The "billions of dollars in budget overruns" are self-inflicted by the ridiculous mess of bureaucracy that's in place. Material and labor costs for a nuclear plant really aren't that much different than any other power plant. Construction time (again, taking out the bureaucracy) takes about a year or two more. Actually getting one approved however requires billions of dollars up front before so much a s a shovel touches the ground, and something just short of an act of god.
The problems with nuclear power are caused by people.
Fact checking? Haven't you figured out that facts mean nothing in this election?
Slashdot. News for nerds. Now you'd think with a mantra like that, the site would be full of "smarter than your average bear" type people. But this election has shown that whatever the site used to be back in the day, it is far cry from that now.
I dislike Clinton. I understand why people dislike Clinton. But I can't figure out how anyone with a logic center in their brain could vote for something like Trump. He's a pathological liar. Post debate fact checks alone are more than enough to illuminate that. None of his policies (what few has put forward) make any sense or, at the very least, won't do anything like he claims they will. His take on foreign relations is equivalent of that of a 2 year old throwing a tantrum. He refuses to release his tax returns. He thinks a blind trust is letting his family run his business and manage his assets (I don't even...). The list goes on.
There isn't a logical reason to vote for Trump. No, "Hillary is a liar" is not a reason.
The republicans could have put up anyone else besides Trump, and they would have won. Someone on the more moderate side instead of tea party crazy would have won by a landslide, and with it the house and the senate. But they went with Trump. The RNC truly fucked up with that little piece of strategy. Maybe it was all the crazy they've been fostering and encouraging over the past decade. Maybe they honestly thought that popularity guarantees a win. I honestly don't know what the hell they were thinking, but their strategy team needs to fired because they literally wrapped the presidency in a nice package and delivered it to the democrats. Worse, the damage Trump is doing may actually lose them the house and senate as well.
Trump's skeletons are usually out there already for all to see, some even with flesh still on them. I don't think he tries to hide much. As far as email leaks, it may be that Trump and his team simply don't use email.
He doesn't use email. He tweets. And those tweets are often so damaging that Wikileaks is like "Well shit, I don't have anything that can top that!".
WikiLeaks: "Oh do we have some info on you Trump!" Trump: "I just tweeted that America can suck my dick and all my supporters to go and grab pussy!" Wikileaks:... Wikileaks: Ok, what do we have on Clinton?"
The people I know who are most disturbed by the simulation concept are the ones who most claim to believe in Jesus. And they get really pissed when I ask them how it's any different from their creation myth. Fireworks really start when I explain the simulation was developed over 6 phases by a lead developer with the intials G.O.D. and Eden was just the sandbox where they tested the "human" code. Of course, the flood was a major content patch when the simulation exited beta.
Actually, the flood was a fat fingering mistake. You see, one of the developers was just trying to debug the simulation by running God's Debugger by using gdb --reset. The problem was, that was the command to reset God's Database (gdb), not God's Debugger (gdbug).
The developer's name was Lucifer some such. Apparently as punishment he was relocated to the basement and is only allowed to write accounting scripts in visual basic.
Pretty much. if you're not motivated to get in shape in the first place, it's unlikely a fitness tracker is going to help you.
For me, it was the tool I needed to find out what I was doing wrong. I've always tried to stay fit, but could never seem to lose weight. The fitness tracker, while not 100% accurate, showed me just how far off I was in my estimation of calories in vs. calories out. Once I fixed that little problem, the weight basically melted away.
But again, if you don't have the motivation to get fit and the will power to break bad habits, a fitness tracker isn't going to magically do so.
in scientific research. For example, what is this "hide the decline" all about? Why would scientists want to hide their data?
They didn't, and you'd know that if you read the whole chain as opposed to some out-of-context excerpt that just happens to fit your bias. "Hide the decline" had nothing to do with "hiding" anything, and a whole lot to do with finding and eliminating bad data.
