You know that you've been programming for too long when the first thing that bugs you about the statement above is not the presence of spelling/grammatical mistakes but that the parentheses are unbalanced.
How could you even read it? My parser threw an error.
It seems your cognitive problems on the actual subject matter extend to a reading comprehension issue, keeping track of your own childishness. That's fine, I appreciate the trouble you're going to to demonstrate that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thanks for making my point for me! Please, carry on reinforcing it even more. Doing a great job.
why aren't the Verizon/AT&T/etc execs who allow this in jail too? Yeah, yeah, we all know the answer
Maybe because it's not illegal to provide for subscription services, and to take them down when someone points out they were scammed? If you think it SHOULD have been illegal to operate their systems that way (as it had been for YEARS), then you should be wondering why congress didn't pass a law requiring the networks to shutdown all of those services until they could rebuild them around a mechanism that forced all new subscriptions to involved proof of identity. Then you could ask for them to be prosecuted for not supporting the mandated far more cumbersome system. Complaining about a lame system that was born and saw considerable legitimate use before it started to be abused isn't the same as idiotically saying people who didn't cause the abused should be in prison.
As I thought, zero to say on subject, just confused about who's tossing around insults. Anonymous cowards, being cowards. Thanks for recognizing that CIWS belongs on a ship, where it's designed to operate, and that you haven't even lifted a finger to look into the many years of work that been done on exactly this topic. Because you're far more interested in making sure we all see that you know how to spell 'faggot' when you're trying to show how smart you are.
because all that crap has been debunked multiple times
What? The email she received, stored, relayed, copied to her lawyer and his staff on thumb drives, dumped on to Huma Abedin's home computer "for printing" and thus exposed to her insane jerk of husband who shared the same laptop... included classified information, including some stuff that would normally be limited to a very small, compartmentalized audience. Her home computer was almost certainly compromised by multiple foreign actors. And even if it wasn't her deliberately negligent behavior would see ANY another person entrusted with that information out of a job, out of a career, stripped of clearance, and must likely in deep legal jeopardy. People GO TO JAIL for far less serious examples of carelessness. This hasn't been "debunked," it's a simple matter of fact that you're trying to wish away.
The only reason Hillary's deliberate mis-handling of classified material and a parade of lying on her part about it "went away" is because the people investigating her misconduct chose to give her a degree of looking-the-other-way that nobody else would get. Highly partisan investigators deliberately changed the characterization of her actions as the crimes they were (gross negligence) to prevent her from being indicted. This has nothing to do with Trump, other than the fact that millions of people certainly did get tired of her looking in the eye and plainly lying about her conduct, over and over again. That certainly was a factor in millions of two-time Obama voters turning their backs on her - she's a bald-faced liar who got caught red handed doing something much worse than things that cost other people their careers and their liberty. And she wanted to be the BOSS of people who would go to prison for doing what she did. Stop pretending you don't know all of this.
I heard that too: refused to target civilians with bombs, drones and trigger-happy military convoys, didn't take part in torturing or degrading prisoners, wouldn't cover up war crimes, a total disgrace to the US military.
Not sure why you think you're scoring some sort of only-in-your-own-echo-chamber rhetorical points when trotting out stuff that Manning had, literally, nothing to do with. He was simply being a drama queen and looking for attention, and indiscriminately dumped a mountain of sensitive information out there for consumption by - among other people - those who would be very happy to kill people just like him on religious grounds, and kill our military and intelligence people for working to defend against just that. Your cartoon villain portrait of everyone in the military shows you're not equipped to even talk about this in informed, rational terms.
Well, it is hard to argue with someone who relies on reason and solid information to make their point, that's for sure.
you've never had to shoot down one incoming anything
Interestingly, you don't know anything at all about what I've shot at what, nor how many times. Regardless, a Phalanx or the like could possibly be a less appropriate defense in a place near civilian housing and the like. And we're not talking about taking out incoming ship-killer missiles, we're talking about overgrown, lumbering model airplanes at prop speeds. More importantly, we're talking about a relatively new threat, and that new ways to detect and act are required. Do you really think they've been testing upgrades to TARS just to improve traffic monitoring on the roads? Rigs like that are designed to spot such stuff from miles out while it totters in on small props. Counter measures are a lot different when a slow-moving fixed-wing thing more or less like an ultra-light is wandering in. Even mentioning something like CIWS in that context shows you're not actually thinking about this, and just looking to use the word 'faggot' because it's exciting to you to type it.
