If it is outside of the national park area then it is under the jurisdiction of the state government, none of which shut down during this period. If it really came down to that, they could have just dispatched their state troopers just like anything else.
This is just a stupid typical politician move to get people to pay attention to them. This is also why we can't have a balanced budget: Instead of taking away useless programs, they decide to cut funding from things that people will complain the loudest about, that way they can keep all of their pet projects.
Can we please stop using the term "scientists" in headlines? Anybody can call themselves a scientist (whether or not they are a competent one,) and scientists usually work for a particular organization - name that organization instead.
The tea party got together and said "gee, I think we ought to shut down the government this month". That was largely a result of the two assfuck parties (republican and democrat) not agreeing on a budget. If you took either one of them out of the equation, there wouldn't have been a shutdown, instead there would have been a running government with one of two different budgets.
Don't link to generalities. Show the specifics. What to cut and by how much.
I don't think listing it was within the scope of that particular document (they are outlining their mission - not detailing every individual action) however I could name a few:
National Endowment of the Arts Title IX Administrative spending in social security (it costs 6 billion per year just to keep the lights on in the offices.)
Those are the biggest, most obvious ones anyways. For an analogy of why I think the NEA is bad, think about this for a second: Hollywood thinks that the government should fund the Oscars. I mean really, nobody gives a shit about that except for the artists themselves. If they want to reward each other for shit that only they themselves care about, then they can do so out of their own pocket. The NEA is a similar deal, only at a lower level. Only the artsy fartsy types actually care about the crap that the NEA produces.
And really the art that comes out of it is in fact crap, sometimes literally piss. Really I take no offense to putting jesus inside of a jar of piss, but why on earth are my tax dollars paying somebody to do that?
As for title 9, title 9 believes that we need to use the education system to force women to take on career choices that they simply might just not be interested in. For example, there's a concerted effort to try to get more girls into IT at the high school level. Which is fine and all, I guess, but in spite of that not many are interested. Why aren't girls interested in IT? I have no idea - but it is a well known fact that men and women's minds are physically different, and part of that difference might include a preponderance to make certain career choices. Even if that were not the case - what if it's just that most of them simply want to do other things instead? I don't play WoW anymore, but I still to this day like watching how the developers have to fight with the community over how "there aren't enough of x class doing this role or having this many in the higher pvp ranks" when a lot of that is actually caused by not enough people who have that particular skill that are interested in playing that particular class. It's not because they're crippled or disfavored, it's simply because (for whatever reason) people have personal preferences for certain things, and so the actual representation won't ever match what "affirmative action" quotas say they should match.
And social security was designed from the beginning so that statistically it doesn't ever actually pay you anything, even though you are guaranteed to pay into it under the premise that it actually will pay you something. Because over time people started living longer than it anticipated, and therefore are getting paid, it is now broken. In addition to that, the percentage of the population on disability is ever increasing (I'm having a hard time believing that the population is becoming more and more disabled as time goes by - but whatever) so now it is double broken. But that's not the worst part - the worst part is that it has the highest administrative costs of any government agency.
That is really neither here nor there. This law won't protect Europeans' data any more than it already is (or isn't,) and I'm pretty sure that they're well aware of that.
I think the purpose for this is mainly an economic one: They want to require IT that services be hosted within their own borders, which they probably believe will encourage job growth. However I think that it will just end up being like a tariff, and the result will be that Europeans will pay up the ass for data warehousing compared to the rest of the world, while gaining nothing in return.
This could have a few other implications as well; namely, that companies who provide these services will only operate in Europe unofficially. Think how mega.co.nz operates out of New Zealand and therefore doesn't have to follow any US laws, meanwhile it contracts with firms all over the world (including the US) for storage and co-hosting. A side effect of that is that they don't have to pay European taxes or have to bother with any European laws at all for that matter.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I think a better approach would be to require mega style encryption among all providers - that is, only the end users hold the keys to their data. Of course, that would make it so that Europe couldn't surveil its own citizens like the NSA, and they don't want that.
Why woosh? He was obviously attacking christianity (scientology doesn't do exorcisms) only scientology is also guilty of most of what he listed. Islam is as well, actually.
Yes, because we all know that poor people paid all of the R&D costs that went into developing computers, smartphones, the internet, life saving surgeries, and life saving medication.
I think the west was already alienated from the islamic world long before that. I mean look at the differences in customs there that we look at as barbaric, such as female circumcision and honor killings. Likewise, they view it as barbaric that we charge interest on loans and allow homosexuals to live (in fact these were two things Osama Bin Laden said he wanted to see end in America.)
Yes, all of season 2 of game of thrones. If you want season 1 or 3 (or both,) you're out of luck.
