or court proceedings. There is no time-limited reporting requirement on the actual native-born status.
This would neatly explain otherwise-madness like the drug war (creating a lucrative black market, as Prohibition did with alcohol) and the gun laws (keeping the victims, and potential vigilante reformers, disarmed).
(Not to mention the government's ties to the RIAA and MPAA, which appear to be direct descendants of the jukebox protection rackets and the organizations behind such notable figures as Crosby and Sinatra.)
But you're right, defying Clinton is like defying the mob.
"Like" defying the mob?
Story I heard is that, since the mid 1920s, the Mafia had a major presence in Arkansa (starting with Hot Springs). It became a move-to site for some major ganagster organizations when things became too hot for them in New York. Eventually the whole state government became a Mafia operation, which it remains to this day. An Arkansas machine-politician governor would necessarily be a high official in organized crime.
It has a lower profile and less public reputation than the Chicago political machine (where Obama rose to the top), but is no less corrupt.
My take on the U.S. government is that it is firmly in the pockets of organized crime, and has been since at least the Nixon-Kennedy election (where both sides had solid Mafia connections - and the winning side consisted largely of the sons of a man who made his millions as a bootlegger during Prohibition.)
This would neatly explain otherwise-madness like the drug war (creating a lucrative black market, as Prohibition did with alcohol) and the gun laws (keeping the victims, and potential vigilante reformers, disarmed).
At least for intel Archs, you can install a 32 Bit OS on a computer with a 64 bit capable cpu.
Which doesn't mean squat. We're talking Q.A. here.
The goal is to determine whether the code will work on a real 32-bit architecture, not a 64-bit architecture running in 32-bit emulation mode. The two have differences. If you run the tests on something other than the real target you have no clue whether it will work on the real thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and by "we", I mean "baby boomers". I'm gen X and wasn't old enough to vote when all this shit really started in the 80s.
I'm a boomer - but I voted against pretty much all of this stuff. And campaigned against it, too. Virtually nobody I ever voted for was elected.
As for the political institutions: The generations before ours held onto power until quite recently (and have bequeathed it to individuals who are their ideological colleagues among later generations). Their crooked lock on the voting process has kept them in power. Look at the ages of the congresscritters and presidents. Even Bill Clinton was a pre-boomer - conceived DURING WWII, and growing up in a cohort where children were scarce and pampered, rather than a flood to be "channelled" into government-approved career paths (by threat of the draft during the Vietnam adventure).
Don't fall for the "blame the boomers" line: It's another instance of the power elite playing divide-and-conquer, to cut you off from potential allies.
... most of the shmucks that ask for numbers like this use robo callers.
And the schmucks in question are normally cluefull enough to program their robots to NOT call the "premium content" number ranges. (Which is also what anyone programming a service that includes a callback feature should also do.)
Not doing this for cellphone ranges or numbers on do-not-call list doesn't impact a phone-pimp's bottom line. Trying to scam a pay-to-talk line does. It might not cost enough to bankrupt them, if their scam is lucrative enough - but even for those it would be a drain on the swag.
Note that the big-sounding numbers are in DOSES.
Divide by 365 for days in a year. Be generous and then divide again only by two (rather than, say, six or eight as is typical for painkillers). You're already talking 730 doses for ONE drug for ONE chronic pain patient.
So numbers like 265, 541, and 562 fewer doses correspond to less than one patient per doctor. Even the 1,826 for painkillers is less than the 2190 annual doses of a 6-per-day prescription for one chronic pain patient.
Yes, with 854,698 active physicians in the U.S., it does add up. But generic painkillers, antidepressants, and the like are cheap. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the more than $400 billion US market for all prescription drugs - or likely even the amount the drug companies spend on Congress to lobby for the drug war.
For me the big take-aways from this article are:
* The impact of Medical Marijuana on overall drug company revenue is miniscule. Unless a fad catches on among doctors and they start switching some classes of patients en masse to M.J., the drug companies are unlikely to see any substantial drop in revenue, and would be ahead to save the lobbying money.