Some adaptation is required, if you're trying to defend a sensitive facility. Radar for this purpose goes up on a fairly tall mast, so it can spot this kind of movement at tree-top level. You can also run observation platforms on tethered inflatables, or let long-fight site-orbiting drones of your own do that job, with look-down rigs. Still, the details you've included in your sensible response certainly are compelling.
Can't believe Manning is running for office and Snowden is still living in fear of his life.
So, blame Obama. Manning should still be serving, and Snowden should have been procured and doing the same. Then we'd have similar treatment for people playing fast and loose with classified information... oh, except for Hillary Clinton, of course. She's special and gets a pass, and all of her staff get immunity deals before talking about her.
if manning's name made it to the general election, that seat would turn so fucking red, it'll take decades to get it blue again
No, Maryland is so hugely gerrymandered in favor of keeping congressional and senate seats in Democrat power that even a toxic idiot like Manning would win. The Democrats in the Maryland legislature have made sure that's always going to be the case.
So to sum things up: you seem to agree that some other places are indeed shitholes, and you consider the people who live there to be incapable of forming (and thus being formed by) a viable society. You seem to think that's places like the Congo. If someone you hate had said that, you'd lazily call them a racist.
If you knew the means to recreate that spark, then perhaps you'd be one to actually fix other countries.
The spark exists everywhere. The chore is in countering the people and cultural inertia that smother it. We've done it before.
It is hubris to think you can fix a whole culture, government, and society.
It took us decades of military occupation and enormous investment to transform a predatory, essentially feudal Japan into a productive, constitutional place run by a proper representative government, with a culture that fully embraces that way of life. No culture that's full of corruption at every level can get past it without a generational shift, and the crushing of those corrupt powers that fight to preserve the corruption. In some places, the culture already has the spark, but has had to live through a generation of attempts to smother it - but when the smothering is forced back, the spark is still there and ready to go: see... Poland, for example. It took a generation of pushing back against the toxicity of the socialism attacking it from Russia before Poland's spark could operate again, free of that crushing weight.
No, we don't even begin to know why the US was great and plenty of other countries turned out horrible.
What? We know EXACTLY why. See that document that begins with "We The People" and the non-stop fight that's been fought ever since to preserve it. Quit trying to pretend that it wasn't hard work and sacrifice and a dedication to a specific way of life that produced the results we enjoy. Being a classic moral relativist, you're trying to wish away the differences between what allowed colonial America to become something different than present day former-colonial Shitholes that can't get their act together, and which export (via illegal immigration or our witless lottery and chain migration systems) the very culture that has them stagnating or worse, regressing.
And, no, the waves of Irish and German and other immigration earlier in our history are NOT the same. Those groups scrambled to assimilate - culturally, linguistically. We were not then an entitlement nation. If someone who came over couldn't shake off their Irish-ness enough to be an American, it was up to sympathetic fellow Irish or other charities to make up for that deficit on their behalf. This was understood by people getting on that boat in the first place. We still have countless charitable groups willing to help people. But we also have a hugely expensive network of government services that are instantly burdened the moment a non-skilled, non-English-speaking, non-assimilating lottery winner's wife's brother's son and wife arrive with chain migration blessings and no means by which to provide for themselves.
You only know how to belittle others
What? Belittling is your hobby. It's how you make yourself feel important. It's how you begin your participation in almost any conversation. If you DO manage to actually engage on the substance, it's with completely nonsensical, disingenuous, faux-patronizing, factually incorrect crap like your comments above. If you actually talked some sense, your pomposity and snark would be easy enough to shrug off. But when it's simply part of your knowing parade of counter-factual hand waving and projection, it just highlights your hypocrisy.