Why wouldn't the CRU (Climate Research Unit at UEA) release their data sets as required by reputable journals such as "Nature."
Ensemble model runs produce petabytes of data. And that's just one data set. Peer-reviewers are of course granted access to the data as needed, but there's no conceivable way to "release" a terabytes and petabytes of HDF/NetCDF/GRIB/etc. files to the public short of a massive data farm, and people like you bitch enough already about "all the money being spent on science".
Why would they deny FOIA requests and conspire to find a way around them?
Because fucking idiots were making ignorant requests that would have wasted thousands of man hours and millions of dollars. But then again, that was the whole point of the FOIA requests to begin with. The "interested" parties had no interest in the actual data, and wouldn't even know what to do with it even if they got it. They wouldn't even be able to store it, let alone process it unless they happened to own their own super-computer.
Why would they seek to marginalize the "Climate Research" journal because some scientists had a contrary opinion, and why did they describe this as "plugging the gap" (their words)?
Having a contrary opinion is fine. Having a contrary opinion being published as reviewed science when supported by nothing but bullshit a college undergrad could rip apart is something else entirely.
Why did a hockey stick emerge from their data no matter what "red noise" was input to the program? (White noise is random; red noise is random from the last iteration, like stock market quotes)
That's a bullshit statement. Not once have I ever seen a single shred of credible evidence to suggest this ever happened. In addition, there are several models with source code freely available for your perusal. Feel free to find the models that behave in this manner.
And why did a hockey stick emerge only when the data was confined to the results of a single bristlecone pine tree?
For fuck's sake, are you stupid or just incompetent? Seriously, the first hits on google take you to several well-written blog entries over on Real Climate that give a thorough debunking to this nonsense.
And why was the fact that contemporary tree-ring data showed a DECLINE in temperature in contrast to very accurate modern thermometers conveniently hidden? Was it because if they don't work accurately now there is no reason to suppose they were accurate thousands of years ago, thus putting the lie to the paleoclimate temperatures?
There's ignorance, and then there's willful ignorance. You are being willfully ignorant. If you were honestly interested in learning the answers to these questions, you would have at least done a little bit of online research. Clearly, you are either incapable of doing that much or you deliberately don't want to.
When you read about these shenanigans it reads like a political backroom dealing attempt to hide shoddy research. I implore you to read "Hiding the Decline; a history of the climategate affair" by A.W. Montford. isbn:978-1475293364, too avail yourselves of the degree of fraud perpetrated by these folks.
Definitely one of the willfully ignorant if you're hauling out that worthless piece of trash. Do you really think the global warming is NEW? You think this was something scientist just cooked up in the past coup
Yeah, and those old pseudoe science pushers from the 1800's like Joseph Fourier and Svante Arrhenius made billions by pushing this scam forward with the prescient knowledge that 100-200 years later the massive consortium of global climate scientists would be rolling in dough, driving BMW's, living in hilltop mansions, and...wait...that's not actually happening is it?
The prediction of global warming was made well before relativity was twinkle in Einstein's eye. Arrhenius (a.k.a the father of modern chemistry) developed a simple global climate model predicting the sensitivity of the climate system to increased CO2 and greenhouse gases in general. His work was published in the 1890's.
All the bullshit about this being some modern global conspiracy is just that: bullshit. Moreover, the same bullshit pushers from such well known controversies as asbestos, acid rain, smoking, etc. are now paid to push climate denial bullshit.
The last I'd heard, news fact-checking organizations were reporting that he told the truth 15% of the time. Why would I ever care what the opinion of someone like was?
And don't tell me "because he's going to be president". The people of the United States are still smarter than that.
True enough. Most people voting for Trump are uneducated white "rale 'muricans". Most people voting for Hillary are doing so because they they can't stomach the the idea of someone like Trump as president.
Fad diets, special exercise programs, etc. only causes weight loss in one area: your wallet. How much weight you lose is governed by physics. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, the weight comes off. Period. It doesn't matter if you got the calories from eating a candy bar or from eating a salad.