* They might be much FARTHER ahead to start selling, reasonably cheaply, purified, standard-dose, convenient oral tablets of the several active compounds. Especially if they can get the government to declare them "orphan drugs" or some new category, so they don't have to spend a bunch on research or accept large-scale liability for possible side-effects, and can let the non-drug-company-funded researchers in the medical community continue to identify the conditions (such as intractable seizures) that these compounds improve.
Oops. Colonel Bleep - 1956. (And if I'd bothered to look at Wikipedia BEFORE posting, the Null Island article mentions it. B-b )
Sounds like "Zero-Zero Island" - the secret hideout of a cartoon character from the early 1950s or so on the Captain Kangaroo children's show.
I think it was Tom Teriffic...
When you develop a network technology that can handle numerous transmitters on the same frequency---some of which are far more powerful than the one you're listening to---go ahead and let the rest of us know.
It's a class of modulation schemes called "spread spectrum". Been around for decades. If it's done right you can't even tell there are other signals out there unless you know THEIR spreading codes because they look too much like thermal background noise.
Yes, they "make the grass taller" and the total bandwidth is still limited by Shannon's criteria (with the interfering signals acting as "noise" in the "signal-to-noise-ratio" term.) So being located too close to "someone shouting" still makes it hard to hear. (Like being next to a waterfall.)
On the other hand, licensing doesn't seem to do what it claims, either. I've got a vehicle with a Sirius satellite receiver, and some company has, over the last couple years, been installing what appear to be cellular mini-towers that create block-wide dead zones all over Silicon Valley. (Some of them make my 2G phone drop connections, too, and some other spots kill the phone without killing the satellite feed.) The zones are too large for the 4-second buffer to cover. My commute is about 14 miles, almost all on 880 and/or 680 in Fremont and Milpitas (if I don't shunpike) and I can't find a route with less than four dead spots for the phone and three for Sirus-XM.
You know all that, but you don't know it's capital M and capital G?
Sorry. Was in a hurry.
(But what's nine orders of magnitude {in the m vs. M case} among friends? B-) )
The President does not control H-1B. Congress does.
The President DOES control the INTERPRETATION and the ENFORCEMENT of the rules - including choosing to avoid enforcing them.
When the laws are not enforced, businessmen who follow the law are at a severe competitive disadvantage to those who violate them. In a highly competitive market this quickly shakes out so that there are two categories of businessmen:
- Those who violate the law and get all the contracts.
- Those who don't violate the law, don't win any contracts, and are now out of business.
We saw that up close and personally when we did some home improvement a few years back. We couldn't find ANY contractors whose line workers weren't illegal aliens.
(We discovered this in the case of, and had it explained by, our siding contractor,. We went to take photographs of the added wiring in the walls when the siding was off, and all his workers became very upset that cameras were in use.)
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the EM spectrum is a shared resource?
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the audio spectrum is a shared resource?
Why don't we have a Federal Speech Commission regulating the use of the audio spectrum? Just think: If everyone talks at once, nobody can hear each other. If some people talk louder they drown others out. If people talk at night they keep others awake. And so on.
By the same arguments used to claim regulation of the radio spectrum is necessary to smooth functioning of radio communications, it is also necessary for the smooth functioning of speech.
So we need to be licensed before we can talk. Some of us would be licensed only talk in low growly voices and others in high squeeky voices, to better avoid interference. All of us would be limited to speak below an assigned loudness level an only in certain places. Certain words would be prohibited, as would advocacy of the consumption of certain products (such as cigarettes). Some subject (such as "adult" activities) could only be talked about during restricted hours. Special licenses would be needed for high-power amplifiers, such as megaphones. I could go on.
That pesky First Amendment puts a big roadblock in the way of common-sense regulation of speech, without which SO much less audio communication can take place.
You generate a 10mhz signal, then add it to a 20ghz sine wave.
Actually you MULTIPLY it, which exercises a trigonometric identity that creates two new "sidebands":
- The 10 mHz signal with the frequency of each component of it shifted up by 20gHz (i.e. a component at 10 mHz would appear at 20gHz + 10 mHz, a component at 5mHz would appear at 20gHz + 5mHz, etc.)
