Your source? My source says Janet Reno wanted it published who was Attorney General at the time. Your source would have to be multiple people at the least.
You didn't watch the tv show called manhunt Unabomber.
So you're basing your knowledge on a TV show. A TV show that doesn't even proclaim it to be a documentary but rather reports itself as drama. That is your source? You do understand that "based on a true story" != 100% true right? There are lots of details changed in every "based on a true story" drama.
For example The Big Sick is based on the true story of how Kumail Nanjiani met his wife, Emily V. Gordon. Parts of the romance are true. Parts are not true. For instance, the comedy romance is set in the present day whereas the couple met in 2007 so things like Uber and smart phones that are present in the film were not around. Her parents are depicted by Ray Romano and Holly Hunter are nothing like her real parents in their behavior or mannerisms according to both of them.
Besides they wouldn't have had the need to publish the whole manifesto to accomplish what they wanted.
Except for the fact that his brother recognized the writings of the manifesto as very similar to what Ted had written in letters to him?
Some investigators did want to publish it, but the majority didn't. It was published to save lives after a lot of debate and finally only to save lives.
The people in charge like Janet Reno wanted to publish it and it got published. The contention that the government didn't want it published would therefore be false.
And how is Google no longer promoting a video the same as them controlling free speech? You can still find the videos if you search for them. Google is no longer advertising them at the top of their list. If they blocked them, then you might have a point .
I find that most conspiracy theories not only have a lack of evidence but they also ignore lots of contrary evidence. Or they start to delve into increasing complex scenarios to try to explain away any contrary evidence.
For example, the leading conspiracy about Vegas is that it is a false flag operation perpetrated my multiple shooters from multiple locations. Their evidence: multiple points of light from a few videos and what sounds like multiple gun shots sources.
Common sense would say multiple shooters, multiple locations would require multiple rooms. Yet the next morning only 2 windows were shot out from adjoining rooms. Not multiple rooms that had their windows shot out. Their explanation: they were replaced in the middle of the night secretly. Replacing windows that are 150-200 lbs each that required people to cling to the outside of the building in the middle of the night while avoiding being detected by law enforcement is a far more likely to them. Also the hotel and staff are in on the conspiracy because they are hiding the "other rooms" which would be full of gun powder smoke and smell and shell casings.
From what I remember about the Unabomber the government wanted to publish his manifesto so that someone might recognize it to help generate leads. And it worked. Are you remembering it right?
Let me make this absolutely clear to you on this point: you have no fucking clue as to why my clients specify "certified Unix" sometimes as they don't detail every single reason behind their requirements. But unlike you I don't presume to know MORE than my client about their needs especially when they make a specific requirement.
Let me guess about the person that you are: if you were a waiter in a restaurant and a skinny person ordered diet soda, you'd just replace it with regular sofa because they didn't need to lose any weight. The fact that they might be diabetic doesn't matter to you. You know more than them and are willing to risk their lives for your fucking ego.
The day you pay my salary, I'll get advice from you about how not to listen to my company and my clients about their exact requirements. Until then, you're just an arrogant individual who thinks they know more than my clients about what they specified as a requirement. If it says "Must install Redhat Linux ES" that's what they will get. We don't install Ubuntu Linux and tell them they'll save money. If it says x86-64 processors with ECC support, we don't get them a Pentium D and a lecture about how they can use a cheaper processor and ECC is overrated.
One of the main drivers of Mac purchases: It's realistically the ONLY Unix laptops that are available. Linux laptops you can get from any major manufacturer. Certified Unix laptops are only through Apple. And if they specify "Certified Unix" instead of Linux, they mean it because contrary to what you assume, most of our clients KNOW the difference. There's a reason that's beyond my pay grade and frankly it's probably beyond your pay grade.
[sarcasm]I don't know about you but when my company puts out a list of requirements for hardware and software, I just blatantly ignore them when purchasing things with their money. It's how I keep my job. Also the clients are ecstatic that I chose to override their wish list when we purchase for them. They are certain to pay the invoices faster when we ignore the spec sheet. I am showered with awards because I do this.[/sarcasm]
Given that the bees didn't die and they were able to carry out their primary mission (bring food back to the hive) I'd say their exposure was below acceptable limits.
Your assertion is based on the assumption that the concentration of pesticides (or anything) never changes in the entire process of honey being made and collected. I can tell you that honey definitely changes from the time it is deposited by a bee to when it was tested. That the concentration of pesticides was exactly the same.