Sorry but that's the most broken release I've ever seen. I could see maybe not the latest season if they wanted that sense of exclusivity, but why on earth would they omit the first season? Game of Thrones is a highly contextual show, you can't just jump right into season 2 and understand shit about what's going on.
Stuff like amazon instant and vudu you have to pay $2.99 just for the ability to watch it for one day. (Though Amazon has a mix of free and "buy once own forever" as well.)
Fiber can be cheap, but usually not. We're not just talking about buying actual cables here, we need to be able to buy cable by the spool and terminate it ourselves. Fiber is a bitch to do that (you need gloves, special glue, a polishing pad, and a bunch of other things I can't think of at the moment, plus about 8 minutes of time per termination if you're fast at it, not to mention the possibility of getting glass stuck in your fingers) and doing it on a regular basis eats up your time, and time is money.
Twisted pair is easy though, I can do it literally in under 45 seconds per end with just two tools: scissors and a crimper.
That's not my experience. My ipad got image retention on the LCD (happens when looking at a web page for 15 minutes) and Apple suggested I try wiping the ipad to factory state. Not one of their "geniuses" told me this, but several. It doesn't take a genius to tell you that image retention isn't a software issue.
I'll spell out those reasons. True libertarians aren't interested in laws that outlaw abortion, prostitution, drugs, gambling, firearms, or junk food. Democrats tend to want more of the later ones, Republicans more of the former ones; as a result, the ones in the middle are mostly banned or heavily restricted.
Liberals often confuse libertarianism with anarchy, but the two aren't even close to one another. Libertarians want law and order, but they don't want a nanny state. Libertarians believe the government should permit you the tools to protect yourself, liberals believe that the government should protect you from yourself.
Why would they target Quake servers? They don't really use that much bandwidth, especially the first quake which actually worked fine for players using 28.8k dialup modems. Modern FPS are higher than that, but not by much. You could easily run a 20 player server on a T1 link, and remember that is about 1.544mbit, and even have bandwidth to spare. With modern FPS games, the bottleneck tends to be the CPU of the machine that is hosting the game.
Game servers tend to be on the low end when it comes to traffic demands. Now FTP or web servers on the other hand can get much worse, depending on what they host and how many users they get, but even for low volume they have the potential of being a lot more bursty.
I'd say more than anything, I'd be concerned about torrent users. Or at least, ones like me anyways - I do at least 700GB of data per month just on torrents alone. Then again, my seeding policies are a lot more generous than most people I imagine (torrent must seed a minimum of 3:1 ratio, or be inactive for at least 72 hours.)
Who are you going to put in prison, exactly? It's possible only a small team of engineers was aware of this. Hell, may have even just been one rogue developer who nobody gave permission to put it there.
You can talk about that idealism all you want, but the fact is that most people don't know a god damn thing about who they are actually voting for. Talk to a crowd of 100 people, and I'll bet you that 70 of them voted for whoever they did because their friends voted for him, because they like his appearance, or because he seems "refreshing". Having a political stance has nothing to do with it other than if you can find confirmation bias. E.g. ask a question like "Do you think killing kittens is immoral? Well then you voted for the right man."
Both parties are guilty of the above, only it tends to be that democrats think their candidate of choice is the only one who wants to, for example, feed the homeless, whereas the republicans think their candidate is the only one who is anti-spying. (Either of which can be either completely true or completely false - what I'm getting at is that they vote for their perception of the party rather than the person.)
My statements above are based on how many times I've literally heard people say that it's about time we had a black president.
She'll get elected anyways. We elected the current turd sandwich that we have right now because too many people felt guilty about not ever having a president with black skin. Now that there's a supposed war on women going on right now, too many people will feel guilty that no president has ever had a vagina, so sure as shit we'll get a giant douche.
And you don't think Akamai wouldn't have to invest in additional infrastructure for a system that's intended to handle well over 100,000,000 people?
Given that Akamai provides similar services to Google, (including Youtube) Facebook, the NBA (who streams to literally millions throughout the world live and in real-time,) and many other high profile sites, I'd say this particular website is peanuts compared to their normal fare.
Except wikileaks (and Assange himself) is already known to embellish the truth, or even outright fabricate it. For example, what they claimed were cameras in that "collateral murder" video were in fact weapons. I'm not even an expert and I clearly saw both Kalashnikov and RPG being carried by those people walking - I don't know how anybody could mistake those for cameras.
Assange himself admitted that his intent is to cause outcry, even if he has to lie about it.
Slashdot Mirror
But I think I speak for most of Europe when I say we don't want to become a United States of Europe
So then what is the purpose of the EU? And why does it grow more and more powerful and centralized (e.g. the adoption of the euro) as time progresses?
If it is outside of the national park area then it is under the jurisdiction of the state government, none of which shut down during this period. If it really came down to that, they could have just dispatched their state troopers just like anything else.
