"It is rather interesting that the Republicans managed to nominate the one person Hillary could actually beat"
Let's clear this up how, ok?
The 'Republicans' did NOT nominate Trump. The primary voters were in some states Democrats/'independents', in other states nominal Republicans. The GOP did as much as it dared to to discredit Trump, and he won anyways. Why?
Because too many non-Democrats are no longer supporting the Republican Party, name it the GOP or the GOPe as you wish. They have their reasons
Trump is a protest candidate. He's attracting surprising support because of that.
And the way Washington is running things, a candidate that seems intent on burning it all down is attractive to a certain minority of the voters. The anti-Hillary minority, combined with the usual anti-Democrat minorities, may yet form a coalition that is sufficient to elect Trump.
But don't think for a moment that 'the Republicans' nominated Trump. They are saddled with him because they chose not to rig the convention and have to choose an even less palatable (to the actual voting coalitions) candidate, or to nominate a candidate they feared more than Trump. The Democrats, being bolder and actually having the intention of pursuing objectives, snuffed the Sanders campaign before it became truly dangerous. The GOPe does not care to pursue any objectives other than retaining their positions and power, or at least this is the belief of a substantial number of their traditional rank and file supporters.
Again, do not confuse Trump's nomination with support from the GOP. They do not support him, save for Priebus and a few RNC members. And they are under attack by the GOPe, as should be expected. Trump is, to take a page from the activists, a change agent. the GOPe does not desire change. His voters do.
Be sure to lay in substantial supplies of popcorn. If Trump wins, you will want it. If Hillary wins, you'll be eating it for dinner. Maybe either way.
You think the Russians/Chinese/any number of nations would be attacking ALL the campaigns devices?
Really?
The reality is that everything sending or receiving data via the Internet is under attack, constantly, and many of the attackers are either employed, supported, or financed by state actors. Not that it matters, for if they spot an unaffiliated attacker succeeding, they will attack THEM. Why steal from the bank if you can just roll the robbers as they 'escape' with the goods? Actually a good strategy to quietly compromise the attackers, leaving them holding an 'empty' bag.
"Of course their analogy is highly questionable, since transmitting data over a network doesn't actually consume anything, now does it?"
It's s more like this:
When you stream your new favorite YouTube video, actual bits of data are sent to your device. And when I request MY favorite YouTube video, my bits are requested also. Eventually many users, those of us using this same ISP, all asking for data, ask for more than can be delivered quickly enough so that no one is disappointed by their video stuttering. At any of several points long the paths all that data takes there is only so much capacity. In its all used no more data.
Your ISP, if they are popular enough, is confronted by this problem sooner or later. Their choices of how to resolve it range from buying more equipment to changing the configuration of their systems to discouraging demand at peak times to outright shutting off some users to, well, doing nothing and hoping they don't lose too much business. Buying more equipment could force them to charge more, make less money, or go broke. Charging more risks losing customers. If they are so damned popular that they have customers out the wazoo, they may charge more or just ignore the poor blighters. If they enjoy a monopoly, same situation basically. But don't believe the hype that your ISP just sucks up money and doesn't do anything. I've done this, back when it was a fraction of the trouble it is now. It's expensive. Users don't know or care. They shouldn't.
This is as dumb as the 'right to be forgotten'. Tell that to a sex offender. Oh, wait, the EU wants to use 'right to be forgotten' to sanitize a powerful person's past history of sordid acts. As if this makes sense. Rendering the truth illegal is a very interesting step, no?
But this is California, the land of the irrational. Most any serious casting director can use IMDB etc to work through an actor's history and make reasonable assumptions. Look through Helen Mirren's filmography, and you can reasonably conclude she is older than 60. Duh. And she's still fabulous.
the complaint her isn't the obviously old actors, it's the difficult older-than-they-seem bunch. In an industry based on illusion, it is both remarkable and understandable that they rely on perception, and if an actor is perceived as older than the role, or perceived age is critical to a role, well, they 'need' to address that.
In every way, though, this is a stupid idea. No one who intends to benefit from this will. No one.
"The entire book of Leviticus is about a pack of religious laws whose major purpose appears to have been social control."
And this is entirely and completely true.
Now, I ask you, why? If you know, bonus points. If you just guess, well, go read up. The answer to this question is actually in the book, but many commentators can offer you the answer.
"The point of writing a religious book is to control people"
That's a rather narrow way of looking at it. Ignoring the possibility that authors sometimes write what they believe to be true to inform others is convenient for the denier, but that does not, by itself, make their assertion true.
"Making ISP's liable for outbound traffic that doesn't originate from within their address range would deal with this."
