I happen to pay for CRTV, but also donate through various means to certain people that provide free videos on Youtube. Those people are not monetized like TV, so you can't count revenue. I can count several dozen people with 600,000+ thousand subscribers who don't get monetized for most of their work.
Revenue is a horrible way to determine who's watching, view count is much more accurate. CNN makes more money than Joe Rogan, but Joe has more viewers on any given show. Most cable news (CNN/MSNBC) shows have a viewership of around 500,000, which in a population of 320 million is laughable. Again, compared to Joe Rogan who is not syndicated with his Podcast (Joe Rogan Experience) or even on TV, usually has over 600K views of his show.
Before you say "but partial watches" most people watching TV do exactly the same thing. Generally people do other things while the News is on.
There will still need to be people working, just in a different capacity and much less of them. Now if we were all using the Carl's Junior vending machine from Idiocracy, we would have a different discussion. Not that far off mind you, but not quite there yet.
That said, I live in California and hate going to fast food restaurants. Customer service does not usually exist for numerous reasons.
There is so much fake news today that people don't know what to believe. Alternative sources can at least get people who want to look a different source for facts, or often a more complete set of facts. Flagging "disputed" from a biased perspective does not help anyone return a full set of facts.
It's really funny how the anti-Trump people bash Fox, yet ignore their own team (not really, it's quite common). FSN is often just as left leaning as CNN or MSNBC depending on the time of day and show running.
The big problem in the US today is that there are simply no reliable sources of news. Just as rare, are reasonable opinions that argue with a full set of facts.
If the reactionaries on the right had done the same thing it would be reported the same way. To you, anything "left" is a problem, not just the extremists on your side. At least be honest about why you censor opinions, asshole.
I agree, but lets not forget how things have progressed so far under an administration which is taking immigration reform very seriously. The EU yesterday issued a statement that US visitors may lose rights to travel without Visas to the EU. A statement which should be seen by all Americans as a blackmail attempt, but the reactionaries on the left are celebrating the threat. The reactionaries on the left applauded the moratorium on immigration being placed on TRO. The reactionaries on the left have been screaming that controlling borders is racist. The reactionaries were further applauding Mexico dumping 150 million tons of sewage claiming that the US deserved it for wanting control of it's own borders.
Don't put anything type of weapon out of their reach, because thus far they have shown that they are willing to destroy and let destruction occur to achieve their end.
This is good news for the US economy as a whole, at least on the surface. Lets avoid the arguments about being paid less or being treated as indentured servants for now. A good portion of the H1B worker's money goes back to their home country. Even if they made the same wages, they don't spend the money the same so American's lose money in the economy and jobs at the lower end.
The answer from many of these big companies will to simply lay off more Americans and move more jobs overseas. Those regulations need to see some light for this to truly work out.
Interesting ideas, but passing a test does not ensure morality. Morality is the problem, and I can tell you quite plainly that the immoral and moral in today's society are pretty evenly numbered. Even if you required 3rd party defensive action, there is no way to prevent or prove collusion.
This would allow vigilantism and encourage anti-competitive attacking. "We thought they were the ones trying to hack us, see our logs? (cat log | sed -e 's/someip/theirip/g'
As much as I hate big Government, I would rather see an easy to interface with government agency with law enforcement capabilities handling this. In fact, isn't that what the NSA is supposed to be for?
No shit Sherlock, thanks for repeating exactly what I stated when you first responded to the post. There is NO INTENT CLAUSE IN THE LAW! That is the statement Representative Gowdy (who happens to have been a State Prosecutor in addition to being a licensed attorney) makes to Comey in that testimony. He further states that it is the AGs job to determine whether or not intent can be found, not the job of the law enforcement officer.
Your knowledge of law matches your mental maturity in both reading comprehension and debate. Meaning a turnip would outclass you.
Does that mean that you should stand outside uncovered in 110 degree sunny weather for hours at a time every day? How about standing in front of a microwave transmitter at the minimum safe distance for a prolonged time every day? Your point is both irrational and illogical.
The reasoning given can be summed up as "sophisticated hackers knew how to brake into systems configured as H's equipment was."
But most systems everywhere probably are, including the State Department's "regular" office email servers (which were breached).
Thus, I don't see it as a significant statement.
Then to put it quite simply, you are not very bright. I have worked in IT Security for 30 (10yrs DOD/20 private sector) years and can tell you first hand that high value targets are not hacked in a way that leaves footprints. A target like the State Department was only found after leaks were discovered. Clinton's server was a value rich target for any State actor. It was found to be running an unpatched version of Exchange, and one that is simple to break into with numerous methods. It is extremely probable that the server was actively exploited by more than one foreign agency, to the point of being highly likely as Director Comey stated.