- The 10 mHz signal with the frequency of each component of it interpreted as a NEGATIVE frequency (i.e. frequency-inverted) and shifted up by 20gHz (i.e. a component at 10 mHz would appear at 20gHz - 10 mHz, a component at 5mHz would appear at 20gHz - 5mHz, etc.)
... Probably right after the first drone-carried bomb, false-flagged as a communication company's bandwidth-booster, goes off over, or in, a stadium crowd.
Although why terrorists keep using bombs has always puzzled me, since an aerosol of a nerve agent or disease spores would do far more damage - and the latter might not even be noticed until long after the event.
Or start with firebombs at the exits. Mass murders with "fire in a crowded venue" have historically had FAR higher body counts that "deranged shooter in a gun-free zone" incidents. (Especially when the exits are blocked - usually by venue operators, in violation of fire codes, to avoid people sneaking in without paying.) Muslims might not go for this, though, since they do have a prohibition on using fire in war (though some of them seem to keep finding exceptions to that rule). But they're far from the entire population of terrorists.
It's also puzzled me why they always seem to go after crowds of ordinary people, rather than the ruling class. Cultural issues, maybe? Easier targets? An ideology that says every voter is responsible for a republic's bad deeds?
This Skype is littered with spyware, advertising and intelligence agency collusion.
So, a question for Linux security guys:
How do we sandbox this thing?
(And how sure are we the sandbox is solid / what unavoidable holes still remain?)
"Absent a search warrant, the government may not turn a citizen's cell phone into a tracking device," Pauley wrote.
So does that mean Kevin Mitnick can successfully petition to have his record expunged and civil rights restored?
As I recall he was hunted down by passive tracking of his analog cellphone.
Just a reminder: this guy is a slimebag who refused to share the Saturn SH1 ROM dump ...
So, in your opinion, choosing not to voluntarily help out a project by violating copyright law (and risking mill-of-the-gods grade legal retribution) makes one a "slimebag"?
Ought to fit in a BeagleBone, Raspberry, Shiva Plug, etc., or something even smaller, just fine. ... plug in a USB WiFi dongle and it can advertise on the air like any other WiFi-connectable printer.
I wonder if there's an app for that?
Yet. (If there wasn't, I posted the above over 16 hours ago and it's REALLY simple to do.)
With such an app, any smartphone (of the matching O.S.) becomes a walk-around exploit delivery system.
Trouble is, there are a lot of legacy printers with old legacy drivers.
The term "sandbox" comes to mind...
Yes, if you share a printer using Samba you can optionally create the print$ share that windows will use when trying to download the drivers.
Interesting.
So bad guys don't even have to hack a printer to exploit this bug. They can just host a Samba print server (maybe even without a printer attached) with the nasty driver in its database. Anyone who tries to print on that "printer" from a Windows machine gets pwned.
Ought to fit in a BeagleBone, Raspberry, Shiva Plug, etc., or something even smaller, just fine. Plug it into an Ethernet LAN, or just plug in a USB WiFi dongle and it can advertise on the air like any other WiFi-connectable printer.
Add a battery, good for a few days, and they have a pocket-sized exploiter that they can carry or drop within radio range of an office, or bury in the packing material of something they mail to the victim.
If it can detect a local printer and masquerade as it, forwarding the print jobs to it, there might be no obvious sign that anything unusual was happening.
I'm not a Windows user or admin, but I'm curious:
Does Samba support the corresponding protocols and emulate this behavior (and is it compatible enough with Microsoft's code to support the exploit)?
The biggest Fuck we got was the "Fight Two Wars completely without funding them" that drove the economy into a tailspin.
That got started at least as far back as when LBJ ran both the Vietnam adventure and the Great Society on the government's credit card - to the tune of progressively impoverishing future generations as the interest mounted. (And it was cited as a problem at the time.)
(WW II and the "Korean Police Action" ran partly on credit, too. But at least in those days there was some intent to actually pay it off eventually.)