This is just a stupid typical politician move to get people to pay attention to them. This is also why we can't have a balanced budget: Instead of taking away useless programs, they decide to cut funding from things that people will complain the loudest about, that way they can keep all of their pet projects.
People like you eat it bait, line, and sinker.
This exactly.
Can we please stop using the term "scientists" in headlines? Anybody can call themselves a scientist (whether or not they are a competent one,) and scientists usually work for a particular organization - name that organization instead.
The tea party got together and said "gee, I think we ought to shut down the government this month". That was largely a result of the two assfuck parties (republican and democrat) not agreeing on a budget. If you took either one of them out of the equation, there wouldn't have been a shutdown, instead there would have been a running government with one of two different budgets.
We can't lose the finer details though, otherwise how would we be able to count the number of stories that Morgan Freeman has told?
Don't link to generalities. Show the specifics. What to cut and by how much.
I don't think listing it was within the scope of that particular document (they are outlining their mission - not detailing every individual action) however I could name a few:
National Endowment of the Arts
Title IX
Administrative spending in social security (it costs 6 billion per year just to keep the lights on in the offices.)
Those are the biggest, most obvious ones anyways. For an analogy of why I think the NEA is bad, think about this for a second: Hollywood thinks that the government should fund the Oscars. I mean really, nobody gives a shit about that except for the artists themselves. If they want to reward each other for shit that only they themselves care about, then they can do so out of their own pocket. The NEA is a similar deal, only at a lower level. Only the artsy fartsy types actually care about the crap that the NEA produces.
And really the art that comes out of it is in fact crap, sometimes literally piss. Really I take no offense to putting jesus inside of a jar of piss, but why on earth are my tax dollars paying somebody to do that?
As for title 9, title 9 believes that we need to use the education system to force women to take on career choices that they simply might just not be interested in. For example, there's a concerted effort to try to get more girls into IT at the high school level. Which is fine and all, I guess, but in spite of that not many are interested. Why aren't girls interested in IT? I have no idea - but it is a well known fact that men and women's minds are physically different, and part of that difference might include a preponderance to make certain career choices. Even if that were not the case - what if it's just that most of them simply want to do other things instead? I don't play WoW anymore, but I still to this day like watching how the developers have to fight with the community over how "there aren't enough of x class doing this role or having this many in the higher pvp ranks" when a lot of that is actually caused by not enough people who have that particular skill that are interested in playing that particular class. It's not because they're crippled or disfavored, it's simply because (for whatever reason) people have personal preferences for certain things, and so the actual representation won't ever match what "affirmative action" quotas say they should match.
And social security was designed from the beginning so that statistically it doesn't ever actually pay you anything, even though you are guaranteed to pay into it under the premise that it actually will pay you something. Because over time people started living longer than it anticipated, and therefore are getting paid, it is now broken. In addition to that, the percentage of the population on disability is ever increasing (I'm having a hard time believing that the population is becoming more and more disabled as time goes by - but whatever) so now it is double broken. But that's not the worst part - the worst part is that it has the highest administrative costs of any government agency.
end rant.
That is really neither here nor there. This law won't protect Europeans' data any more than it already is (or isn't,) and I'm pretty sure that they're well aware of that.
I think the purpose for this is mainly an economic one: They want to require IT that services be hosted within their own borders, which they probably believe will encourage job growth. However I think that it will just end up being like a tariff, and the result will be that Europeans will pay up the ass for data warehousing compared to the rest of the world, while gaining nothing in return.
This could have a few other implications as well; namely, that companies who provide these services will only operate in Europe unofficially. Think how mega.co.nz operates out of New Zealand and therefore doesn't have to follow any US laws, meanwhile it contracts with firms all over the world (including the US) for storage and co-hosting. A side effect of that is that they don't have to pay European taxes or have to bother with any European laws at all for that matter.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I think a better approach would be to require mega style encryption among all providers - that is, only the end users hold the keys to their data. Of course, that would make it so that Europe couldn't surveil its own citizens like the NSA, and they don't want that.
Why woosh? He was obviously attacking christianity (scientology doesn't do exorcisms) only scientology is also guilty of most of what he listed. Islam is as well, actually.
Yes, because we all know that poor people paid all of the R&D costs that went into developing computers, smartphones, the internet, life saving surgeries, and life saving medication.
I think you have that the other way around: If we had free energy, we wouldn't need to worry about making profits.
And by the way, Democracy Now receives funding from Ford, Carnegie Corporation, and George Soros (who has a very outspoken political bias),
I think the west was already alienated from the islamic world long before that. I mean look at the differences in customs there that we look at as barbaric, such as female circumcision and honor killings. Likewise, they view it as barbaric that we charge interest on loans and allow homosexuals to live (in fact these were two things Osama Bin Laden said he wanted to see end in America.)