Secondly, they tested specifically for neocinids because it is known they can cause issues with bees. Do the other pesticides have any effect on bees? If not, then why chase a wild goose?
They have also removed the option to run applications from anywhere from the security settings, you used to be able to choose from only the App Store, App Store and Trusted Developers (you know, trusted by Apple, not the user) and Anywhere, but now they have removed the 'Anywhere' option. The writing is on the wall that it is going in a very user-hostile direction and becoming exactly the opposite of Apple's portrayal of themselves in that 1984 ad.
Well that's a bold faced lie. I just installed a bunch of applications the other day on a machine. None of which I got from the App Store or "Trusted Developers". I guess is that you don't know that OS X requires you to verify that you want to install something that you got off the Internet with a dialog confirmation. After clicking "Yes, install", it installed and ran fine.
Pretty useful if it's on a bullet list of requirements. "Must be Unix certified" is on a lot of equipment requirements I've seen when looking for Unix equipment.
If by "proper computer", you mean a certified Unix 03 desktop then by all means get all the choices. Oh wait Apple seems to be one of the few choices left.
Yes because all of that makes up for Edge's terrible compatibility. Where do I sign up so that my browser doesn't work on many websites that are out there that all other browsers seem to handle?
Uh what? I find it peculiar that you speak as if you lived in my neighborhood and that you've been here for all the neighborhood and city meetings about this subject. Where you also here for the multiple petitions and complaints that have been made? There IS a lot of demand. And yet we have 1 cable company in the neighborhood. It's not a monopoly as it is an oligarchy. Other cable companies won't come in. Other DSL companies won't come in. No fiber companies will come in.
Is that sarcasm because demand has been wanting fiber for 5 years now when it first started rolling out in the city. There were even mailing lists, polls, etc. I had hoped that Google Fiber rolling out to different cities would have spurned fiber here. Sadly no. Without Google directly threatening competition, there will be no fiber.
It seems that MS is still stuck behind other companies when it comes to app stores. Whatever excuse they come up with, the real reason is that there are few users therefore few customers. Thus few developers who want to make apps or extensions. And history shows that eventually MS will abandon these systems leaving the developers and users without options. For example the Zune App Store then Windows Phone store, etc. Meanwhile Google and Apple app stores have billions of downloads daily.
YouTube is the best example of how Net Neutrality is supposed to work. For those that don't remember, YouTube competed against Google and Google didn't make any headway. So Google bought them out. Without equal treatment of packets, that would never have happened.
The difference is choice. While AOL tried to lock you in to their ecosystem, you were a month away from a different provider if you chose. There hundreds of different dialup companies back when AOL was its peak.
How many viable broadband does the average American actually have? At the city level, my city has two fiber companies, three cable companies, and two DSL companies; however, at the neighborhood level, the choices are quite limited. Most people in my neighborhood have 1 cable and 1 DSL. Fiber is a mile away and had been "Coming soon" for 5 years.
Let's start with the obvious: That is not a CSO training program. I would hope that a CSO go through that certification but CSO qualifications do not necessarily require it. Just like the position of CIO does not necessarily require an IT degree.
You didn't answer the question: what CSO training programs exist out there? None. This is why your analogy fails. CSO is a relatively new position within companies that isn't really well defined in terms of qualifications.
Flying a plane for an airline has both industry and federal guidelines for qualification. The first of these is the requirement of a pilot's license which takes years to obtain.
Considering there's no "CSO" degree that you can get, I'd have to agree. At best you could get a cyber-security degree from a handful of colleges but that does not ensure the role of chief of security.
Nothing says a plumber can't be good at flying an airplane, but would you want a plumber to be the pilot on your next flight?
Other than the fact that you have to be trained for years as a pilot before any major airline would hire you (civilian or military flight school). And there exists formal pilot training programs. But please show me the numerous "Chief Security Officer" programs that someone must pass before taking on the role.
And there is nothing stopping Gab simply offering the app on their own web site too, or are they complaining that they are not popular enough and need free advertising on Play to survive?
I often find that people who complain that other people are "too sensitive" are the first to cry and whine when something doesn't go their way. I believe it's called projection.
Slashdot Mirror
Your source? My source says Janet Reno wanted it published who was Attorney General at the time. Your source would have to be multiple people at the least.