Probably not. ISPs that won't respond will not help, and taking those offline risks harming innocent users, and we have a problem that cannot well be solved. And I bet a small Americano that many of these ISPs are major players, and will not be taken to account.
"The rest can then be tackled by holding the source to blame - if you have an device that's spamming, well it's up to you to shut it down or pay up."
Sure, bill the homeowner running a door cam. Maybe if you start up the technical solution of denying the MAC addresses associated with the attack, disabling a variety of devices and risking more lawsuits.
Ultimately, perhaps, we are learning that plugging in tiny, useful devices that are insecure and easily commandeered is a good business model for the manufacturers, and users love them, but they cannot be permitted access, and therefore cannot be used, because they are exceedingly dangerous. Disproportionately so.
Darn. But then, a single bullet, not really so dangerous sitting on a countertop, is exceedingly dangerous if it becomes lodged int he brain of an American President. It's the implementation. Cheap IoT devices are, sadly, dangerous. They need to be made better.
In the NT, Hebrews 13 is an excellent passage, not only because it was written to Jewish converts, but because it is a brief, limited, but clear recommendation of how to live the Christian life.
The Letter of Paul to the Romans is, to me, the best handbook of the Gospel, living a Christian life, and how to evangelize in the NT. Our church just finished a 2+ year study of it, punctuated with other bits and such. A total of 60+ messages in all. We took months to go through Romans 8. And scripture is so full of meaning you need to examine every word...
More clarity : As you should know, the Mosaic covenant is superceded, overridden, by the new covenant in Christ. Those who continue to obey the Law at bound by it, but those who believe in Christ not only need not, but are given a new covenant, fulfilled in Him.
This is a central point of Christianity, one you cannot be ignorant of. Unless you've done no study, in which case I encourage your attention. There is much literature, many essays, much discussion, going back to Christ Himself.
Your complaint is noted, and has been answered for centuries.
"Jawbone is known for being the first big Bluetooth ear manufacturer."
Ignoring Jabra, this is true. Or, actually, it is false.
And I did indeed own an original Jabra, several since they were terribly short-lived. And Jawbones, Samsungs, Plantronics, Motorolas, blah blah blah. I was a Bluetooth junky from the very, very beginning. Jabra was first and big. Jawbone came to the party in mid-orgy, had great sets, but got distracted.
At least in my church our pastors preach FROM THE BIBLE. They give more than a damn about what is written in the Bible.
My church, and indeed virtually all of Protestant/Reformed Christianity does not forbid pastors, priests, whatever you call them to marry. The Catholic Church still does. Calling the Catholic Church "the church" is imprecise, lazy, or deliberately misleading. Or you don't really care, which is unfortunate.
Jesus did indeed correct Peter when He was arrested. There may be righteous justifications for war, which is a longstanding debate of which there is much commentary you could find and consider. I will not repeat or paraphrase those more learned than I in this matter.
"but on a "shall issue" permit requiring a reasonable proficiency test."
This does not mean what you seem to think it means. Make the proficiency test as you wish, and suddenly it becomes impossible to pass. 'Problem' solved.
'Shall issue' means that the authorities SHALL indeed issue upon request, or it means nothing. Driving,being a privilege, doesn't serve as an example. While driving may seem to be so necessary as to be a right, it is in fact not. Nope.
It wasn't that long ago that bringing a crashed Exchange server up in less than a half hour was considered a skill. Hearing that at least one of the private servers Hillary used was on Apple hardware, moving from one server system to another is nontrivial. I'm hoping he wasn't trying to keep Exchange running on a Mac server, which is like squeezing toothpaste back into the wrong tube.
He's not without skill. He's stuck with impossible tasks.
He asked a fairly interesting and reasonable question. I've asked similar ones, focused on recovering mail, not obfuscating it. And I already knew how I would do it, I just hoped for a simpler quicker way.
But, of course, while I was 'just' working for a hospital at the time, I knew I had to recover all that I could for legal reasons.We all know this poor blighter was trapped with a client that demanded criminal behavior 'or else'.
Slashdot Mirror
Wells Fargo.
"It is rather interesting that the Republicans managed to nominate the one person Hillary could actually beat"
Let's clear this up how, ok?
The 'Republicans' did NOT nominate Trump. The primary voters were in some states Democrats/'independents', in other states nominal Republicans. The GOP did as much as it dared to to discredit Trump, and he won anyways. Why?
Because too many non-Democrats are no longer supporting the Republican Party, name it the GOP or the GOPe as you wish. They have their reasons
Trump is a protest candidate. He's attracting surprising support because of that.
And the way Washington is running things, a candidate that seems intent on burning it all down is attractive to a certain minority of the voters. The anti-Hillary minority, combined with the usual anti-Democrat minorities, may yet form a coalition that is sufficient to elect Trump.
