If the kid who crashed into them were a multi-millionaire, Snapchat's involvement would have never even been a talking point.
If the multi-millionaire properly structured their finances, the deep pockets won't be so deep for a lawsuit. These lawsuits are always about milking the most money for the attorneys.
Neither the kid nor the kid's family have deep pockets. So the couple is suing Snapchat because it has deep pockets. Of course, the attorneys will milk every dime.
In a controlled computing environment, system administrators don't allow unauthorized software to run on the network without being tested first. An app store would be a huge security risk if users were able to download and install their own software.
He is winning in the Republican primaries by huge landslide margins whereas Hilary has only been winning marginally in Demo primaries.
Trump won most of his elections with 30% to 45% of the votes. There were — and perhaps still are — serious doubts as to whether two-third of Republican voters would actually vote for him. The only reason he's winning more than 50% of the vote in the last few elections was because his opponents are dropping out. He has yet to win an election by a landslide. In fact, he will probably lose to Hillary by a double-digit landslide.
I do agree that there might be selective enforcement, but that's corruption, not good practice.
If you apply the same rules as civilians and civil workers to political appointees, they won't have enough flexibility to make decisions. What you end up with is a government that rubber stamps decisions because no one wants to put themselves at risk. That's already happening to some extent with the Republicans in Congress who are afraid of passing a budget because it will get them voted out of office.
However, the first rule of this sort of thing is that all bets are off if you decide to be Above the Law and get yourself in trouble.
You're making an assumption that Hillary put herself above the law. She requested a secured BlackBerry from the NSA and they told her no. The email server was installed under existing government policy that was later changed, and the emails were retroactively classified by intelligence agencies once they became public. You can't say she was above the law without ignoring the facts.
That being said, I've never really understood why people would abstain from the vote.
There's a perception that the Democrats and the Republicans in the US are identical parties. Therefore it doesn't matter if the lesser evil is picked because they're both the same. I read somewhere that two-thirds of colonial citizens didn't care either way how the American Revolution turned out. If true, that would explain a lot about American voters.
What's broken? Electoral votes are based on population counts. Most of the populous states are Democratic (blue). Most of the less populous states are Republican (red). There's a mismatch between the two because the Republicans are appealing to the smallest voting demographic while ignoring the rest of the country.
Does your underlying math say that a large percentage of young and old Bernie supporters have continually said they hate Hillary and will stay home or vote for Trump??
Nope. I'm expecting Republican voters to stay home if their favorite candidate isn't in running. Democratic voters will come out in droves as they always do during a presidential year.
It is good to see the level of discourse you are willing to engage in.
You're making the assumption that your point is worthy enough for me to take the time for further discourse. It does not. Slashdot exist to keep me amuse at work while I'm waiting for a script to finish. I'm not here to amuse you.
If "I" as a normal person, that has in the past done DoD and other Fed work...and basically signed my life away saying I'd not do the same careless type things HRC did, had gotten caught doing even a fraction of what she's been shown to have done, I'd be lucky to not get charged with jail-able offenses, and just get off with super heavy fines and likely a BAN on being able to ever work for the Federal Govt. again.
That's because you're a government worker and not a civilian or political appointee. There are different rules for different people in the government. Your example as a government worker is meaningless because Hillary is a political appointee.
That's an extremely unlikely scenario based on the 2016 electoral map, which is identical to 2012 and 2008. Hillary needs 28 electoral votes to win. Trump will need 168 electoral votes to win.
And here's the underlying math. If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.
The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.
wouldn't be so sure. Romney got 62% of the white male vote last time round. That isn't 70%, but its in hailing distance.
Right. Ronald Reagan/George HW Bush got 63%, John McCain/Mitt Romney got 62%. Over the last 40+ years, the white male voter demographic for the Republican Party has been getting smaller and smaller. Trump can't pull enough voters out of his ass to get in hailing distance.
Is that the only reason for your using words like "oneupmanship" and "fanboys"?