Yes, all of season 2 of game of thrones. If you want season 1 or 3 (or both,) you're out of luck.
Sorry but that's the most broken release I've ever seen. I could see maybe not the latest season if they wanted that sense of exclusivity, but why on earth would they omit the first season? Game of Thrones is a highly contextual show, you can't just jump right into season 2 and understand shit about what's going on.
Stuff like amazon instant and vudu you have to pay $2.99 just for the ability to watch it for one day. (Though Amazon has a mix of free and "buy once own forever" as well.)
That's also assuming that the shows are on all year long, which they aren't.
Fiber can be cheap, but usually not. We're not just talking about buying actual cables here, we need to be able to buy cable by the spool and terminate it ourselves. Fiber is a bitch to do that (you need gloves, special glue, a polishing pad, and a bunch of other things I can't think of at the moment, plus about 8 minutes of time per termination if you're fast at it, not to mention the possibility of getting glass stuck in your fingers) and doing it on a regular basis eats up your time, and time is money.
Twisted pair is easy though, I can do it literally in under 45 seconds per end with just two tools: scissors and a crimper.
I was cloned, the AlphaWolf_HK you replied to is 1/8th my size and gnaws on his kitty.
That's not my experience. My ipad got image retention on the LCD (happens when looking at a web page for 15 minutes) and Apple suggested I try wiping the ipad to factory state. Not one of their "geniuses" told me this, but several. It doesn't take a genius to tell you that image retention isn't a software issue.
I'll spell out those reasons. True libertarians aren't interested in laws that outlaw abortion, prostitution, drugs, gambling, firearms, or junk food. Democrats tend to want more of the later ones, Republicans more of the former ones; as a result, the ones in the middle are mostly banned or heavily restricted.
Liberals often confuse libertarianism with anarchy, but the two aren't even close to one another. Libertarians want law and order, but they don't want a nanny state. Libertarians believe the government should permit you the tools to protect yourself, liberals believe that the government should protect you from yourself.
Why would they target Quake servers? They don't really use that much bandwidth, especially the first quake which actually worked fine for players using 28.8k dialup modems. Modern FPS are higher than that, but not by much. You could easily run a 20 player server on a T1 link, and remember that is about 1.544mbit, and even have bandwidth to spare. With modern FPS games, the bottleneck tends to be the CPU of the machine that is hosting the game.
Game servers tend to be on the low end when it comes to traffic demands. Now FTP or web servers on the other hand can get much worse, depending on what they host and how many users they get, but even for low volume they have the potential of being a lot more bursty.
I'd say more than anything, I'd be concerned about torrent users. Or at least, ones like me anyways - I do at least 700GB of data per month just on torrents alone. Then again, my seeding policies are a lot more generous than most people I imagine (torrent must seed a minimum of 3:1 ratio, or be inactive for at least 72 hours.)
Who are you going to put in prison, exactly? It's possible only a small team of engineers was aware of this. Hell, may have even just been one rogue developer who nobody gave permission to put it there.
You can talk about that idealism all you want, but the fact is that most people don't know a god damn thing about who they are actually voting for. Talk to a crowd of 100 people, and I'll bet you that 70 of them voted for whoever they did because their friends voted for him, because they like his appearance, or because he seems "refreshing". Having a political stance has nothing to do with it other than if you can find confirmation bias. E.g. ask a question like "Do you think killing kittens is immoral? Well then you voted for the right man."
Both parties are guilty of the above, only it tends to be that democrats think their candidate of choice is the only one who wants to, for example, feed the homeless, whereas the republicans think their candidate is the only one who is anti-spying. (Either of which can be either completely true or completely false - what I'm getting at is that they vote for their perception of the party rather than the person.)
My statements above are based on how many times I've literally heard people say that it's about time we had a black president.
She'll get elected anyways. We elected the current turd sandwich that we have right now because too many people felt guilty about not ever having a president with black skin. Now that there's a supposed war on women going on right now, too many people will feel guilty that no president has ever had a vagina, so sure as shit we'll get a giant douche.
Yes, after it is paid to the employees, but not before.
And you don't think Akamai wouldn't have to invest in additional infrastructure for a system that's intended to handle well over 100,000,000 people?
Given that Akamai provides similar services to Google, (including Youtube) Facebook, the NBA (who streams to literally millions throughout the world live and in real-time,) and many other high profile sites, I'd say this particular website is peanuts compared to their normal fare.
Except wikileaks (and Assange himself) is already known to embellish the truth, or even outright fabricate it. For example, what they claimed were cameras in that "collateral murder" video were in fact weapons. I'm not even an expert and I clearly saw both Kalashnikov and RPG being carried by those people walking - I don't know how anybody could mistake those for cameras.
Assange himself admitted that his intent is to cause outcry, even if he has to lie about it.