But don't think for a moment that 'the Republicans' nominated Trump. They are saddled with him because they chose not to rig the convention and have to choose an even less palatable (to the actual voting coalitions) candidate, or to nominate a candidate they feared more than Trump. The Democrats, being bolder and actually having the intention of pursuing objectives, snuffed the Sanders campaign before it became truly dangerous. The GOPe does not care to pursue any objectives other than retaining their positions and power, or at least this is the belief of a substantial number of their traditional rank and file supporters.
Again, do not confuse Trump's nomination with support from the GOP. They do not support him, save for Priebus and a few RNC members. And they are under attack by the GOPe, as should be expected. Trump is, to take a page from the activists, a change agent. the GOPe does not desire change. His voters do.
Be sure to lay in substantial supplies of popcorn. If Trump wins, you will want it. If Hillary wins, you'll be eating it for dinner. Maybe either way.
You think the Russians/Chinese/any number of nations would be attacking ALL the campaigns devices?
Really?
The reality is that everything sending or receiving data via the Internet is under attack, constantly, and many of the attackers are either employed, supported, or financed by state actors. Not that it matters, for if they spot an unaffiliated attacker succeeding, they will attack THEM. Why steal from the bank if you can just roll the robbers as they 'escape' with the goods? Actually a good strategy to quietly compromise the attackers, leaving them holding an 'empty' bag.
So where you live there isn't a monopoly.
What was your point again?
"Of course their analogy is highly questionable, since transmitting data over a network doesn't actually consume anything, now does it?"
It's s more like this:
When you stream your new favorite YouTube video, actual bits of data are sent to your device. And when I request MY favorite YouTube video, my bits are requested also. Eventually many users, those of us using this same ISP, all asking for data, ask for more than can be delivered quickly enough so that no one is disappointed by their video stuttering. At any of several points long the paths all that data takes there is only so much capacity. In its all used no more data.
Your ISP, if they are popular enough, is confronted by this problem sooner or later. Their choices of how to resolve it range from buying more equipment to changing the configuration of their systems to discouraging demand at peak times to outright shutting off some users to, well, doing nothing and hoping they don't lose too much business. Buying more equipment could force them to charge more, make less money, or go broke. Charging more risks losing customers. If they are so damned popular that they have customers out the wazoo, they may charge more or just ignore the poor blighters. If they enjoy a monopoly, same situation basically. But don't believe the hype that your ISP just sucks up money and doesn't do anything. I've done this, back when it was a fraction of the trouble it is now. It's expensive. Users don't know or care. They shouldn't.
This is as dumb as the 'right to be forgotten'. Tell that to a sex offender. Oh, wait, the EU wants to use 'right to be forgotten' to sanitize a powerful person's past history of sordid acts. As if this makes sense. Rendering the truth illegal is a very interesting step, no?
But this is California, the land of the irrational. Most any serious casting director can use IMDB etc to work through an actor's history and make reasonable assumptions. Look through Helen Mirren's filmography, and you can reasonably conclude she is older than 60. Duh. And she's still fabulous.
the complaint her isn't the obviously old actors, it's the difficult older-than-they-seem bunch. In an industry based on illusion, it is both remarkable and understandable that they rely on perception, and if an actor is perceived as older than the role, or perceived age is critical to a role, well, they 'need' to address that.
In every way, though, this is a stupid idea. No one who intends to benefit from this will. No one.
"The entire book of Leviticus is about a pack of religious laws whose major purpose appears to have been social control."
And this is entirely and completely true.
Now, I ask you, why? If you know, bonus points. If you just guess, well, go read up. The answer to this question is actually in the book, but many commentators can offer you the answer.
"The point of writing a religious book is to control people"
That's a rather narrow way of looking at it. Ignoring the possibility that authors sometimes write what they believe to be true to inform others is convenient for the denier, but that does not, by itself, make their assertion true.
"all of us consume oxygen."
Actually, we process oxygen. And it gets 'recycled', that is, reprocessed.
Think you patch your IoT door cam?
I doubt it. These are stupid simple, and that's the problem.
"Making ISP's liable for outbound traffic that doesn't originate from within their address range would deal with this."
Probably not. ISPs that won't respond will not help, and taking those offline risks harming innocent users, and we have a problem that cannot well be solved. And I bet a small Americano that many of these ISPs are major players, and will not be taken to account.
"The rest can then be tackled by holding the source to blame - if you have an device that's spamming, well it's up to you to shut it down or pay up."
Sure, bill the homeowner running a door cam. Maybe if you start up the technical solution of denying the MAC addresses associated with the attack, disabling a variety of devices and risking more lawsuits.
