Well then lets check, lets check everywhere the full extent of votes really being hacked
This can be done without sending the data to the Federal gov't. Allow auditors the ability to run queries physically at the states, but not remove any data from the state without getting permission. Disable the USB ports and search them at the door. Or only allow them to request queries in writing; they'd never have to touch the database itself.
the federal government which owns all of the results of a national election anyway and is legally free and clear to demand any information it likes.
Are you sure about this? We do have a federalist system.
A lot of info is "publicly available", but it's not collected together in a "convenient" form. One typically has to request specific records from a gov't clerk; they won't give you the entire list of everybody in say CSV format.
And sometimes they charge per person's records such that if you ask for everybody (if allowed), you'd have pay millions of dollars.
There are various reasons to do this, but generally it's to prevent mass spamming and mass shaming of citizens.
I just wish they'd [Azure] slow down a little bit and let people catch up
Unless you are seeking resume bullet points or enjoy drama for drama's sake, it's usually best to let others be the guinea-pigs for new or fast-changing tech.
Others, such as ancient Greece considered women to be the uncontrollably horny ones.
History written by men.
Guys: wear a sharp suit. Feemales uglify yourself because it's YOUR fault if horndogs can't control their actions
I believe there's a difference between "sexual" clothing and "sharp" clothing. Women can also wear professional "sharp" clothing without it being sexual.
Unless it has the opposite effect of more women in productive jobs
True, that may happen, but where's the tipping point? That's what I'm asking. Policing/courts/prevention/training/firing has a cost to companies. It's not clear the benefits outweigh the costs.
These ladies it seems would rather people like that didn't (for example) keep pushing the flirting after being shut down.
They didn't necessarily define "creepy" as "pushy", which seems to be your interpretation. Overall, if they personally like somebody they seem to like the sexually-implied attention and if they don't like the person they don't like the sexually-implied attention. They want to use/enjoy the attention when it suits them (no pun intended) but complain when it doesn't. Again, it appears they want it both ways, which I find unrealistic.
If you put honey out, you'll get both bees and flies. If you only want bees but not flies, you are kidding yourself. Just don't put honey out, period.
Example cultures? I realize in some cultures women have much more social power than one typically sees, and that could indeed change the dynamics. But that's because women there have a proverbial big stick. A big enough stick can re-shape just about ANY behavior. I'm talking general tendencies. Being a male myself, I can vouch we, er, I think way too much about...um..."romance", especially when younger. It can be tamed, but takes a lot more power than other emotions/instincts.
Some women lie. To be fair, people in general lie. I have a friend who told me that during a recession, one woman accused him of harassment because she was vying for his position. The co's trim policy let staff go in order hiring, and he had seniority over her. Thus, to increase her chances of survival, she tried to frame him. I know for sure she wasn't his type, so I believe him.
I prefer that companies be given "encouragement" to make things repairable rather than all-or-nothing laws.
For example, require clear consumer disclosure* of estimated hours and cost to replace common phone components such as screens, batteries, speakers, microphones, memory, physical buttons, lenses, and ports/sockets. (It's certainly possible the cost may exceed the device itself in some cases.)
I realize micromanaging circuit board design with such laws could be a bear, but the above items have relatively clean boundaries (or should have).
This doesn't force repair-ability on manufacturers, but could embarrass/shame them into making a better effort. If a consumer really wants to pay for compactness over repair-ability, they can and probably will in some cases for fashion/status reasons. But the majority would probably sacrifice some sleekness for repair-ability, if they have enough info to weigh it.
* An in-store purchase could require a customer initial or signature on a time/cost disclosure form, and on-line sales could require a confirmation page before the final "buy" button (sorry Amazon-1-click: it's 2 now).
Since recorded history, whenever an attractive lady walked past a construction zone or equivalent, the male workers hooted and hollered like a bunch of monkeys (which humans pretty much are for good or bad).
Multiple times I've rode to lunch with "white collar" workers, and they do the same when an attractive lady crosses the street, usually with the windows closed, which differs from the factory situation in that the lady usually doesn't hear it (or pretends not to).