Your body is not a perpetual motion machine. Calories are calories. Eat less, exercise more.
So, at the speeds Verizon provides me, 569 gig in a few days is a physical impossibility.
Definitely agree with other posters - sue them for the max amount allowable in small claims court. Bet they settle without you ever actually talking to a lawyer.
Wow! That's like seven exploding Samsung Galaxy 7's worth of data!
I don't think there was much concern about Reagan having Alzheimers while he was president, and making decisions as president.
Also, can anybody look at Hillary Clinton's behavior in the past year and honestly say she doesn't appear unhealthy? I just don't know of any other people in the media spotlight or candidates for office I've seen who go on 2 minute coughing fits multiple times, or who need a stool while they're on stage.
By that measure, I guess FDR should never have been president then?
Please call them what they are : a taxi company. No need to repeat their marketing drivel.
They're not even a taxi company. They're a contracting service. They match independent contractors (drivers) with riders. The contract drivers agree to is so bad you'd have be blind and/or stupid to accept it. The drivers would actually be better off just working for a real taxi company. At least then they're aren't wrecking their own cars while making pennies on the dollar after expenses and taxes.
Hillary isn't "progressive left". She is, at best, a little left of center. The media also isn't saying she "deserves" to be president. If they are, they certainly have a funny way of showing it. Typically you don't devote air time to trying to tear down the candidate you think "deserves" to be president.
The media also isn't labeling the right as angry/bigoted/racist/etc. They've earned those titles through their actions and what they've said. Now granted, those most vocal on the right may only represent a small segment of the right but that's what's getting the air time.
The RINOs need to become real republicans again and change their message. Brushing up on their science classes would also help.
You know, it would really help if you read the freakin' paper so you don't look like an idiot when making comments.
Also, the paper has received several critiques including one from Dr. Michael Mann. Yes, that Dr. Mann. He thinks that they don't provide a solid basis to draw the conclusions they did, and he makes some good arguments AGAINST the paper's conclusions.
Does anybody really doubt that this man was assassinated by the DNC/Clintons/etc.? Days after a huge scandal? Double tapped in the back and nothing taken? Does that sound like robbery to you?
Everything's a crazy conspiracy theory until it comes out decades later in declassified documents that it was true. I remember back in the 80's when charges that the CIA was helping South American drug lords import shit-tons of cocaine into the U.S. was just a crazy conspiracy theory too.
I'm far from a tinfoil hat wearing kook. But the fact that this guy was murdered in a decent neighborhood just weeks after he leaked a bunch of sensitive documents about major political figures, by a "robber" who didn't even bother to take his cellphone or wallet, seems more than a little suspicious to me. It strains belief that it was all just a coincidence.
Make no mistake, Edward Snowden would have met the same fate if he hadn't been smart enough to get the fuck out of the country.
Has the bar for crazy really dropped so low? So let me get this straight. Someone gets murdered in DC, and it's suddenly Clinton's fault?
Let me clue you in. You clearly don't live in this area. There are no "nice" areas that will prevent you from getting shot. Last week we had a case where four people jumped an old lady, shot her in the arm, then stole her shoes. Not her purse. Not her money. Just her shoes.
But clearly it was Trump trying to send a message, right? I mean, she was a black lady and had a pro Hillary sign on her property. #dumbassconspiracy
And if you're a Democrat reading this and are angered: take the challenge. Post a reason why Hillary would be better than Trump as president...
What the fuck does this have to do with "the heart rules the head" bullshit you spouted off before?
If you want evidence of which party is "ruled by the heart" how about looking at something objective, like...oh I don't know...how about basic scientific understanding?
Republicans don't spout lies and insults? Did you sleep through the past 20 years or so? Live in a cabin in the woods for the past couple of decades? Happen to miss the RNC this year?
Both parties do this. That's why sites like FactCheck actually have a job. Republicans do it more, and are better at it to be sure, but they both do it.
