Who the fuck do you think makes voter intimidation known? Independent observers. They don't interfere with anything - they just observe, take notes, and publish a report on how fair the voting process was, whether disenfranchisement occurred, and so on. You don't even know what you're arguing about.
They don't intimidate - they observe. They are there to simply monitor the elections, as the US has a pretty ropey history when it comes to claims of voter fraud. The US calling for observers to be present in the polling stations of other countries is not unheard of, so it seems rather strange for them to not be accepted in the US. Whether the observers are elected or not has nothing to do with it - they are simply there to make sure no one is being pressured to vote, and that people are not being turned away who are allowed to vote. They can't affect anything this election - they simply take notes and pass them on for review, so the legitimacy of the election can be better understood. I know lots of Americans are hateful of the UN, but these people are there purely to ensure democracy is respected, not by affecting the elections themselves, but by highlighting any undemocratic practices undertaken in the areas they observe.
You have to field the requests, figure out or clarify what data is being requested (which can be from any number of different sources, and across millions of years), collate the data, print it out, bundle it, and mail it. That isn't a trivial thing to do, and I have no idea how you can expect it to be as simple as you portray it.
The Met Office (who released the data), sent a letter to the author of that article, stating precisely how he doesn't understand what the data means, as he's not a scientist. This is the second time this same author has tried this stunt, and people like you take it on face value without checking the cited sources. If you believe this, what other nonsense do you believe? It's clear you don't bother to check the sources, so you have no way to discern fact from fiction, apart from your own bias.
I have no idea how you can tell the difference. Please go into details. So far you've not mentioned a single thing that differentiates your claims from those of a person suffering a paranoid episode. Have you used a task manager to actually see what services your phone is running? You sound indistinguishable from this guy, who let his paranoid imagination run rampant.
That's great, but if the person who wins the election is simply terrible, and your vote caused the candidate you'd prefer to win to lose, your protest voting will give you 4 years of shit to eat. Election reform is what's needed, not some shoot-yourself-in-the-foot-to-make-a-point gesture. That fixes nothing. To solve the problem, actually solve the problem.
How do you know you're not mentally ill? That's the problem with mental illness - you might swear you're fine, but in the depths of some horrible illness.
Android apps can run as services and the visible app can be started for any reason by said services. You've leapt straight to the explanation of "I'm being hacked", and missed out the rational steps of actually identifying a hack. Paranoia isn't helping you.
Have you seen a doctor? You have given a pretty decent account of what life feels like to a paranoid schizophrenic. I'd rule that out first before assuming that all your devices are hacked. Do you even have any evidence they were hacked? Or did they just start acting weirdly, and you assume them to be hacked? Give us something to go on, at least.
They are doing just that. If they agree with Obama's position, and they are computer geniuses, it makes sense for them to help Obama by being a computer genius. Them serving coffee to advisors isn't exactly going to help as much, is it? Or not trying to get "their guy" in power again, and just coming up with solutions they think (rightly or wrongly) Romney will skull-fuck into the ground...
Just a heads up - any argument that relies on "because that's the way we've always done it" or "because tradition, that's why", is not being properly explained. Those are *not* valid reasons for *anything*. I'm not saying your point isn't correct, but that sure as hell isn't the right way to make the point to others.
It's a lot easier to back up something in the cloud than a PC or portable device, plus all you need to access the cloud is a network device, which as we all know from the contents of our pockets, are a lot smaller than any storage device of any significant capacity. So no, not necessarily because it's a buzzword, maybe because it's actually a pretty interesting idea.
Why? It has a clear definition to those in the industry who actually depend upon it. It's not the same as a the mainframes of yore - it's a distinct technical shift people haven't seen before. I would say anyone who thinks the term "The Cloud" can't be said with a straight face simply doesn't know what they're talking about.
The fact you picked Greece is very telling. Why didn't you pick one of the multi-party systems which is doing really well, like Germany? Making a point is one thing, but to intentionally misrepresent the truth in order to make your point is fucking disgusting.
Maybe they don't appreciate having religion forced down their necks in every facet of their life. One doesn't like the status quo, the other does. Guess which is vocal? Oh no, that's too easy - I guess it must be that atheists are somehow all assholes or some other irrational guess.
Not in the case of this asshole - all the data is there, but he won't believe it "because Jesus". That *is* dangerous thinking. Seriously dangerous thinking. This guy in question is delusional, and should be treated as such.
My apologies - yes, mach 1 was achieved by ThrustSSC (the same guys as this project) in 1997. And it wasn't a rocket car, but a jet car, with 2 jet engines.
It's being paid for partly by public funds as it's being used to get kids interested in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It's also not a rocket car, but a rocket/jet hybrid, so it's a lot different to simply being a plane on the ground. It seriously would help your argument if you read about the project before commenting massively on its shortcomings; shortcomings which don't seem to actually exist.
This project is being used to get kids interested in science, technology, and mathematics. That's why it's being partly-funded by the government, including the loan of some Typhoon engines. It's not just rich guys going "what what" and driving like idiots - they actually put some thought into it. They tour the car model around schools and get the kids to make projects based on it. The car is also not a rocket car, but a rocket/jet hybrid. It has a rocket engine (which uses a Formula-1 car as the oxidiser pump - that in itself is pretty cool), strapped to one of the engines from a Eurofighter jet (the aforementioned Typhoon engine). It's a really fascinating project.
Slashdot Mirror
Who the fuck do you think makes voter intimidation known? Independent observers. They don't interfere with anything - they just observe, take notes, and publish a report on how fair the voting process was, whether disenfranchisement occurred, and so on. You don't even know what you're arguing about.
