Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.
Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.
Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.
Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?
Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?
Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.
Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.
Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.
I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.
All those documents were meticulously collected but unfortunately lost in a computer crash.
such as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" while under oath? The only consequence he suffered was disbarment.
Two months after the Senate failed to convict him, President Clinton was held in civil contempt of court by Judge Susan Webber Wright. His license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas for five years and later by the United States Supreme Court. He was also fined $90,000 for allegedly giving false testimony. Clinton declined to appeal the civil contempt of court ruling, citing financial problems, but still maintained that his testimony complied with Wright's earlier definition of sexual relations.
If the Oldford Group is not permitted to operate the sites in the US market, what makes Amaya so confident that it could operate the same sites in the same US market that has barred both of the gaming websites ?
B. If Uncle Sam can sue Oldford Group and order that privately held company to fork over $700 million, what makes Amaya so sure that Uncle Sam won't do the same to it ?
Amaya is already licensed to operate in NJ and Nevada (and possibly other states).
that is true in person - online you have no idea what you are really playing against. there are many documented cases of online sites allowing players to see all the cards on the table. the documentary I saw showed a 100% proper call on bluff rate over a period of many months.
think about it. you are at a 8 person table. 7 of the players are computers and know your cards. think that make the odds of you winning 'exactly the same'?
Firstly, there's licensing and regulations. Some of the regulators (ARJEL for instance) demand that every action go through their servers and is retained for possible fraud investigation. Incidents of bots on your site, can cause you to lose your license.
Secondly, the large operators do not want to kill the goose that lays golden eggs and are aggressively fighting bots, colluders and other fraudsters. And yes, they can be detected by multiple methods that I am not at liberty to discuss.
The fact is that you are safer playing online than against strangers in meatspace.
It's a tricky issue. Unregulated gambling leads to a lot of (desperate) people getting ripped off by corrupt institutions. Especially online, how hard would it be to know the dealer/house was honest? I'm not for censorship but these kinds of things aren't so clean cut.
You still need people willing to shoot. Can you rely on the US military to shoot US people? The US government is not a military junta where military would be used to something like that, the military still thinks they're protecting these people.
On the other hand, you need people willing to die. The US is pretty short on those as well.
And why all computer users need free software in all of their computers. I don't want someone I don't trust vetting the software that has the ability to ruin my project or kill me. Those who get to audit code may be expert in someone else's opinion, but I would rather have software freedom.
Free software is not a panacea (*cough*)heartbleed(*cough*).
Expert witnesses who get to audit the code can speculate.
Fixed that for you.
I've participated in more code reviews than I care to count and finding bugs in the code is not a matter of speculation. Stack overflows can cause all kinds of interesting issues.
The longer number doesn't mean anything in a rolling release system. EACH release will contain all of those things, so a single number is just as accurate.
A rolling release system that introduces breaking changes in EACH release is flawed.
Looks like they're adding far more than they're removing.
It is a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible to add features without removing existing ones.
Oh wait, you don't mean web features, you mean UI features
The web browser is the interface between the user and the Web. The UI is not unimportant. If Microsoft gets lambasted every so often for changing the UI of MSOffice for no good reason, Mozilla shouldn't get a free pass.
a few people are too proud to install addons to get back
Your assumption that useful addons will be maintained forever and will never become useless due to breaking API changes is optimistic at best.
I really like to just glance at a version number and see what it is.
And how much information does this single number provide?
What's wrong with the commonly accepted scheme of <major>.<minor>.<patch> where: <patch> changed - bug and/or security fixes <minor> changed - some added features and/or minor UI changes <major> changed - significant changes that may cause compatibility and/or workflow issues.
Slashdot Mirror
Free as in "Freedom", not as in "Gratis"
All those documents were meticulously collected but unfortunately lost in a computer crash.
such as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" while under oath? The only consequence he suffered was disbarment.
Two months after the Senate failed to convict him, President Clinton was held in civil contempt of court by Judge Susan Webber Wright. His license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas for five years and later by the United States Supreme Court. He was also fined $90,000 for allegedly giving false testimony. Clinton declined to appeal the civil contempt of court ruling, citing financial problems, but still maintained that his testimony complied with Wright's earlier definition of sexual relations.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I suspect, however, that what you want is an Android phone with a physical keyboard, not a BB phone with an Android subsystem.