Basically, the two things Hillary has going for her is she has experience and she knows the game. Those are both positives and negatives in my opinion. But that's overshadowed by all her other..."qualities", which make her (or should have made her) unelectable. Trump is just batshit insane; a US version of Kim Jong Il. He's said shit that would have gotten any other candidate I can think of over the decades burned at the stake (Democrat or Republican).
So you have a cold calculating ruthless sociopath and an idiotic batshit insane sociopath. It's the worst election I can remember. It's not even an election. It's a choice between the devil you know and the devil you don't. Usually I just vote third party in this situation, but in this case the thought of Trump in the Whitehouse is so damn terrifying there isn't much of choice.
I think there's a large number of people out there who feel the same way. They aren't voting for Hillary as much as they are voting against Trump.
The problem with the software engineering/programming people is that they don't care about reusability, and it shows; once the project is done they move on to the next one.
That's a bullshit statement and you know it. The people who maintain projects like Spring, Hadoop, etc. don't give a shit about re-usability? Yeah, ok.
The people producing C libraries (like myself) are happily reusing the libraries we wrote two decades ago without having to rewrite them to use in another language.
And I still happily reuse Java libraries I wrote from over a decade ago without having to worry about what particular machine they're going to be run on, what OS changes have been made, etc. I haven't been doing much python programming lately, but I'm pretty sure I can run the same scripts I wrote 10 years ago and still have them work just fine today.
In addition, there is absolutely nothing special about C. C is a language, nothing more. The compiler can produce binary lib files that can be linked in to other code, but that isn't limited in any way to just C.
Use the appropriate tool for the job, and avoid treating everything like nail just because you only know how to use a hammer.
You should have gone to his supervisor and gotten his ass nailed to the wall. At least at the company I work for, that would be considered a serious ethical breach and grounds for immediate termination.
So the dog finally caught a car. Now we get to watch what happens when a bunch of idiots vote against their own best interests and have to face the consequences. Take this a preview of what's coming in November for the good ol' US.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm having a ball.
This should be obvious, but I guess politicians need to be seen doing something, and apparently reasonable gun control in a country that makes up a 1/3 of violent gun crimes just isn't going to fly.
The guy was nuts. He had a documented history of being nuts. His friends thought he was nuts. His family thought he was nuts. And yet, he could still get plenty of ammo and guns. The problem wasn't that there wasn't enough surveillance. The problem is that no one was paying attention to the information that was ALREADY AVAILABLE.
"Oh, I see you have a history of being bat shit insane. Here, let me get you a special discount on our Sandy Hook signature line of guns."
What, like Guantanamo Bay was going to be closed under President Obama?
And for the millionth time, a president can promise ANYTHING but he/she has to have the support to do it.
Presidents aren't gods. They can't just wave their hand and make shit happen. "I will close Guantanamo!" made a good sound bite, but anyone with a partially functioning cortex should have realized that doing so is a lot more complicated than simply saying "CLOSE IT".
And that's really the problem with elections in general. It's why people have low confidence and trust in politicians. Politicians have to market themselves, and they have to do it in the 5 minute attention span the news/people have. But at the same time, they have to deal with problems who's answers are anything but simple. How do you resolve that?
Well, right now we have politicians delivering sound bites that are tailored to sound good, but if you actually stop and think about what it is they're talking about the sound bites are really just fluff. The actual implementation and execution of said sound bites may be quite difficult or impossible, especially if you're going to be meeting opposition.
So go ahead and vote for whoever "sounds" better to you. But keep in mind that doesn't mean they're going to get anything done. Obstructionism is the word of the day in politics.
Slashdot Mirror
The "billions of dollars in budget overruns" are self-inflicted by the ridiculous mess of bureaucracy that's in place. Material and labor costs for a nuclear plant really aren't that much different than any other power plant. Construction time (again, taking out the bureaucracy) takes about a year or two more. Actually getting one approved however requires billions of dollars up front before so much a s a shovel touches the ground, and something just short of an act of god.