Well then, it's a good thing nobody said that, right? Still, let me guess: you're in the camp that says we should NOT deport illegal immigrants back to certain places because those places are... real shitholes, right? Can't have it both ways. Biasing a visa lottery to favor places that cannot shake off a deep, pervasive criminal culture, instead of doing what, say, Mexico, Canada and the UK do (merit-based immigration) is crazy. Haiti IS a shithole. The local culture there has had decades of opportunities to use offered help (not counting the Clinton Foundation's fraud, of course - that's a special case) to reform their culture and civil institutions. But they still haven't - it's a violent, poorly educated, corrupt place. We should be looking for someone willing to actually work on that, and raining support down on them so that Haitians perhaps could stand a chance of having a real place to live.
Yeah, if I lived there, I'd probably want out. If I lived there, I'd certainly call it a shithole.
The whole notion of only letting in the best and brightest into a country? Not only is not the Christian way, it's also not the American way.
You're right, it's the Canadian way. Or the Swiss way. Why shouldn't we be looking for people who bring something TO the country, rather than people who bring the need for massive entitlement spending, more ESOL teachers, and a generation's (at best) lag time in constructive engagement in the economy?
I'm good friends with African immigrants who showed up here legally, speaking English AND three more languages than I do, who worked three jobs, bought homes, run businesses... and would be the very first people to tell you that someone from a rural village in Somalia is not going to show up equipped to do any of those things. Exactly the opposite. If your mission is generosity, why are you not advocating for helping to fix what's wrong in Somalia? Or is it too much of a shithole, and you're thinking it's beyond help?
Are there shithole countries in Africa? Sure, the Congo comes to mind.
Really? Which words did I use that triggered you? Was it pointing out that culture and race aren't the same thing? I know, that one really stings. Be proud! Proclaim it! Say what you think: that culture and race ARE the same thing. No? I see.
Typical liberal. So busy trying to project some fictional racism onto somebody else (in order to avoid addressing the point he was actually making), that the liberal accidentally displays their own flaming ACTUAL racism. Right on cue! Almost as predictable as liberals displaying the fact that they don't understand the difference between skin pigment and color, or race and country. Of course liberals DO (usually) know the difference, but they play dumb when they act like they don't, since they're talking in their own echo chamber, where they presume that their own liberal audience actually IS dumb. It's quite hilarious, actually.
I think the greater concern, and a sure sign of economic trouble, is the collapse in the understanding of the difference between "countries" and "country's."
When we can't tell the difference between plural and possessive, wider chaos isn't far behind.
Hey, look! Utterly unable to address the issue, as always! Such a wondrous display of juvenile arrested development. Here's a thought: get an adult - say, the person that buys you your groceries - to help you work through the topic and craft a response that actually has something to do with it. You'll learn so much!
Are you THAT obtuse? I guess you are. The GP thinks we're all still racists. Well, except for him. HE'S not a racist, just you.
How unable are you to parse a little bit of rhetorical holding-up-the-mirror so that the GP can realize what a tool he's being? Never mind, you want him to be right. So, now that's two of you who aren't racists, while everyone else is. You are so wise, and so superior, compared to all of us unresolved racists out here.
Are you even listening to yourself? The GP calls everyone (else) racists, and you think I'm being vindictive by asking him to act like an adult and admit he's full of crap? Who's being hostile? The person who called you a racist, or me, who pointed out the GP's trolling?
Hey, look! Someone who is perfectly aware of the gist of the conversation, but can't actually address the subject matter because that would mean admitting I made a perfectly valid point. So, of course, your response, as usual, goes right to childish ad hominem. Or maybe you ARE the rare racist that hasn't resolved his own issues yet? That must be it, and explains why you can't talk about it.
So what you're saying is that everyone ELSE are racist and haven't resolved that problem, but you're definitely superior to those deplorables. Let me guess, none of your friends are racists, either. Just those other people.
Because it's hard to erase 250 years of racism with a few logical arguments. We have a history to content with that your attempts at rationalism cannot resolve.
So, you're saying that you're a racist and you can't resolve that problem?