Is there a practical difference?
Scanners do not live in vain!
It is never gambling when the odds are biased in one sides favour, then it is fraud and losing.
Not when the odds are known in advance. If you don't like them, don't play.
Now if the odds are misrepresented, it is a whole different issue.
If the Oldford Group is not permitted to operate the sites in the US market, what makes Amaya so confident that it could operate the same sites in the same US market that has barred both of the gaming websites ?
B. If Uncle Sam can sue Oldford Group and order that privately held company to fork over $700 million, what makes Amaya so sure that Uncle Sam won't do the same to it ?
Amaya is already licensed to operate in NJ and Nevada (and possibly other states).
that is true in person - online you have no idea what you are really playing against. there are many documented cases of online sites allowing players to see all the cards on the table. the documentary I saw showed a 100% proper call on bluff rate over a period of many months.
think about it. you are at a 8 person table. 7 of the players are computers and know your cards. think that make the odds of you winning 'exactly the same'?
Firstly, there's licensing and regulations. Some of the regulators (ARJEL for instance) demand that every action go through their servers and is retained for possible fraud investigation. Incidents of bots on your site, can cause you to lose your license.
Secondly, the large operators do not want to kill the goose that lays golden eggs and are aggressively fighting bots, colluders and other fraudsters. And yes, they can be detected by multiple methods that I am not at liberty to discuss.
The fact is that you are safer playing online than against strangers in meatspace.
It's a tricky issue. Unregulated gambling leads to a lot of (desperate) people getting ripped off by corrupt institutions. Especially online, how hard would it be to know the dealer/house was honest? I'm not for censorship but these kinds of things aren't so clean cut.
http://www.rationalgroup.com/a...
You still need people willing to shoot. Can you rely on the US military to shoot US people? The US government is not a military junta where military would be used to something like that, the military still thinks they're protecting these people.
On the other hand, you need people willing to die. The US is pretty short on those as well.
It's Canada, not the US.
Yet...
And why all computer users need free software in all of their computers. I don't want someone I don't trust vetting the software that has the ability to ruin my project or kill me. Those who get to audit code may be expert in someone else's opinion, but I would rather have software freedom.
Free software is not a panacea (*cough*)heartbleed(*cough*).
I am not a lawyer but I believe that the legal standard in such cases is "preponderance of evidence", not "beyond a reasonable doubt".
My opinion is that Intel (and AMD) achieved those things not because of the x86 architecture but in spite of it.
Expert witnesses who get to audit the code can speculate.
Fixed that for you.
I've participated in more code reviews than I care to count and finding bugs in the code is not a matter of speculation.
Stack overflows can cause all kinds of interesting issues.
Court systems cannot establish causes of engineering problems.
Expert witnesses who get to audit the code can.
Educate the women. Their role in [...] educing the birthrate [...] is enormous.
I completely agree.
How about for corruption, embezzlement and all the other ways criminals and terrorists outright destroy the lives of citizens daily?
Won't work, because the criminals and terrorists will never agree to it.
powershell is dumbed down?
The longer number doesn't mean anything in a rolling release system. EACH release will contain all of those things, so a single number is just as accurate.
A rolling release system that introduces breaking changes in EACH release is flawed.
Looks like they're adding far more than they're removing.
It is a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible to add features without removing existing ones.
Oh wait, you don't mean web features, you mean UI features
The web browser is the interface between the user and the Web. The UI is not unimportant.
If Microsoft gets lambasted every so often for changing the UI of MSOffice for no good reason, Mozilla shouldn't get a free pass.
a few people are too proud to install addons to get back
Your assumption that useful addons will be maintained forever and will never become useless due to breaking API changes is optimistic at best.
Right, I should have known.
Kindly stick to the point.
Snowden also indicated that he would be willing to accept a "short period" behind bars.
How much time behind bars do those that break the "supreme law of the land" get?
Detaining alleged criminals without due process, no sentence, no release date.
FTFY.
Well except mutants aren't real
They aren't?
I really like to just glance at a version number and see what it is.
And how much information does this single number provide?
What's wrong with the commonly accepted scheme of <major>.<minor>.<patch> where:
<patch> changed - bug and/or security fixes
<minor> changed - some added features and/or minor UI changes
<major> changed - significant changes that may cause compatibility and/or workflow issues.
eh?