The problems with nuclear power are caused by people.
Not only does Trump not have such an agenda, 99% of his followers have nothing to do with racism, sexism, xenophobia, or accepting sexual assault.
Sure they don't. And there was no classified emails on Clinton's server either.
Fact checking? Haven't you figured out that facts mean nothing in this election?
Slashdot. News for nerds. Now you'd think with a mantra like that, the site would be full of "smarter than your average bear" type people. But this election has shown that whatever the site used to be back in the day, it is far cry from that now.
I dislike Clinton. I understand why people dislike Clinton. But I can't figure out how anyone with a logic center in their brain could vote for something like Trump. He's a pathological liar. Post debate fact checks alone are more than enough to illuminate that. None of his policies (what few has put forward) make any sense or, at the very least, won't do anything like he claims they will. His take on foreign relations is equivalent of that of a 2 year old throwing a tantrum. He refuses to release his tax returns. He thinks a blind trust is letting his family run his business and manage his assets (I don't even...). The list goes on.
There isn't a logical reason to vote for Trump. No, "Hillary is a liar" is not a reason.
The republicans could have put up anyone else besides Trump, and they would have won. Someone on the more moderate side instead of tea party crazy would have won by a landslide, and with it the house and the senate. But they went with Trump. The RNC truly fucked up with that little piece of strategy. Maybe it was all the crazy they've been fostering and encouraging over the past decade. Maybe they honestly thought that popularity guarantees a win. I honestly don't know what the hell they were thinking, but their strategy team needs to fired because they literally wrapped the presidency in a nice package and delivered it to the democrats. Worse, the damage Trump is doing may actually lose them the house and senate as well.
Trump's skeletons are usually out there already for all to see, some even with flesh still on them. I don't think he tries to hide much. As far as email leaks, it may be that Trump and his team simply don't use email.
He doesn't use email. He tweets. And those tweets are often so damaging that Wikileaks is like "Well shit, I don't have anything that can top that!".
WikiLeaks: "Oh do we have some info on you Trump!"
Trump: "I just tweeted that America can suck my dick and all my supporters to go and grab pussy!"
Wikileaks:...
Wikileaks: Ok, what do we have on Clinton?"
The people I know who are most disturbed by the simulation concept are the ones who most claim to believe in Jesus. And they get really pissed when I ask them how it's any different from their creation myth. Fireworks really start when I explain the simulation was developed over 6 phases by a lead developer with the intials G.O.D. and Eden was just the sandbox where they tested the "human" code. Of course, the flood was a major content patch when the simulation exited beta.
Actually, the flood was a fat fingering mistake. You see, one of the developers was just trying to debug the simulation by running God's Debugger by using gdb --reset. The problem was, that was the command to reset God's Database (gdb), not God's Debugger (gdbug).
The developer's name was Lucifer some such. Apparently as punishment he was relocated to the basement and is only allowed to write accounting scripts in visual basic.
Pretty much. if you're not motivated to get in shape in the first place, it's unlikely a fitness tracker is going to help you.
For me, it was the tool I needed to find out what I was doing wrong. I've always tried to stay fit, but could never seem to lose weight. The fitness tracker, while not 100% accurate, showed me just how far off I was in my estimation of calories in vs. calories out. Once I fixed that little problem, the weight basically melted away.
But again, if you don't have the motivation to get fit and the will power to break bad habits, a fitness tracker isn't going to magically do so.
in scientific research. For example, what is this "hide the decline" all about? Why would scientists want to hide their data?
They didn't, and you'd know that if you read the whole chain as opposed to some out-of-context excerpt that just happens to fit your bias. "Hide the decline" had nothing to do with "hiding" anything, and a whole lot to do with finding and eliminating bad data.
Why wouldn't the CRU (Climate Research Unit at UEA) release their data sets as required by reputable journals such as "Nature."