Males are biologically horny and it would take a lot of effort and resources to outright stop them from showing it. I'm not condoning flirtatious behavior, only saying it's very economically expensive to curtail most of it and there's probably a point of diminishing returns. Society needs to decide how much enforcement and regulation should be applied to curtail it because the cost ain't free: court costs, firing, training, and policing it is a de facto tax on products and services.
I will agree that (uninvited) touching and outright rude remarks should be punished by probation or termination. But there's a lot of "soft" harassment, much of it subjective in terms of offensiveness. For example, there's a lot of middle ground between "You look very nice today", and "You look veeeery nice today."
Another thing is that if a lady doesn't want such attention, dress ugly, or at least non-sexual. It's quite possible to look professional without adding a sexual nature. Wear dark pantsuits or long loose-fitting skirts, mild or no lipstick, light makeup, hair up or a simple ponytail, and simple practical shoes. Of course there are a few exceptional ladies who look hot in anything, but that's rare outside of modelling agencies.
I've asked some attractively-dressed ladies why they dress provocatively and yet complain about harassment. Their answer is often hypocritical: "I'm okay when nice men flirt with me but not creeps". They want the upsides of attention but not the downsides. I have to call them on that: you can't have it both ways. For one, "creep" is subjective (as the election showed).
Society will probably have to compromise: men can tone it down and learn to be more subtle, and women can manage their attire better.
Profit breeds competition, and focuses our potential into action.
But for the last few decades, it's been log-jamming at the top. If it's so important for competition, then spread it out so that the "motivation juice" is not just at the top.
Yip, third-world travel can make even our chintziest services seem good in comparison.
Many conservatives point out that even our very poorest often have it better than many in the 3rd world. But, why aim our economic system so low? Don't we want to get better over time instead of back-slide into 3rd-world-ism? Or do they find something sacred about profits?
"Believe me, I know more than the scientists. I'm really smart, everyone around me knows it. I don't necessarily do formulas and ya da da, but I have natural instincts; I smell science like a cat, and pounce--beautiful bigly American Science! #MASGA!"
Slashdot Mirror
This can be done without sending the data to the Federal gov't. Allow auditors the ability to run queries physically at the states, but not remove any data from the state without getting permission. Disable the USB ports and search them at the door. Or only allow them to request queries in writing; they'd never have to touch the database itself.
Are you sure about this? We do have a federalist system.
A lot of info is "publicly available", but it's not collected together in a "convenient" form. One typically has to request specific records from a gov't clerk; they won't give you the entire list of everybody in say CSV format.
And sometimes they charge per person's records such that if you ask for everybody (if allowed), you'd have pay millions of dollars.
There are various reasons to do this, but generally it's to prevent mass spamming and mass shaming of citizens.
Recently it was announced the first batch of Seattle min. wage studies had some significant flaws.
But in general, decades of min. wage change studies show a mixed bag: some people gain and some lose. It's neither a panacea nor doom.
Unless you are seeking resume bullet points or enjoy drama for drama's sake, it's usually best to let others be the guinea-pigs for new or fast-changing tech.
History written by men.
I believe there's a difference between "sexual" clothing and "sharp" clothing. Women can also wear professional "sharp" clothing without it being sexual.
True, that may happen, but where's the tipping point? That's what I'm asking. Policing/courts/prevention/training/firing has a cost to companies. It's not clear the benefits outweigh the costs.
They didn't necessarily define "creepy" as "pushy", which seems to be your interpretation. Overall, if they personally like somebody they seem to like the sexually-implied attention and if they don't like the person they don't like the sexually-implied attention. They want to use/enjoy the attention when it suits them (no pun intended) but complain when it doesn't. Again, it appears they want it both ways, which I find unrealistic.
If you put honey out, you'll get both bees and flies. If you only want bees but not flies, you are kidding yourself. Just don't put honey out, period.
Not sure how yet, but somehow robots will be involved in the solution.
Example cultures? I realize in some cultures women have much more social power than one typically sees, and that could indeed change the dynamics. But that's because women there have a proverbial big stick. A big enough stick can re-shape just about ANY behavior. I'm talking general tendencies. Being a male myself, I can vouch we, er, I think way too much about...um..."romance", especially when younger. It can be tamed, but takes a lot more power than other emotions/instincts.