Not an affectation. It's the sort of thing that non-native English speakers say when they haven't mastered plural/single idioms and such. Like, "You have a lot of nice camera gears!" And that gets seen often enough in the intellectual wasteland of social media, and poisons the well badly enough that it makes it into/. postings.
Slashdot Mirror
over the Soviet Union, and 14 October, 1062, over Cuba
And just like that, four years later, the Battle Of Hastings.
You know that you've been programming for too long when the first thing that bugs you about the statement above is not the presence of spelling/grammatical mistakes but that the parentheses are unbalanced.
How could you even read it? My parser threw an error.
It seems your cognitive problems on the actual subject matter extend to a reading comprehension issue, keeping track of your own childishness. That's fine, I appreciate the trouble you're going to to demonstrate that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thanks for making my point for me! Please, carry on reinforcing it even more. Doing a great job.
why aren't the Verizon/AT&T/etc execs who allow this in jail too? Yeah, yeah, we all know the answer
Maybe because it's not illegal to provide for subscription services, and to take them down when someone points out they were scammed? If you think it SHOULD have been illegal to operate their systems that way (as it had been for YEARS), then you should be wondering why congress didn't pass a law requiring the networks to shutdown all of those services until they could rebuild them around a mechanism that forced all new subscriptions to involved proof of identity. Then you could ask for them to be prosecuted for not supporting the mandated far more cumbersome system. Complaining about a lame system that was born and saw considerable legitimate use before it started to be abused isn't the same as idiotically saying people who didn't cause the abused should be in prison.
As I thought, zero to say on subject, just confused about who's tossing around insults. Anonymous cowards, being cowards. Thanks for recognizing that CIWS belongs on a ship, where it's designed to operate, and that you haven't even lifted a finger to look into the many years of work that been done on exactly this topic. Because you're far more interested in making sure we all see that you know how to spell 'faggot' when you're trying to show how smart you are.
because all that crap has been debunked multiple times
What? The email she received, stored, relayed, copied to her lawyer and his staff on thumb drives, dumped on to Huma Abedin's home computer "for printing" and thus exposed to her insane jerk of husband who shared the same laptop ... included classified information, including some stuff that would normally be limited to a very small, compartmentalized audience. Her home computer was almost certainly compromised by multiple foreign actors. And even if it wasn't her deliberately negligent behavior would see ANY another person entrusted with that information out of a job, out of a career, stripped of clearance, and must likely in deep legal jeopardy. People GO TO JAIL for far less serious examples of carelessness. This hasn't been "debunked," it's a simple matter of fact that you're trying to wish away.
The only reason Hillary's deliberate mis-handling of classified material and a parade of lying on her part about it "went away" is because the people investigating her misconduct chose to give her a degree of looking-the-other-way that nobody else would get. Highly partisan investigators deliberately changed the characterization of her actions as the crimes they were (gross negligence) to prevent her from being indicted. This has nothing to do with Trump, other than the fact that millions of people certainly did get tired of her looking in the eye and plainly lying about her conduct, over and over again. That certainly was a factor in millions of two-time Obama voters turning their backs on her - she's a bald-faced liar who got caught red handed doing something much worse than things that cost other people their careers and their liberty. And she wanted to be the BOSS of people who would go to prison for doing what she did. Stop pretending you don't know all of this.
I heard that too: refused to target civilians with bombs, drones and trigger-happy military convoys, didn't take part in torturing or degrading prisoners, wouldn't cover up war crimes, a total disgrace to the US military.