Ensemble model runs produce petabytes of data. And that's just one data set. Peer-reviewers are of course granted access to the data as needed, but there's no conceivable way to "release" a terabytes and petabytes of HDF/NetCDF/GRIB/etc. files to the public short of a massive data farm, and people like you bitch enough already about "all the money being spent on science".
Why would they deny FOIA requests and conspire to find a way around them?
Because fucking idiots were making ignorant requests that would have wasted thousands of man hours and millions of dollars. But then again, that was the whole point of the FOIA requests to begin with. The "interested" parties had no interest in the actual data, and wouldn't even know what to do with it even if they got it. They wouldn't even be able to store it, let alone process it unless they happened to own their own super-computer.
Why would they seek to marginalize the "Climate Research" journal because some scientists had a contrary opinion, and why did they describe this as "plugging the gap" (their words)?
Having a contrary opinion is fine. Having a contrary opinion being published as reviewed science when supported by nothing but bullshit a college undergrad could rip apart is something else entirely.
Why did a hockey stick emerge from their data no matter what "red noise" was input to the program? (White noise is random; red noise is random from the last iteration, like stock market quotes)
That's a bullshit statement. Not once have I ever seen a single shred of credible evidence to suggest this ever happened. In addition, there are several models with source code freely available for your perusal. Feel free to find the models that behave in this manner.
And why did a hockey stick emerge only when the data was confined to the results of a single bristlecone pine tree?
For fuck's sake, are you stupid or just incompetent? Seriously, the first hits on google take you to several well-written blog entries over on Real Climate that give a thorough debunking to this nonsense.
And why was the fact that contemporary tree-ring data showed a DECLINE in temperature in contrast to very accurate modern thermometers conveniently hidden? Was it because if they don't work accurately now there is no reason to suppose they were accurate thousands of years ago, thus putting the lie to the paleoclimate temperatures?
There's ignorance, and then there's willful ignorance. You are being willfully ignorant. If you were honestly interested in learning the answers to these questions, you would have at least done a little bit of online research. Clearly, you are either incapable of doing that much or you deliberately don't want to.
When you read about these shenanigans it reads like a political backroom dealing attempt to hide shoddy research. I implore you to read "Hiding the Decline; a history of the climategate affair" by A.W. Montford. isbn:978-1475293364, too avail yourselves of the degree of fraud perpetrated by these folks.
Definitely one of the willfully ignorant if you're hauling out that worthless piece of trash. Do you really think the global warming is NEW? You think this was something scientist just cooked up in the past coup
Yeah, and those old pseudoe science pushers from the 1800's like Joseph Fourier and Svante Arrhenius made billions by pushing this scam forward with the prescient knowledge that 100-200 years later the massive consortium of global climate scientists would be rolling in dough, driving BMW's, living in hilltop mansions, and...wait...that's not actually happening is it?
The prediction of global warming was made well before relativity was twinkle in Einstein's eye. Arrhenius (a.k.a the father of modern chemistry) developed a simple global climate model predicting the sensitivity of the climate system to increased CO2 and greenhouse gases in general. His work was published in the 1890's.
All the bullshit about this being some modern global conspiracy is just that: bullshit. Moreover, the same bullshit pushers from such well known controversies as asbestos, acid rain, smoking, etc. are now paid to push climate denial bullshit.
The last I'd heard, news fact-checking organizations were reporting that he told the truth 15% of the time. Why would I ever care what the opinion of someone like was?
And don't tell me "because he's going to be president". The people of the United States are still smarter than that.
True enough. Most people voting for Trump are uneducated white "rale 'muricans". Most people voting for Hillary are doing so because they they can't stomach the the idea of someone like Trump as president.
Carbs, protein, fat...bullshit.
Fad diets, special exercise programs, etc. only causes weight loss in one area: your wallet. How much weight you lose is governed by physics. If you consume fewer calories than you burn, the weight comes off. Period. It doesn't matter if you got the calories from eating a candy bar or from eating a salad.