The mods here went full on conservative about a decade ago.
As I understand it:
The mods are chosen algorithmically from the non-anonymous Slashdot users.
The meta-mods, who moderate the moderators' decisions (and affect the algorithm's future awarding of moderator points) are self-chosen.
Are you saying that the algorithm went right-wing? Or that the meta-moderators drove it that way?
Or are you saying that you, personally, are so left-wing that the general membership's moderation looks right-wing to you.
= = = =
A hint, though:
Many left-wingers apply social pressure to each other to conform to certain behavioral templates. This includes agreeing with a number of ideological points, regardless of whether they are consistent with observed reality - or each other.
To someone who has internalized this idea system, any questioning of any of its points is a sign of heresy or non-membership. This calls for immediate criticism - to return the straying sheep to the fold or to attack a non-member of the flock.
Such criticism often takes the form of labelling the heretical speaker as right-wing, i.e. a member of the perceived largest group of enemies.
To a true believer, any deviation honestly appears to be a product of the alleged vast right-wing conspiracy.
Police are civilians with no special powers over a citizen.
In the U.S. (generally - it is state level so may vary a bit) there is a distinction:
- Non-police citizens can only arrest for felonies.
- Police can also arrest, or issue citations, for misdemeanors and infractions (such as traffic offences).
Unfortunately, in some states (and to some extent generally, under federal law), modern gun restriction laws, and those pushing expansion of them, are creating, expanding, (and attempting to make general), zones where police may be armed and non-police citizens (absent a special permit) may not.
This trend is leading to the creation of a Samurai class, with a monopoly on being armed, a special relation to (and responsibilities toward) those in power, and the reduction of the remainder of the population to peasants.
... we're not able to participate because we are still investigating Obama's birth status and stuff.
I know you're razzing the "Birthers". But the issue of where Obama was physically born is moot. One of his parents is - and was at the time - a U.S. citizen, and that makes him "native born" for presidential eligibility purposes, regardless of where the birth took place (or the child was raised).
- There once was a requirement that, if the only U.S. citizen parent was the mother, the father needed to have been a US resident for a certain number of years. That sexism was removed long before even the Equal Rights Amendment movement.
- The time limit on reporting the birth is only for the bureaucracy to automatically issue papers, without additional bureaucratic or court proceedings. There is no time-limited reporting requirement on the actual native-born status.
This would neatly explain otherwise-madness like the drug war (creating a lucrative black market, as Prohibition did with alcohol) and the gun laws (keeping the victims, and potential vigilante reformers, disarmed).
(Not to mention the government's ties to the RIAA and MPAA, which appear to be direct descendants of the jukebox protection rackets and the organizations behind such notable figures as Crosby and Sinatra.)
But you're right, defying Clinton is like defying the mob.
"Like" defying the mob?
Story I heard is that, since the mid 1920s, the Mafia had a major presence in Arkansa (starting with Hot Springs). It became a move-to site for some major ganagster organizations when things became too hot for them in New York. Eventually the whole state government became a Mafia operation, which it remains to this day. An Arkansas machine-politician governor would necessarily be a high official in organized crime.
It has a lower profile and less public reputation than the Chicago political machine (where Obama rose to the top), but is no less corrupt.
My take on the U.S. government is that it is firmly in the pockets of organized crime, and has been since at least the Nixon-Kennedy election (where both sides had solid Mafia connections - and the winning side consisted largely of the sons of a man who made his millions as a bootlegger during Prohibition.)
This would neatly explain otherwise-madness like the drug war (creating a lucrative black market, as Prohibition did with alcohol) and the gun laws (keeping the victims, and potential vigilante reformers, disarmed).
At least for intel Archs, you can install a 32 Bit OS on a computer with a 64 bit capable cpu.
Which doesn't mean squat. We're talking Q.A. here.
The goal is to determine whether the code will work on a real 32-bit architecture, not a 64-bit architecture running in 32-bit emulation mode. The two have differences. If you run the tests on something other than the real target you have no clue whether it will work on the real thing.