They don't intimidate - they observe. They are there to simply monitor the elections, as the US has a pretty ropey history when it comes to claims of voter fraud. The US calling for observers to be present in the polling stations of other countries is not unheard of, so it seems rather strange for them to not be accepted in the US. Whether the observers are elected or not has nothing to do with it - they are simply there to make sure no one is being pressured to vote, and that people are not being turned away who are allowed to vote. They can't affect anything this election - they simply take notes and pass them on for review, so the legitimacy of the election can be better understood. I know lots of Americans are hateful of the UN, but these people are there purely to ensure democracy is respected, not by affecting the elections themselves, but by highlighting any undemocratic practices undertaken in the areas they observe.
You have to field the requests, figure out or clarify what data is being requested (which can be from any number of different sources, and across millions of years), collate the data, print it out, bundle it, and mail it. That isn't a trivial thing to do, and I have no idea how you can expect it to be as simple as you portray it.
The Met Office (who released the data), sent a letter to the author of that article, stating precisely how he doesn't understand what the data means, as he's not a scientist. This is the second time this same author has tried this stunt, and people like you take it on face value without checking the cited sources. If you believe this, what other nonsense do you believe? It's clear you don't bother to check the sources, so you have no way to discern fact from fiction, apart from your own bias.
"Terrorist-type weapons"?? Terrorism is a motive, not an act. If you don't even know that, I have no idea why you should be taken seriously.
I have no idea how you can tell the difference. Please go into details. So far you've not mentioned a single thing that differentiates your claims from those of a person suffering a paranoid episode. Have you used a task manager to actually see what services your phone is running? You sound indistinguishable from this guy, who let his paranoid imagination run rampant.
That's great, but if the person who wins the election is simply terrible, and your vote caused the candidate you'd prefer to win to lose, your protest voting will give you 4 years of shit to eat. Election reform is what's needed, not some shoot-yourself-in-the-foot-to-make-a-point gesture. That fixes nothing. To solve the problem, actually solve the problem.
How do you know you're not mentally ill? That's the problem with mental illness - you might swear you're fine, but in the depths of some horrible illness.
Android apps can run as services and the visible app can be started for any reason by said services. You've leapt straight to the explanation of "I'm being hacked", and missed out the rational steps of actually identifying a hack. Paranoia isn't helping you.
Have you seen a doctor? You have given a pretty decent account of what life feels like to a paranoid schizophrenic. I'd rule that out first before assuming that all your devices are hacked. Do you even have any evidence they were hacked? Or did they just start acting weirdly, and you assume them to be hacked? Give us something to go on, at least.
They are doing just that. If they agree with Obama's position, and they are computer geniuses, it makes sense for them to help Obama by being a computer genius. Them serving coffee to advisors isn't exactly going to help as much, is it? Or not trying to get "their guy" in power again, and just coming up with solutions they think (rightly or wrongly) Romney will skull-fuck into the ground...
Just a heads up - any argument that relies on "because that's the way we've always done it" or "because tradition, that's why", is not being properly explained. Those are *not* valid reasons for *anything*. I'm not saying your point isn't correct, but that sure as hell isn't the right way to make the point to others.
If we use that logic, a parking ticket is an official government document.
Get a better internet provider? Move somewhere you can get one?
It's a lot easier to back up something in the cloud than a PC or portable device, plus all you need to access the cloud is a network device, which as we all know from the contents of our pockets, are a lot smaller than any storage device of any significant capacity. So no, not necessarily because it's a buzzword, maybe because it's actually a pretty interesting idea.
Why? It has a clear definition to those in the industry who actually depend upon it. It's not the same as a the mainframes of yore - it's a distinct technical shift people haven't seen before. I would say anyone who thinks the term "The Cloud" can't be said with a straight face simply doesn't know what they're talking about.
The fact you picked Greece is very telling. Why didn't you pick one of the multi-party systems which is doing really well, like Germany? Making a point is one thing, but to intentionally misrepresent the truth in order to make your point is fucking disgusting.
They're cheap for a reason.
And he's stuck with a US-spec car in Europe. That's embarrassing.
Maybe they don't appreciate having religion forced down their necks in every facet of their life. One doesn't like the status quo, the other does. Guess which is vocal? Oh no, that's too easy - I guess it must be that atheists are somehow all assholes or some other irrational guess.
Not in the case of this asshole - all the data is there, but he won't believe it "because Jesus". That *is* dangerous thinking. Seriously dangerous thinking. This guy in question is delusional, and should be treated as such.
My apologies - yes, mach 1 was achieved by ThrustSSC (the same guys as this project) in 1997. And it wasn't a rocket car, but a jet car, with 2 jet engines.
It's being paid for partly by public funds as it's being used to get kids interested in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It's also not a rocket car, but a rocket/jet hybrid, so it's a lot different to simply being a plane on the ground. It seriously would help your argument if you read about the project before commenting massively on its shortcomings; shortcomings which don't seem to actually exist.
That would have been a rocket *sled*, not a rocket *car*.
This project is being used to get kids interested in science, technology, and mathematics. That's why it's being partly-funded by the government, including the loan of some Typhoon engines. It's not just rich guys going "what what" and driving like idiots - they actually put some thought into it. They tour the car model around schools and get the kids to make projects based on it. The car is also not a rocket car, but a rocket/jet hybrid. It has a rocket engine (which uses a Formula-1 car as the oxidiser pump - that in itself is pretty cool), strapped to one of the engines from a Eurofighter jet (the aforementioned Typhoon engine). It's a really fascinating project.