You didn't watch the tv show called manhunt Unabomber.
So you're basing your knowledge on a TV show. A TV show that doesn't even proclaim it to be a documentary but rather reports itself as drama. That is your source? You do understand that "based on a true story" != 100% true right? There are lots of details changed in every "based on a true story" drama.
For example The Big Sick is based on the true story of how Kumail Nanjiani met his wife, Emily V. Gordon. Parts of the romance are true. Parts are not true. For instance, the comedy romance is set in the present day whereas the couple met in 2007 so things like Uber and smart phones that are present in the film were not around. Her parents are depicted by Ray Romano and Holly Hunter are nothing like her real parents in their behavior or mannerisms according to both of them.
Besides they wouldn't have had the need to publish the whole manifesto to accomplish what they wanted.
Except for the fact that his brother recognized the writings of the manifesto as very similar to what Ted had written in letters to him?
Some investigators did want to publish it, but the majority didn't. It was published to save lives after a lot of debate and finally only to save lives.
The people in charge like Janet Reno wanted to publish it and it got published. The contention that the government didn't want it published would therefore be false.
And how is Google no longer promoting a video the same as them controlling free speech? You can still find the videos if you search for them. Google is no longer advertising them at the top of their list. If they blocked them, then you might have a point .
I find that most conspiracy theories not only have a lack of evidence but they also ignore lots of contrary evidence. Or they start to delve into increasing complex scenarios to try to explain away any contrary evidence.
For example, the leading conspiracy about Vegas is that it is a false flag operation perpetrated my multiple shooters from multiple locations. Their evidence: multiple points of light from a few videos and what sounds like multiple gun shots sources.
Common sense would say multiple shooters, multiple locations would require multiple rooms. Yet the next morning only 2 windows were shot out from adjoining rooms. Not multiple rooms that had their windows shot out. Their explanation: they were replaced in the middle of the night secretly. Replacing windows that are 150-200 lbs each that required people to cling to the outside of the building in the middle of the night while avoiding being detected by law enforcement is a far more likely to them. Also the hotel and staff are in on the conspiracy because they are hiding the "other rooms" which would be full of gun powder smoke and smell and shell casings.
From what I remember about the Unabomber the government wanted to publish his manifesto so that someone might recognize it to help generate leads. And it worked. Are you remembering it right?
Let me make this absolutely clear to you on this point: you have no fucking clue as to why my clients specify "certified Unix" sometimes as they don't detail every single reason behind their requirements. But unlike you I don't presume to know MORE than my client about their needs especially when they make a specific requirement.
Let me guess about the person that you are: if you were a waiter in a restaurant and a skinny person ordered diet soda, you'd just replace it with regular sofa because they didn't need to lose any weight. The fact that they might be diabetic doesn't matter to you. You know more than them and are willing to risk their lives for your fucking ego.
The day you pay my salary, I'll get advice from you about how not to listen to my company and my clients about their exact requirements. Until then, you're just an arrogant individual who thinks they know more than my clients about what they specified as a requirement. If it says "Must install Redhat Linux ES" that's what they will get. We don't install Ubuntu Linux and tell them they'll save money. If it says x86-64 processors with ECC support, we don't get them a Pentium D and a lecture about how they can use a cheaper processor and ECC is overrated.
One of the main drivers of Mac purchases: It's realistically the ONLY Unix laptops that are available. Linux laptops you can get from any major manufacturer. Certified Unix laptops are only through Apple. And if they specify "Certified Unix" instead of Linux, they mean it because contrary to what you assume, most of our clients KNOW the difference. There's a reason that's beyond my pay grade and frankly it's probably beyond your pay grade.
[sarcasm]I don't know about you but when my company puts out a list of requirements for hardware and software, I just blatantly ignore them when purchasing things with their money. It's how I keep my job. Also the clients are ecstatic that I chose to override their wish list when we purchase for them. They are certain to pay the invoices faster when we ignore the spec sheet. I am showered with awards because I do this.[/sarcasm]
Given that the bees didn't die and they were able to carry out their primary mission (bring food back to the hive) I'd say their exposure was below acceptable limits.
Your assertion is based on the assumption that the concentration of pesticides (or anything) never changes in the entire process of honey being made and collected. I can tell you that honey definitely changes from the time it is deposited by a bee to when it was tested. That the concentration of pesticides was exactly the same.