Not sure why you think you're scoring some sort of only-in-your-own-echo-chamber rhetorical points when trotting out stuff that Manning had, literally, nothing to do with. He was simply being a drama queen and looking for attention, and indiscriminately dumped a mountain of sensitive information out there for consumption by - among other people - those who would be very happy to kill people just like him on religious grounds, and kill our military and intelligence people for working to defend against just that. Your cartoon villain portrait of everyone in the military shows you're not equipped to even talk about this in informed, rational terms.
stop being a faggot
Well, it is hard to argue with someone who relies on reason and solid information to make their point, that's for sure.
you've never had to shoot down one incoming anything
Interestingly, you don't know anything at all about what I've shot at what, nor how many times. Regardless, a Phalanx or the like could possibly be a less appropriate defense in a place near civilian housing and the like. And we're not talking about taking out incoming ship-killer missiles, we're talking about overgrown, lumbering model airplanes at prop speeds. More importantly, we're talking about a relatively new threat, and that new ways to detect and act are required. Do you really think they've been testing upgrades to TARS just to improve traffic monitoring on the roads? Rigs like that are designed to spot such stuff from miles out while it totters in on small props. Counter measures are a lot different when a slow-moving fixed-wing thing more or less like an ultra-light is wandering in. Even mentioning something like CIWS in that context shows you're not actually thinking about this, and just looking to use the word 'faggot' because it's exciting to you to type it.
Some adaptation is required, if you're trying to defend a sensitive facility. Radar for this purpose goes up on a fairly tall mast, so it can spot this kind of movement at tree-top level. You can also run observation platforms on tethered inflatables, or let long-fight site-orbiting drones of your own do that job, with look-down rigs. Still, the details you've included in your sensible response certainly are compelling.
A "swarm" of a dozen of these big beasts, as reported, should be pretty easy for modern radar systems to spot, no?
Right, it's a congressional district only thing. Observation re: MD's legislature and how it impacts those elections stands.
Can't believe Manning is running for office and Snowden is still living in fear of his life.
So, blame Obama. Manning should still be serving, and Snowden should have been procured and doing the same. Then we'd have similar treatment for people playing fast and loose with classified information ... oh, except for Hillary Clinton, of course. She's special and gets a pass, and all of her staff get immunity deals before talking about her.
if manning's name made it to the general election, that seat would turn so fucking red, it'll take decades to get it blue again
No, Maryland is so hugely gerrymandered in favor of keeping congressional and senate seats in Democrat power that even a toxic idiot like Manning would win. The Democrats in the Maryland legislature have made sure that's always going to be the case.
If you knew the means to recreate that spark, then perhaps you'd be one to actually fix other countries.
The spark exists everywhere. The chore is in countering the people and cultural inertia that smother it. We've done it before.
It is hubris to think you can fix a whole culture, government, and society.
It took us decades of military occupation and enormous investment to transform a predatory, essentially feudal Japan into a productive, constitutional place run by a proper representative government, with a culture that fully embraces that way of life. No culture that's full of corruption at every level can get past it without a generational shift, and the crushing of those corrupt powers that fight to preserve the corruption. In some places, the culture already has the spark, but has had to live through a generation of attempts to smother it - but when the smothering is forced back, the spark is still there and ready to go: see ... Poland, for example. It took a generation of pushing back against the toxicity of the socialism attacking it from Russia before Poland's spark could operate again, free of that crushing weight.
No, we don't even begin to know why the US was great and plenty of other countries turned out horrible.
What? We know EXACTLY why. See that document that begins with "We The People" and the non-stop fight that's been fought ever since to preserve it. Quit trying to pretend that it wasn't hard work and sacrifice and a dedication to a specific way of life that produced the results we enjoy. Being a classic moral relativist, you're trying to wish away the differences between what allowed colonial America to become something different than present day former-colonial Shitholes that can't get their act together, and which export (via illegal immigration or our witless lottery and chain migration systems) the very culture that has them stagnating or worse, regressing.
And, no, the waves of Irish and German and other immigration earlier in our history are NOT the same. Those groups scrambled to assimilate - culturally, linguistically. We were not then an entitlement nation. If someone who came over couldn't shake off their Irish-ness enough to be an American, it was up to sympathetic fellow Irish or other charities to make up for that deficit on their behalf. This was understood by people getting on that boat in the first place. We still have countless charitable groups willing to help people. But we also have a hugely expensive network of government services that are instantly burdened the moment a non-skilled, non-English-speaking, non-assimilating lottery winner's wife's brother's son and wife arrive with chain migration blessings and no means by which to provide for themselves.