Another point just to deter the fanbois, is that mail servers for brand new domains are attacked almost as soon as they go live on the Internet. Ask Cloudmark, Spamhaus, or any other company hosting mail and DNS for customers or providing RBL information. Claiming "nobody knew" is not just foolish, it's downright lying.
That said, RF is dangerous depending on signal strength and exposure time. I don't, out of long time habits instilled in the Military, keep a cell phone by my head. I use headphones. Can the body tolerate the cell phones? Probably, but it's kind of like eating bacon. It tastes really good but in large quantities is not very healthy. Everything in moderation was coined quite wisely.
Directory Comey stated in testimony that the action was illegal. He stated that he did not recommend pressing charges since intent could be proven. You can find the testimony in front of Congress during questioning by Representative Trey Gowdy.
The FBI and numerous sources state that it's probable it was hacked. Left wing source and Right wing source just in case you are biased in one direction or the other. Why can be found here, or talk to a security expert who has dealt with forensics if you want the technical details.
It's a long book but the philosophy is solid. Society based on "intentions" and not "law" simply fail. What we see in the world today is a staggering amount of anti-science rhetoric, and the creation and use of criminal charges for simply thinking a way someone dislikes.
I can't make you learn politics quite as easily, but recommend you read the Federalist Papers which contain thoughts regarding why the US was established the way it was. Plato's "The Republic" is probably a good primer since we get foundations of Justice, Liberty, and critical thought from that book,
Point is, I don't think guns and phones matter much to whether this is a free country. It is all in the intangible subtleties of the culture. It is in the common sense of the people. If that goes, we're fucked.
Unfortunately that is simply false. When the Government is setup to be a tyranny, it only takes the right person in office to make it so. The "common sense" of the people should never let the Government get to the point where it's people have no natural rights (personal liberty).
Many Western countries are setup just like the UK, where the wrong person in power means absolute tyranny. It's taken the UK about 15 years to kill free speech, but anything today deemed "hate speech" will land you in jail. The UK, France, and countless others used to be the Bastions of Free speech that everyone else tried to emulate. Not any longer.
So people in the UK can purchase weapons for self defense? Are they free to speak their minds without fear of going to jail? The answer to both of those is "no", so I am correct. Show me the laws and protections people have for what we in the US call the first and second amendments of the Constitution, and I'll admit I'm wrong. I don't have any fear of being wrong.
Given that most Americans favor the surveillance, including both Republicans and Democrats...
This is why majority rule has hit the brick wall. It always ends in tyranny...
Which is why we are a Republic, and not a pure Democracy. The founders knew that Democracy always fails, there were plenty of historical examples for them to study.
Part 1, pure hyperbole and Bullshit. If there is illegal activity due process will find it and prosecute it, and the Constitution provides the presumption of innocence. Leftists wanted that for their candidate.
Part 2. You can run a Google search and find Nancy Pelosi telling a women that illegal aliens are not criminals. Woman: “In 2010 one of the illegals slaughtered my son,” she began. “He tortured him, he beat him, he tied him up like an animal. And he set him on fire. And I am not a one-story mother. This happens every day because there are no laws enforced at the border.” Pelosi: "I pray for you, again, we all pray that none of us has to experience what you’ve experienced. So thank you for channeling your energy to help prevent something like that from happening, but I do want to say to you, that in our sanctuary cities, our people are not disobeying the law. These are law-abiding citizens. It enables them to there without being reported to ICE in case of another crime that they might bare witness to."
Part 3 - The basis of the ban is that the 7 States under moritorium are either failed states, or openly support terrorism. The US does not employ Santa Claus to determine a person's status, it relies on foreign governments to provide status. If there is no central Government (Libya, Sudan, Syria), status can not be provided. Other Governments (Iran) can not be trusted to provide reliable information. Christians, including Yazidis , were mentioned as a priority since ISIS has been openly committing genocide against those groups.
Part 4, and I'm done doing research for you can be found here as well as numerous other sources.
I don't care about your opinion of the Democratic party any more than you care about mine. I don't listen to Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC, or NBC, or anyone else to form my opinion. ALL media in this country has become so biased the truth is hard to find. I go to sources, and suggest you do the same. I can say absolutely that my opinion is based in facts, and constantly being updated with evaluations. Not many, including you it seems, can say the same (referencing your lack of desire or ability to find information on immigration, Pelosi's statement, etc..).
Wrong, you are cherry picking a sentence fragment to back an invalid opinion based on a lie. Why not read the _FULL_ quote from Steven Bannon instead of repeating lies? Oh, it harms your narrative. Thanks for playing, have a nice day.
Slashdot Mirror
I happen to pay for CRTV, but also donate through various means to certain people that provide free videos on Youtube. Those people are not monetized like TV, so you can't count revenue. I can count several dozen people with 600,000+ thousand subscribers who don't get monetized for most of their work.