Your body is not a perpetual motion machine. Calories are calories. Eat less, exercise more.
So, at the speeds Verizon provides me, 569 gig in a few days is a physical impossibility.
Definitely agree with other posters - sue them for the max amount allowable in small claims court. Bet they settle without you ever actually talking to a lawyer.
Wow! That's like seven exploding Samsung Galaxy 7's worth of data!
BS. The majority of the media is left leaning. They would love to pan the RNC.
The majority is left leaning because women don't like working in places where they're sexually harassed. :P
I don't think there was much concern about Reagan having Alzheimers while he was president, and making decisions as president.
Also, can anybody look at Hillary Clinton's behavior in the past year and honestly say she doesn't appear unhealthy? I just don't know of any other people in the media spotlight or candidates for office I've seen who go on 2 minute coughing fits multiple times, or who need a stool while they're on stage.
By that measure, I guess FDR should never have been president then?
Please call them what they are : a taxi company.
No need to repeat their marketing drivel.
They're not even a taxi company. They're a contracting service. They match independent contractors (drivers) with riders. The contract drivers agree to is so bad you'd have be blind and/or stupid to accept it. The drivers would actually be better off just working for a real taxi company. At least then they're aren't wrecking their own cars while making pennies on the dollar after expenses and taxes.
Hillary isn't "progressive left". She is, at best, a little left of center. The media also isn't saying she "deserves" to be president. If they are, they certainly have a funny way of showing it. Typically you don't devote air time to trying to tear down the candidate you think "deserves" to be president.
The media also isn't labeling the right as angry/bigoted/racist/etc. They've earned those titles through their actions and what they've said. Now granted, those most vocal on the right may only represent a small segment of the right but that's what's getting the air time.
The RINOs need to become real republicans again and change their message. Brushing up on their science classes would also help.
You know, it would really help if you read the freakin' paper so you don't look like an idiot when making comments.
Also, the paper has received several critiques including one from Dr. Michael Mann. Yes, that Dr. Mann. He thinks that they don't provide a solid basis to draw the conclusions they did, and he makes some good arguments AGAINST the paper's conclusions.
Does anybody really doubt that this man was assassinated by the DNC/Clintons/etc.? Days after a huge scandal? Double tapped in the back and nothing taken? Does that sound like robbery to you?
No, that sounds like DC to me.
Everything's a crazy conspiracy theory until it comes out decades later in declassified documents that it was true. I remember back in the 80's when charges that the CIA was helping South American drug lords import shit-tons of cocaine into the U.S. was just a crazy conspiracy theory too.
I'm far from a tinfoil hat wearing kook. But the fact that this guy was murdered in a decent neighborhood just weeks after he leaked a bunch of sensitive documents about major political figures, by a "robber" who didn't even bother to take his cellphone or wallet, seems more than a little suspicious to me. It strains belief that it was all just a coincidence.
Make no mistake, Edward Snowden would have met the same fate if he hadn't been smart enough to get the fuck out of the country.
Has the bar for crazy really dropped so low? So let me get this straight. Someone gets murdered in DC, and it's suddenly Clinton's fault?
Let me clue you in. You clearly don't live in this area. There are no "nice" areas that will prevent you from getting shot. Last week we had a case where four people jumped an old lady, shot her in the arm, then stole her shoes. Not her purse. Not her money. Just her shoes.
But clearly it was Trump trying to send a message, right? I mean, she was a black lady and had a pro Hillary sign on her property. #dumbassconspiracy
give the editors a break. they had to type this summary with only 1 hand!
They could do better. Why? Because I know something you don't know.
They are not left handed.
And if you're a Democrat reading this and are angered: take the challenge. Post a reason why Hillary would be better than Trump as president...
What the fuck does this have to do with "the heart rules the head" bullshit you spouted off before?
If you want evidence of which party is "ruled by the heart" how about looking at something objective, like...oh I don't know...how about basic scientific understanding?