Some women lie. To be fair, people in general lie. I have a friend who told me that during a recession, one woman accused him of harassment because she was vying for his position. The co's trim policy let staff go in order hiring, and he had seniority over her. Thus, to increase her chances of survival, she tried to frame him. I know for sure she wasn't his type, so I believe him.
I prefer that companies be given "encouragement" to make things repairable rather than all-or-nothing laws.
For example, require clear consumer disclosure* of estimated hours and cost to replace common phone components such as screens, batteries, speakers, microphones, memory, physical buttons, lenses, and ports/sockets. (It's certainly possible the cost may exceed the device itself in some cases.)
I realize micromanaging circuit board design with such laws could be a bear, but the above items have relatively clean boundaries (or should have).
This doesn't force repair-ability on manufacturers, but could embarrass/shame them into making a better effort. If a consumer really wants to pay for compactness over repair-ability, they can and probably will in some cases for fashion/status reasons. But the majority would probably sacrifice some sleekness for repair-ability, if they have enough info to weigh it.
* An in-store purchase could require a customer initial or signature on a time/cost disclosure form, and on-line sales could require a confirmation page before the final "buy" button (sorry Amazon-1-click: it's 2 now).
Since recorded history, whenever an attractive lady walked past a construction zone or equivalent, the male workers hooted and hollered like a bunch of monkeys (which humans pretty much are for good or bad).
Multiple times I've rode to lunch with "white collar" workers, and they do the same when an attractive lady crosses the street, usually with the windows closed, which differs from the factory situation in that the lady usually doesn't hear it (or pretends not to).
Males are biologically horny and it would take a lot of effort and resources to outright stop them from showing it. I'm not condoning flirtatious behavior, only saying it's very economically expensive to curtail most of it and there's probably a point of diminishing returns. Society needs to decide how much enforcement and regulation should be applied to curtail it because the cost ain't free: court costs, firing, training, and policing it is a de facto tax on products and services.
I will agree that (uninvited) touching and outright rude remarks should be punished by probation or termination. But there's a lot of "soft" harassment, much of it subjective in terms of offensiveness. For example, there's a lot of middle ground between "You look very nice today", and "You look veeeery nice today."
Another thing is that if a lady doesn't want such attention, dress ugly, or at least non-sexual. It's quite possible to look professional without adding a sexual nature. Wear dark pantsuits or long loose-fitting skirts, mild or no lipstick, light makeup, hair up or a simple ponytail, and simple practical shoes. Of course there are a few exceptional ladies who look hot in anything, but that's rare outside of modelling agencies.
I've asked some attractively-dressed ladies why they dress provocatively and yet complain about harassment. Their answer is often hypocritical: "I'm okay when nice men flirt with me but not creeps". They want the upsides of attention but not the downsides. I have to call them on that: you can't have it both ways. For one, "creep" is subjective (as the election showed).
Society will probably have to compromise: men can tone it down and learn to be more subtle, and women can manage their attire better.
Naw, they walked away from the funds.
The end of decades often brings a recession. We are just about due.
Their .NET tools are just a honey pot with a thousand ways to lock you in
This can get expensive as every loon and troll will come out of the woodwork to throw monkey wrenches into the process.
But for the last few decades, it's been log-jamming at the top. If it's so important for competition, then spread it out so that the "motivation juice" is not just at the top.
Yip, third-world travel can make even our chintziest services seem good in comparison.
Many conservatives point out that even our very poorest often have it better than many in the 3rd world. But, why aim our economic system so low? Don't we want to get better over time instead of back-slide into 3rd-world-ism? Or do they find something sacred about profits?
Hey Microsoft, instead of reorganizing your sales force, try stop sucking.
He lives next door to a self-taught brain surgeon.
And our self-taught-politician president is doing just fine.
It's neither compatible with IE, nor better.
Bigly fake moon! So sad.
"Believe me, I know more than the scientists. I'm really smart, everyone around me knows it. I don't necessarily do formulas and ya da da, but I have natural instincts; I smell science like a cat, and pounce--beautiful bigly American Science! #MASGA!"
The big players should pull out of Germany and put up a notice to German readers telling the gov't to Fuck Off.
I tried a couple, they were buggy
Well, perhaps; I don't play phone games so wouldn't know that market.
It's global. You cannot set it per site; at least not last I checked.