People with immunity are generally held in contempt if they plead the 5th. Combetta pled the 5th while under immunity protection. No contempt of court was issued.
I don't think the deal ever went through. The article is poorly written in that regards.
One can potentially use the phone for the interface, making the sensing device(s) not need speech-AI power chips, etc.
I see it as a way for Amazon to shove a "shopping machine" into your house. I suppose they are willing to subsidize hardware to place such; but from computing hardware perspective, it still seems poorly factored to me.
even though the DOJ and FBI are trying to stonewall it.
Do you have evidence of this alleged motivation?
Comey is a Republication, and it seems he'd rather lock Hillary up rather then keep having to answer pesky questions about the case from Congress and the press. (Maybe he wants to get back to pestering Apple:-)
Judiciary Committee aids told FoxNews.com that the destruction of the laptops is particularly troubling as it means that the computers could not be used as evidence in future legal proceedings, should new information or circumstances arise. [emph. added]
I don't get it, isn't that the trade-off? Essentially it's a deal to make the techie's life less risky in exchange for more info about Mrs. C.
But from another perspective, that doesn't mean everyone is equal in the eye of the law: the pawn gets a deal so that the queen can be nailed?
I agree that high-ranking officials deserve more scrutiny, but it does go against "equal justice" to slide on the pawn in order to get at the queen.
Using Ada added about 40% to bidders costs such that such orgs kept losing out to bids from more common languages. As I mentioned elsewhere, most orgs simply don't want to pay extra for quality.
Name one breakthrough in science which was made by a crackpot
"Crockpot" is probably relative. Einstein's ideas were greeted with skepticism, bordering on ridicule, as was the multiverse model of quantum physics. Even rockets working in the vacuum of space was bashed by some in the mainstream.
There is often groupthink and "best practices" of the time, and going against those can get one labelled as a crackpot. Humans naturally protect their turf.
I've been labelled such myself for claiming that human grokkability is more important than shear parsimony in terms of "productive" programming code, in debates among certain academics. (I'm not claiming all academics.)
The problem is that "parsimony" is easier to measure than human grokkability, but being easier to measure does not make a factor more important. My detractors seem to mistake ease-of-measurement for importance.
Humans have to read and maintain the code, not machines nor mathematicians. (At least machines processing the code is usually not the bottleneck.)
They claim that "emergent" benefits appear if one follows parsimony, but so far have not shown this the case. Their case is very indirect, seemingly claiming that if you follow parsimony, you'll filter out "bad" programmers, and academically gifted programmers would replace them and be many times more productive, justifying their higher salaries. This has been tried before without lasting benefits. Companies also value people skills, writing skills, UI skills, domain skills, and other things that "raw" academics are not necessarily better at. Those not in the field often don't understand the value of those aspects.
Plus, I suspect they want the industry to value academics more, and are thus biased by their wallet to push for academic-centric development. Thus, protecting their turf.
Commodore's problem was more that they took an age to substantially improve the Amiga and make those improvements available.
They had difficulty with backward compatibility. The design was fairly kludgy to keep the machines cheap (which was their main selling point). The side-effect is that upgrades had to match the original kludge for kludge, making a mess of any newer model.
"However she is a politician not a IT expert." - She employed numerous IT experts, however, and certainly could be expected to know the implications.
Please elaborate on the IT side.
A home server versus AOL versus a "regular" gov't office email server NOT designed for classified info* doesn't make any LEGAL difference. The existing laws say nothing about server selection or ownership. The real issue is that none of the 3 listed were designed for classified info.
If somebody "put" classified info on ANY of them, a mistake is being made. As far as whose fault it is, well, that's an administrative/authority issue and NOT an IT issue.
* The "other" office system that was for classified info is generally not considered to be "email".
deleting emails after the authorities have started an investigation on you, claiming that they had nothing to do with the case,
She was asked to turn over "work related" emails. She was NOT OBLIGATED to turn over non-rework-related emails (at least not at that time).
Missing some due to imperfect review is usually NOT a federal crime except in extreme circumstances.
Most people would miss some also if they reviewed them themselves. Jurors would know this. If you have perfect eyes, well, you are a minority.
I agree and she agreed it was poor practice to use a private/personal email service, but it was NOT illegal. That's why Colin did it also.
The FBI did uncover some of those originally excluded from the "work pile" by unstated means. NONE had anything suspicious, and appeared to show that the (Hillary's) lawyers reading them didn't bother reading the whole email before categorizing them.
Slashdot Mirror
"Mr. Jobs, you are hugging me wrong!"
Shocking news!
iChan, with translucent rounded edges (unless you hold it wrong or plug in a regular headphone jack).
That's probably McAfee in the way.
Smaller Gov't == Smaller Backups
I don't think the deal ever went through. The article is poorly written in that regards.
One can potentially use the phone for the interface, making the sensing device(s) not need speech-AI power chips, etc.