Republicans don't spout lies and insults? Did you sleep through the past 20 years or so? Live in a cabin in the woods for the past couple of decades? Happen to miss the RNC this year?
Both parties do this. That's why sites like FactCheck actually have a job. Republicans do it more, and are better at it to be sure, but they both do it.
Basically, the two things Hillary has going for her is she has experience and she knows the game. Those are both positives and negatives in my opinion. But that's overshadowed by all her other..."qualities", which make her (or should have made her) unelectable. Trump is just batshit insane; a US version of Kim Jong Il. He's said shit that would have gotten any other candidate I can think of over the decades burned at the stake (Democrat or Republican).
So you have a cold calculating ruthless sociopath and an idiotic batshit insane sociopath. It's the worst election I can remember. It's not even an election. It's a choice between the devil you know and the devil you don't. Usually I just vote third party in this situation, but in this case the thought of Trump in the Whitehouse is so damn terrifying there isn't much of choice.
I think there's a large number of people out there who feel the same way. They aren't voting for Hillary as much as they are voting against Trump.
The problem with the software engineering/programming people is that they don't care about reusability, and it shows; once the project is done they move on to the next one.
That's a bullshit statement and you know it. The people who maintain projects like Spring, Hadoop, etc. don't give a shit about re-usability? Yeah, ok.
The people producing C libraries (like myself) are happily reusing the libraries we wrote two decades ago without having to rewrite them to use in another language.
And I still happily reuse Java libraries I wrote from over a decade ago without having to worry about what particular machine they're going to be run on, what OS changes have been made, etc. I haven't been doing much python programming lately, but I'm pretty sure I can run the same scripts I wrote 10 years ago and still have them work just fine today.
In addition, there is absolutely nothing special about C. C is a language, nothing more. The compiler can produce binary lib files that can be linked in to other code, but that isn't limited in any way to just C.
Use the appropriate tool for the job, and avoid treating everything like nail just because you only know how to use a hammer.
You should have gone to his supervisor and gotten his ass nailed to the wall. At least at the company I work for, that would be considered a serious ethical breach and grounds for immediate termination.
*grabs popcorn*
So the dog finally caught a car. Now we get to watch what happens when a bunch of idiots vote against their own best interests and have to face the consequences. Take this a preview of what's coming in November for the good ol' US.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm having a ball.
This should be obvious, but I guess politicians need to be seen doing something, and apparently reasonable gun control in a country that makes up a 1/3 of violent gun crimes just isn't going to fly.
The guy was nuts. He had a documented history of being nuts. His friends thought he was nuts. His family thought he was nuts. And yet, he could still get plenty of ammo and guns. The problem wasn't that there wasn't enough surveillance. The problem is that no one was paying attention to the information that was ALREADY AVAILABLE.
"Oh, I see you have a history of being bat shit insane. Here, let me get you a special discount on our Sandy Hook signature line of guns."
What, like Guantanamo Bay was going to be closed under President Obama?
And for the millionth time, a president can promise ANYTHING but he/she has to have the support to do it.
Presidents aren't gods. They can't just wave their hand and make shit happen. "I will close Guantanamo!" made a good sound bite, but anyone with a partially functioning cortex should have realized that doing so is a lot more complicated than simply saying "CLOSE IT".
And that's really the problem with elections in general. It's why people have low confidence and trust in politicians. Politicians have to market themselves, and they have to do it in the 5 minute attention span the news/people have. But at the same time, they have to deal with problems who's answers are anything but simple. How do you resolve that?
Well, right now we have politicians delivering sound bites that are tailored to sound good, but if you actually stop and think about what it is they're talking about the sound bites are really just fluff. The actual implementation and execution of said sound bites may be quite difficult or impossible, especially if you're going to be meeting opposition.
So go ahead and vote for whoever "sounds" better to you. But keep in mind that doesn't mean they're going to get anything done. Obstructionism is the word of the day in politics.