Revenue is a horrible way to determine who's watching, view count is much more accurate. CNN makes more money than Joe Rogan, but Joe has more viewers on any given show. Most cable news (CNN/MSNBC) shows have a viewership of around 500,000, which in a population of 320 million is laughable. Again, compared to Joe Rogan who is not syndicated with his Podcast (Joe Rogan Experience) or even on TV, usually has over 600K views of his show.
Before you say "but partial watches" most people watching TV do exactly the same thing. Generally people do other things while the News is on.
There will still need to be people working, just in a different capacity and much less of them. Now if we were all using the Carl's Junior vending machine from Idiocracy, we would have a different discussion. Not that far off mind you, but not quite there yet.
That said, I live in California and hate going to fast food restaurants. Customer service does not usually exist for numerous reasons.
There is so much fake news today that people don't know what to believe. Alternative sources can at least get people who want to look a different source for facts, or often a more complete set of facts. Flagging "disputed" from a biased perspective does not help anyone return a full set of facts.
It's really funny how the anti-Trump people bash Fox, yet ignore their own team (not really, it's quite common). FSN is often just as left leaning as CNN or MSNBC depending on the time of day and show running.
The big problem in the US today is that there are simply no reliable sources of news. Just as rare, are reasonable opinions that argue with a full set of facts.
If the reactionaries on the right had done the same thing it would be reported the same way. To you, anything "left" is a problem, not just the extremists on your side. At least be honest about why you censor opinions, asshole.
I agree, but lets not forget how things have progressed so far under an administration which is taking immigration reform very seriously. The EU yesterday issued a statement that US visitors may lose rights to travel without Visas to the EU. A statement which should be seen by all Americans as a blackmail attempt, but the reactionaries on the left are celebrating the threat. The reactionaries on the left applauded the moratorium on immigration being placed on TRO. The reactionaries on the left have been screaming that controlling borders is racist. The reactionaries were further applauding Mexico dumping 150 million tons of sewage claiming that the US deserved it for wanting control of it's own borders.
Don't put anything type of weapon out of their reach, because thus far they have shown that they are willing to destroy and let destruction occur to achieve their end.
This is good news for the US economy as a whole, at least on the surface. Lets avoid the arguments about being paid less or being treated as indentured servants for now. A good portion of the H1B worker's money goes back to their home country. Even if they made the same wages, they don't spend the money the same so American's lose money in the economy and jobs at the lower end.
The answer from many of these big companies will to simply lay off more Americans and move more jobs overseas. Those regulations need to see some light for this to truly work out.
Interesting ideas, but passing a test does not ensure morality. Morality is the problem, and I can tell you quite plainly that the immoral and moral in today's society are pretty evenly numbered. Even if you required 3rd party defensive action, there is no way to prevent or prove collusion.
This would allow vigilantism and encourage anti-competitive attacking. "We thought they were the ones trying to hack us, see our logs? (cat log | sed -e 's/someip/theirip/g'
As much as I hate big Government, I would rather see an easy to interface with government agency with law enforcement capabilities handling this. In fact, isn't that what the NSA is supposed to be for?
ZERO clear evidence was given of intent, period.
No shit Sherlock, thanks for repeating exactly what I stated when you first responded to the post. There is NO INTENT CLAUSE IN THE LAW! That is the statement Representative Gowdy (who happens to have been a State Prosecutor in addition to being a licensed attorney) makes to Comey in that testimony. He further states that it is the AGs job to determine whether or not intent can be found, not the job of the law enforcement officer.
Your knowledge of law matches your mental maturity in both reading comprehension and debate. Meaning a turnip would outclass you.
Does that mean that you should stand outside uncovered in 110 degree sunny weather for hours at a time every day? How about standing in front of a microwave transmitter at the minimum safe distance for a prolonged time every day? Your point is both irrational and illogical.
The reasoning given can be summed up as "sophisticated hackers knew how to brake into systems configured as H's equipment was."
But most systems everywhere probably are, including the State Department's "regular" office email servers (which were breached).
Thus, I don't see it as a significant statement.
Then to put it quite simply, you are not very bright. I have worked in IT Security for 30 (10yrs DOD/20 private sector) years and can tell you first hand that high value targets are not hacked in a way that leaves footprints. A target like the State Department was only found after leaks were discovered. Clinton's server was a value rich target for any State actor. It was found to be running an unpatched version of Exchange, and one that is simple to break into with numerous methods. It is extremely probable that the server was actively exploited by more than one foreign agency, to the point of being highly likely as Director Comey stated.
Another point just to deter the fanbois, is that mail servers for brand new domains are attacked almost as soon as they go live on the Internet. Ask Cloudmark, Spamhaus, or any other company hosting mail and DNS for customers or providing RBL information. Claiming "nobody knew" is not just foolish, it's downright lying.