Secondly, they tested specifically for neocinids because it is known they can cause issues with bees. Do the other pesticides have any effect on bees? If not, then why chase a wild goose?
They have also removed the option to run applications from anywhere from the security settings, you used to be able to choose from only the App Store, App Store and Trusted Developers (you know, trusted by Apple, not the user) and Anywhere, but now they have removed the 'Anywhere' option. The writing is on the wall that it is going in a very user-hostile direction and becoming exactly the opposite of Apple's portrayal of themselves in that 1984 ad.
Well that's a bold faced lie. I just installed a bunch of applications the other day on a machine. None of which I got from the App Store or "Trusted Developers". I guess is that you don't know that OS X requires you to verify that you want to install something that you got off the Internet with a dialog confirmation. After clicking "Yes, install", it installed and ran fine.
Pretty useful if it's on a bullet list of requirements. "Must be Unix certified" is on a lot of equipment requirements I've seen when looking for Unix equipment.
How much of what you said is true? Unix 03 Certification requires testing and money.
If by "proper computer", you mean a certified Unix 03 desktop then by all means get all the choices. Oh wait Apple seems to be one of the few choices left.
Yes because all of that makes up for Edge's terrible compatibility. Where do I sign up so that my browser doesn't work on many websites that are out there that all other browsers seem to handle?
Uh what? I find it peculiar that you speak as if you lived in my neighborhood and that you've been here for all the neighborhood and city meetings about this subject. Where you also here for the multiple petitions and complaints that have been made? There IS a lot of demand. And yet we have 1 cable company in the neighborhood. It's not a monopoly as it is an oligarchy. Other cable companies won't come in. Other DSL companies won't come in. No fiber companies will come in.
Is that sarcasm because demand has been wanting fiber for 5 years now when it first started rolling out in the city. There were even mailing lists, polls, etc. I had hoped that Google Fiber rolling out to different cities would have spurned fiber here. Sadly no. Without Google directly threatening competition, there will be no fiber.
It seems that MS is still stuck behind other companies when it comes to app stores. Whatever excuse they come up with, the real reason is that there are few users therefore few customers. Thus few developers who want to make apps or extensions. And history shows that eventually MS will abandon these systems leaving the developers and users without options. For example the Zune App Store then Windows Phone store, etc. Meanwhile Google and Apple app stores have billions of downloads daily.
YouTube is the best example of how Net Neutrality is supposed to work. For those that don't remember, YouTube competed against Google and Google didn't make any headway. So Google bought them out. Without equal treatment of packets, that would never have happened.
The difference is choice. While AOL tried to lock you in to their ecosystem, you were a month away from a different provider if you chose. There hundreds of different dialup companies back when AOL was its peak.
How many viable broadband does the average American actually have? At the city level, my city has two fiber companies, three cable companies, and two DSL companies; however, at the neighborhood level, the choices are quite limited. Most people in my neighborhood have 1 cable and 1 DSL. Fiber is a mile away and had been "Coming soon" for 5 years.
Let's start with the obvious: That is not a CSO training program. I would hope that a CSO go through that certification but CSO qualifications do not necessarily require it. Just like the position of CIO does not necessarily require an IT degree.
Yet MS still does things that make us question them. Windows 10's misleading and forced upgrades happened this decade if you want to ignore that.
You didn't answer the question: what CSO training programs exist out there? None. This is why your analogy fails. CSO is a relatively new position within companies that isn't really well defined in terms of qualifications.
Flying a plane for an airline has both industry and federal guidelines for qualification. The first of these is the requirement of a pilot's license which takes years to obtain.
Considering there's no "CSO" degree that you can get, I'd have to agree. At best you could get a cyber-security degree from a handful of colleges but that does not ensure the role of chief of security.
Nothing says a plumber can't be good at flying an airplane, but would you want a plumber to be the pilot on your next flight?
Other than the fact that you have to be trained for years as a pilot before any major airline would hire you (civilian or military flight school). And there exists formal pilot training programs. But please show me the numerous "Chief Security Officer" programs that someone must pass before taking on the role.
And there is nothing stopping Gab simply offering the app on their own web site too, or are they complaining that they are not popular enough and need free advertising on Play to survive?
I often find that people who complain that other people are "too sensitive" are the first to cry and whine when something doesn't go their way. I believe it's called projection.