Those are the only five-dollar words that the OP could afford. If he had the discipline to save up his money, he could have gotten an Apple Watch instead.
Read my link. Trump is going to spray paint the map you threw up.
Read my links. Hillary only needs 28 electoral votes to win. If she flips Florida, game over. If she flips Ohio and one other state, game over. No Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio, which caused Karl Rove to threw an epic fit when Fox News called Ohio for Obama in 2012. Trump will to have win six times as many electoral votes to defeat her. That's going to be an uphill battle.
Is it really possible you think this race is just like all of the other Republican clone races run in those other years?
Trump has to DO BETTER than Mitt Romney AND John McCain AND George W. Bush AND George H.W. Bush AND Ronald Reagan. If he falls shorts, he won't win.
[...] the Democrat has negative charisma.
People don't have to like Hillary and they like Trump even less. But people will vote for Hillary because she's not Trump.
The future is clear if you will simply look with open eyes and hear with open ears.
It's nice to have faith. But the Republican Party will need a miracle of biblical portion to win the presidency and keep the Republican Congress in 2016.
That is so funny! it's pretty much madness to think there is historical precedent of any sort for what is about to transpire.
Let's look at the 2016 electoral map, which is identical to the 2012 and 2008 electoral maps. Hillary needs 28 electoral votes to win. Trump will need 168 electoral votes to win.
And here's the underlying math. If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.
The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.
Slashdot Mirror
All of that money is money earned overseas. So it's not "funneled" anywhere, it's just not brought back
US profits are funneled through a Nevada subsidiary because Nevada doesn't have a corporate tax.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html
If the kid who crashed into them were a multi-millionaire, Snapchat's involvement would have never even been a talking point.
If the multi-millionaire properly structured their finances, the deep pockets won't be so deep for a lawsuit. These lawsuits are always about milking the most money for the attorneys.
Neither the kid nor the kid's family have deep pockets. So the couple is suing Snapchat because it has deep pockets. Of course, the attorneys will milk every dime.
Why the fuck would you remove an app store?
In a controlled computing environment, system administrators don't allow unauthorized software to run on the network without being tested first. An app store would be a huge security risk if users were able to download and install their own software.
If you upgrade now, it's FREE. After June 29th, it will be $119.
He is winning in the Republican primaries by huge landslide margins whereas Hilary has only been winning marginally in Demo primaries.
Trump won most of his elections with 30% to 45% of the votes. There were — and perhaps still are — serious doubts as to whether two-third of Republican voters would actually vote for him. The only reason he's winning more than 50% of the vote in the last few elections was because his opponents are dropping out. He has yet to win an election by a landslide. In fact, he will probably lose to Hillary by a double-digit landslide.
I do agree that there might be selective enforcement, but that's corruption, not good practice.
If you apply the same rules as civilians and civil workers to political appointees, they won't have enough flexibility to make decisions. What you end up with is a government that rubber stamps decisions because no one wants to put themselves at risk. That's already happening to some extent with the Republicans in Congress who are afraid of passing a budget because it will get them voted out of office.
However, the first rule of this sort of thing is that all bets are off if you decide to be Above the Law and get yourself in trouble.
You're making an assumption that Hillary put herself above the law. She requested a secured BlackBerry from the NSA and they told her no. The email server was installed under existing government policy that was later changed, and the emails were retroactively classified by intelligence agencies once they became public. You can't say she was above the law without ignoring the facts.
Guess again. Political appointees aren't exempt from the Espionage act.
I look forward to Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio being prosecuted under the Espionage Act.
That being said, I've never really understood why people would abstain from the vote.
There's a perception that the Democrats and the Republicans in the US are identical parties. Therefore it doesn't matter if the lesser evil is picked because they're both the same. I read somewhere that two-thirds of colonial citizens didn't care either way how the American Revolution turned out. If true, that would explain a lot about American voters.
Neither was Obama.
I have a hard time seeing coal country going for Democrats this year.
Might not matter. Hillary needs Florida to win outright, or Ohio and one other state.
Thanks to a totally broken electoral system.