Ultimately, perhaps, we are learning that plugging in tiny, useful devices that are insecure and easily commandeered is a good business model for the manufacturers, and users love them, but they cannot be permitted access, and therefore cannot be used, because they are exceedingly dangerous. Disproportionately so.
Darn. But then, a single bullet, not really so dangerous sitting on a countertop, is exceedingly dangerous if it becomes lodged int he brain of an American President. It's the implementation. Cheap IoT devices are, sadly, dangerous. They need to be made better.
Excellent comments all, thank you.
In the NT, Hebrews 13 is an excellent passage, not only because it was written to Jewish converts, but because it is a brief, limited, but clear recommendation of how to live the Christian life.
The Letter of Paul to the Romans is, to me, the best handbook of the Gospel, living a Christian life, and how to evangelize in the NT. Our church just finished a 2+ year study of it, punctuated with other bits and such. A total of 60+ messages in all. We took months to go through Romans 8. And scripture is so full of meaning you need to examine every word...
More clarity :
As you should know, the Mosaic covenant is superceded, overridden, by the new covenant in Christ. Those who continue to obey the Law at bound by it, but those who believe in Christ not only need not, but are given a new covenant, fulfilled in Him.
This is a central point of Christianity, one you cannot be ignorant of. Unless you've done no study, in which case I encourage your attention. There is much literature, many essays, much discussion, going back to Christ Himself.
Your complaint is noted, and has been answered for centuries.
"Jawbone is known for being the first big Bluetooth ear manufacturer."
Ignoring Jabra, this is true. Or, actually, it is false.
And I did indeed own an original Jabra, several since they were terribly short-lived. And Jawbones, Samsungs, Plantronics, Motorolas, blah blah blah. I was a Bluetooth junky from the very, very beginning. Jabra was first and big. Jawbone came to the party in mid-orgy, had great sets, but got distracted.
Or they didn't happen to find this specific manuscript, relying on several others that were available.
In other words, they used what they actually had.
Seriously, this is not that hard.
For clarity;
At least in my church our pastors preach FROM THE BIBLE. They give more than a damn about what is written in the Bible.
My church, and indeed virtually all of Protestant/Reformed Christianity does not forbid pastors, priests, whatever you call them to marry. The Catholic Church still does. Calling the Catholic Church "the church" is imprecise, lazy, or deliberately misleading. Or you don't really care, which is unfortunate.
Jesus did indeed correct Peter when He was arrested. There may be righteous justifications for war, which is a longstanding debate of which there is much commentary you could find and consider. I will not repeat or paraphrase those more learned than I in this matter.
"but on a "shall issue" permit requiring a reasonable proficiency test."
This does not mean what you seem to think it means. Make the proficiency test as you wish, and suddenly it becomes impossible to pass. 'Problem' solved.
'Shall issue' means that the authorities SHALL indeed issue upon request, or it means nothing. Driving,being a privilege, doesn't serve as an example. While driving may seem to be so necessary as to be a right, it is in fact not. Nope.
No, that's incompetence as a cover for favoritism. Even a minimally skilled email admin would know to do this. Inexcusable.
"Trump is way more dangerous"
The power of his pen won't match the power of Hillary's pen, if she is elected. Hyperbole much?
"How about stoning people who wear mixed fabrics?"
Unless you are an Orthodox Jew, this was rescinded around 2000 years ago. Please use current documentation.
" it's still communicating to the Rs that 40% don't believe in their message enough to vote for it"
And Mitt Romney was castigated for saying EXACTLY THIS.
Would you people please get your story straight, or at least admit you will do anything, anything, to win?
"I'd rather vote for a student of the Grand fucking Wizard of the KKK."
You have that choice...
" since they'd just have to run a script to edit a bunch of text files"
Or ask the Russians for help.
If you're saving your server mail files in test files, you. are. doing. it. wrong.
It's called encryption. Your assailants will use it to receive the data they stole from you.
It wasn't that long ago that bringing a crashed Exchange server up in less than a half hour was considered a skill. Hearing that at least one of the private servers Hillary used was on Apple hardware, moving from one server system to another is nontrivial. I'm hoping he wasn't trying to keep Exchange running on a Mac server, which is like squeezing toothpaste back into the wrong tube.
He's not without skill. He's stuck with impossible tasks.
He asked a fairly interesting and reasonable question. I've asked similar ones, focused on recovering mail, not obfuscating it. And I already knew how I would do it, I just hoped for a simpler quicker way.
But, of course, while I was 'just' working for a hospital at the time, I knew I had to recover all that I could for legal reasons.We all know this poor blighter was trapped with a client that demanded criminal behavior 'or else'.