I see it as a way for Amazon to shove a "shopping machine" into your house. I suppose they are willing to subsidize hardware to place such; but from computing hardware perspective, it still seems poorly factored to me.
I got a Zune Band with Clippy built in.
So, which candidate is more likely to get this person their meds?
Maybe that's more important than who cheats more on emails/taxes.
Re: Trump: It matters because we have to choose between two evils.
Personally, I'll take the Evil One without A.D.D.
Do you have evidence of this alleged motivation?
Comey is a Republication, and it seems he'd rather lock Hillary up rather then keep having to answer pesky questions about the case from Congress and the press. (Maybe he wants to get back to pestering Apple :-)
I don't get it, isn't that the trade-off? Essentially it's a deal to make the techie's life less risky in exchange for more info about Mrs. C.
But from another perspective, that doesn't mean everyone is equal in the eye of the law: the pawn gets a deal so that the queen can be nailed?
I agree that high-ranking officials deserve more scrutiny, but it does go against "equal justice" to slide on the pawn in order to get at the queen.
Why can't a cellphone app do the same? Why buy Yet Another Small Computer? Factor, people. Idontgettit
That might be true, but doesn't invalidate the original point.
Christopher Columbus was also nuts, and a more sane person probably wouldn't take the trip. Serendipity is sometimes fueled by stupidity.
Using Ada added about 40% to bidders costs such that such orgs kept losing out to bids from more common languages. As I mentioned elsewhere, most orgs simply don't want to pay extra for quality.
Sorry, I meant C64. My bad.
One can get metal poisoning from cans that are say 20+ years old. I guess during an apocalypse, that's a relatively minor worry.
I figure water would be the most important anyhow, but it takes up a lot of space. One can live much longer without food than water.
Some kind of cabinet-sized storage system that cycles by feeding the yard sprinklers may be more practical, but I've never seen such on the market.
Maybe the theory is that if you only/mostly stored food, you can barter for water?
"Crockpot" is probably relative. Einstein's ideas were greeted with skepticism, bordering on ridicule, as was the multiverse model of quantum physics. Even rockets working in the vacuum of space was bashed by some in the mainstream.
There is often groupthink and "best practices" of the time, and going against those can get one labelled as a crackpot. Humans naturally protect their turf.
I've been labelled such myself for claiming that human grokkability is more important than shear parsimony in terms of "productive" programming code, in debates among certain academics. (I'm not claiming all academics.)
The problem is that "parsimony" is easier to measure than human grokkability, but being easier to measure does not make a factor more important. My detractors seem to mistake ease-of-measurement for importance.
Humans have to read and maintain the code, not machines nor mathematicians. (At least machines processing the code is usually not the bottleneck.)
They claim that "emergent" benefits appear if one follows parsimony, but so far have not shown this the case. Their case is very indirect, seemingly claiming that if you follow parsimony, you'll filter out "bad" programmers, and academically gifted programmers would replace them and be many times more productive, justifying their higher salaries. This has been tried before without lasting benefits. Companies also value people skills, writing skills, UI skills, domain skills, and other things that "raw" academics are not necessarily better at. Those not in the field often don't understand the value of those aspects.
Plus, I suspect they want the industry to value academics more, and are thus biased by their wallet to push for academic-centric development. Thus, protecting their turf.
Did I wander into a tangent here?
How do you rotate the supplies? Food and water go bad after 5 or 10 years. Do you just throw it out? Feed it to animals? Water the lawn?
The Borg don't need porn.
Formal verification is time-consuming, and most companies probably don't want to pay for it.
A fastidious programmer will get booted for taking too long.
They had difficulty with backward compatibility. The design was fairly kludgy to keep the machines cheap (which was their main selling point). The side-effect is that upgrades had to match the original kludge for kludge, making a mess of any newer model.
Deep learning can now penetrate your pathways in expanding ways and inject fulfilling content that triggers a euphoria of discovery and edification.
Please elaborate on the IT side.
A home server versus AOL versus a "regular" gov't office email server NOT designed for classified info* doesn't make any LEGAL difference. The existing laws say nothing about server selection or ownership. The real issue is that none of the 3 listed were designed for classified info.
If somebody "put" classified info on ANY of them, a mistake is being made. As far as whose fault it is, well, that's an administrative/authority issue and NOT an IT issue.
* The "other" office system that was for classified info is generally not considered to be "email".
She was asked to turn over "work related" emails. She was NOT OBLIGATED to turn over non-rework-related emails (at least not at that time).
Missing some due to imperfect review is usually NOT a federal crime except in extreme circumstances.
Most people would miss some also if they reviewed them themselves. Jurors would know this. If you have perfect eyes, well, you are a minority.
I agree and she agreed it was poor practice to use a private/personal email service, but it was NOT illegal. That's why Colin did it also.
The FBI did uncover some of those originally excluded from the "work pile" by unstated means. NONE had anything suspicious, and appeared to show that the (Hillary's) lawyers reading them didn't bother reading the whole email before categorizing them.