I'm so confused....
That said, RF is dangerous depending on signal strength and exposure time. I don't, out of long time habits instilled in the Military, keep a cell phone by my head. I use headphones. Can the body tolerate the cell phones? Probably, but it's kind of like eating bacon. It tastes really good but in large quantities is not very healthy. Everything in moderation was coined quite wisely.
Thanks for asking the question, you are a toddler happy to cover your eyes and close your ears. Buggeroff shill!
Searching the Web is not that hard. CSPAN video here.
Let us see if you are mature enough to stop lying, or if you close your eyes and years yelling "nuh uh"
Directory Comey stated in testimony that the action was illegal. He stated that he did not recommend pressing charges since intent could be proven. You can find the testimony in front of Congress during questioning by Representative Trey Gowdy.
The FBI and numerous sources state that it's probable it was hacked. Left wing source and Right wing source just in case you are biased in one direction or the other. Why can be found here, or talk to a security expert who has dealt with forensics if you want the technical details.
Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged".
It's a long book but the philosophy is solid. Society based on "intentions" and not "law" simply fail. What we see in the world today is a staggering amount of anti-science rhetoric, and the creation and use of criminal charges for simply thinking a way someone dislikes.
I can't make you learn politics quite as easily, but recommend you read the Federalist Papers which contain thoughts regarding why the US was established the way it was. Plato's "The Republic" is probably a good primer since we get foundations of Justice, Liberty, and critical thought from that book,
Point is, I don't think guns and phones matter much to whether this is a free country. It is all in the intangible subtleties of the culture. It is in the common sense of the people. If that goes, we're fucked.
Unfortunately that is simply false. When the Government is setup to be a tyranny, it only takes the right person in office to make it so. The "common sense" of the people should never let the Government get to the point where it's people have no natural rights (personal liberty).
Many Western countries are setup just like the UK, where the wrong person in power means absolute tyranny. It's taken the UK about 15 years to kill free speech, but anything today deemed "hate speech" will land you in jail. The UK, France, and countless others used to be the Bastions of Free speech that everyone else tried to emulate. Not any longer.
So people in the UK can purchase weapons for self defense? Are they free to speak their minds without fear of going to jail? The answer to both of those is "no", so I am correct. Show me the laws and protections people have for what we in the US call the first and second amendments of the Constitution, and I'll admit I'm wrong. I don't have any fear of being wrong.
or do you simply have a personal attack because I am correct?
5) Disarm the general public
6) kill free speech
The UK is right on track.
Given that most Americans favor the surveillance, including both Republicans and Democrats...
This is why majority rule has hit the brick wall. It always ends in tyranny...
Which is why we are a Republic, and not a pure Democracy. The founders knew that Democracy always fails, there were plenty of historical examples for them to study.
Part 1, pure hyperbole and Bullshit. If there is illegal activity due process will find it and prosecute it, and the Constitution provides the presumption of innocence. Leftists wanted that for their candidate.
Part 2. You can run a Google search and find Nancy Pelosi telling a women that illegal aliens are not criminals. Woman: “In 2010 one of the illegals slaughtered my son,” she began. “He tortured him, he beat him, he tied him up like an animal. And he set him on fire. And I am not a one-story mother. This happens every day because there are no laws enforced at the border.” Pelosi: "I pray for you, again, we all pray that none of us has to experience what you’ve experienced. So thank you for channeling your energy to help prevent something like that from happening, but I do want to say to you, that in our sanctuary cities, our people are not disobeying the law. These are law-abiding citizens. It enables them to there without being reported to ICE in case of another crime that they might bare witness to."
Part 3 - The basis of the ban is that the 7 States under moritorium are either failed states, or openly support terrorism. The US does not employ Santa Claus to determine a person's status, it relies on foreign governments to provide status. If there is no central Government (Libya, Sudan, Syria), status can not be provided. Other Governments (Iran) can not be trusted to provide reliable information. Christians, including Yazidis , were mentioned as a priority since ISIS has been openly committing genocide against those groups.
Part 4, and I'm done doing research for you can be found here as well as numerous other sources.
I don't care about your opinion of the Democratic party any more than you care about mine. I don't listen to Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC, or NBC, or anyone else to form my opinion. ALL media in this country has become so biased the truth is hard to find. I go to sources, and suggest you do the same. I can say absolutely that my opinion is based in facts, and constantly being updated with evaluations. Not many, including you it seems, can say the same (referencing your lack of desire or ability to find information on immigration, Pelosi's statement, etc..).
I know which sides hold the guns, and the Leftist in the country have been more than happy to give theirs up.
Wrong, you are cherry picking a sentence fragment to back an invalid opinion based on a lie. Why not read the _FULL_ quote from Steven Bannon instead of repeating lies? Oh, it harms your narrative. Thanks for playing, have a nice day.