You only know how to belittle others
What? Belittling is your hobby. It's how you make yourself feel important. It's how you begin your participation in almost any conversation. If you DO manage to actually engage on the substance, it's with completely nonsensical, disingenuous, faux-patronizing, factually incorrect crap like your comments above. If you actually talked some sense, your pomposity and snark would be easy enough to shrug off. But when it's simply part of your knowing parade of counter-factual hand waving and projection, it just highlights your hypocrisy.
Yeah, if I lived there, I'd probably want out. If I lived there, I'd certainly call it a shithole.
The whole notion of only letting in the best and brightest into a country? Not only is not the Christian way, it's also not the American way.
You're right, it's the Canadian way. Or the Swiss way. Why shouldn't we be looking for people who bring something TO the country, rather than people who bring the need for massive entitlement spending, more ESOL teachers, and a generation's (at best) lag time in constructive engagement in the economy?
... and would be the very first people to tell you that someone from a rural village in Somalia is not going to show up equipped to do any of those things. Exactly the opposite. If your mission is generosity, why are you not advocating for helping to fix what's wrong in Somalia? Or is it too much of a shithole, and you're thinking it's beyond help?
I'm good friends with African immigrants who showed up here legally, speaking English AND three more languages than I do, who worked three jobs, bought homes, run businesses
Are there shithole countries in Africa? Sure, the Congo comes to mind.
An almost entirely black country. Racist.
Really? Which words did I use that triggered you? Was it pointing out that culture and race aren't the same thing? I know, that one really stings. Be proud! Proclaim it! Say what you think: that culture and race ARE the same thing. No? I see.
Typical liberal. So busy trying to project some fictional racism onto somebody else (in order to avoid addressing the point he was actually making), that the liberal accidentally displays their own flaming ACTUAL racism. Right on cue! Almost as predictable as liberals displaying the fact that they don't understand the difference between skin pigment and color, or race and country. Of course liberals DO (usually) know the difference, but they play dumb when they act like they don't, since they're talking in their own echo chamber, where they presume that their own liberal audience actually IS dumb. It's quite hilarious, actually.
I think the greater concern, and a sure sign of economic trouble, is the collapse in the understanding of the difference between "countries" and "country's."
When we can't tell the difference between plural and possessive, wider chaos isn't far behind.
Hey, look! Utterly unable to address the issue, as always! Such a wondrous display of juvenile arrested development. Here's a thought: get an adult - say, the person that buys you your groceries - to help you work through the topic and craft a response that actually has something to do with it. You'll learn so much!
Are you THAT obtuse? I guess you are. The GP thinks we're all still racists. Well, except for him. HE'S not a racist, just you.
How unable are you to parse a little bit of rhetorical holding-up-the-mirror so that the GP can realize what a tool he's being? Never mind, you want him to be right. So, now that's two of you who aren't racists, while everyone else is. You are so wise, and so superior, compared to all of us unresolved racists out here.
Are you even listening to yourself? The GP calls everyone (else) racists, and you think I'm being vindictive by asking him to act like an adult and admit he's full of crap? Who's being hostile? The person who called you a racist, or me, who pointed out the GP's trolling?
Hey, look! Someone who is perfectly aware of the gist of the conversation, but can't actually address the subject matter because that would mean admitting I made a perfectly valid point. So, of course, your response, as usual, goes right to childish ad hominem. Or maybe you ARE the rare racist that hasn't resolved his own issues yet? That must be it, and explains why you can't talk about it.
So what you're saying is that everyone ELSE are racist and haven't resolved that problem, but you're definitely superior to those deplorables. Let me guess, none of your friends are racists, either. Just those other people.
Because it's hard to erase 250 years of racism with a few logical arguments. We have a history to content with that your attempts at rationalism cannot resolve.
So, you're saying that you're a racist and you can't resolve that problem?
No, that's just you pretending you can't understand the difference between the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities.
Not an affectation. It's the sort of thing that non-native English speakers say when they haven't mastered plural/single idioms and such. Like, "You have a lot of nice camera gears!" And that gets seen often enough in the intellectual wasteland of social media, and poisons the well badly enough that it makes it into /. postings.