What's broken? Electoral votes are based on population counts. Most of the populous states are Democratic (blue). Most of the less populous states are Republican (red). There's a mismatch between the two because the Republicans are appealing to the smallest voting demographic while ignoring the rest of the country.
Does your underlying math say that a large percentage of young and old Bernie supporters have continually said they hate Hillary and will stay home or vote for Trump??
Nope. I'm expecting Republican voters to stay home if their favorite candidate isn't in running. Democratic voters will come out in droves as they always do during a presidential year.
You must be using Linux then.
If that was true, you wouldn't have been able to post a comment. Therefore, you must be using a Mac.
It is good to see the level of discourse you are willing to engage in.
You're making the assumption that your point is worthy enough for me to take the time for further discourse. It does not. Slashdot exist to keep me amuse at work while I'm waiting for a script to finish. I'm not here to amuse you.
If "I" as a normal person, that has in the past done DoD and other Fed work...and basically signed my life away saying I'd not do the same careless type things HRC did, had gotten caught doing even a fraction of what she's been shown to have done, I'd be lucky to not get charged with jail-able offenses, and just get off with super heavy fines and likely a BAN on being able to ever work for the Federal Govt. again.
That's because you're a government worker and not a civilian or political appointee. There are different rules for different people in the government. Your example as a government worker is meaningless because Hillary is a political appointee.
what if no one get's 270?
That's an extremely unlikely scenario based on the 2016 electoral map, which is identical to 2012 and 2008. Hillary needs 28 electoral votes to win. Trump will need 168 electoral votes to win.
And here's the underlying math. If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.
The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/
Provided the DoJ doesn't indict her for mishandling of classified information.
Don't count on it. These manufactured scandals never go anywhere.
wouldn't be so sure. Romney got 62% of the white male vote last time round. That isn't 70%, but its in hailing distance.
Right. Ronald Reagan/George HW Bush got 63%, John McCain/Mitt Romney got 62%. Over the last 40+ years, the white male voter demographic for the Republican Party has been getting smaller and smaller. Trump can't pull enough voters out of his ass to get in hailing distance.
If only we could figure out how to move electricity from places where it's generated to places where it's consumed.
We got transmission lines to deliver electricity. Been around forever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission
Is that the only reason for your using words like "oneupmanship" and "fanboys"?
Those are the only five-dollar words that the OP could afford. If he had the discipline to save up his money, he could have gotten an Apple Watch instead.
The historical record and presidential statistics didn't favor Donald Trump becoming the Republican presidential nominee either!
I'm referring to the general election, where the historical record and presidential statistics are more reliable.
History making events sometimes happen and we might, unfortunately, be in for one this November.
A double digit loss by Trump to a Hillary landslide and the Republican Congress going up in smoke.
Read my link. Trump is going to spray paint the map you threw up.
Read my links. Hillary only needs 28 electoral votes to win. If she flips Florida, game over. If she flips Ohio and one other state, game over. No Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio, which caused Karl Rove to threw an epic fit when Fox News called Ohio for Obama in 2012. Trump will to have win six times as many electoral votes to defeat her. That's going to be an uphill battle.
Is it really possible you think this race is just like all of the other Republican clone races run in those other years?
Trump has to DO BETTER than Mitt Romney AND John McCain AND George W. Bush AND George H.W. Bush AND Ronald Reagan. If he falls shorts, he won't win.
[...] the Democrat has negative charisma.
People don't have to like Hillary and they like Trump even less. But people will vote for Hillary because she's not Trump.
The future is clear if you will simply look with open eyes and hear with open ears.
It's nice to have faith. But the Republican Party will need a miracle of biblical portion to win the presidency and keep the Republican Congress in 2016.
That is so funny! it's pretty much madness to think there is historical precedent of any sort for what is about to transpire.
Let's look at the 2016 electoral map, which is identical to the 2012 and 2008 electoral maps. Hillary needs 28 electoral votes to win. Trump will need 168 electoral votes to win.
And here's the underlying math. If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.
The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/