Are you claiming the Blumenthal messages were never copied to the appropriate department persons? Do you have evidence of this? Note that even IF she did not CC'd them directly, that does not mean she didn't later send a copy.
If she held that position, then why did she (after the existence of her private stash had been discovered) agree to provide to State (long after she'd left office) 50,000+ printed out pages of emails
I don't know their reasoning, I cannot read their minds. I've heard the department archives are in poor shape, for whatever reason.
If you mean "Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system."
Then sending to or CC'ing a person using an agency system would be abiding by the law since it would be recorded under their account. I've seen no evidence that she failed to do such. Only heresy from political opponents.
Exactly what word or term did she violate? I don't see anything specific enough. I cannot see the computations taking place in your mind to conclude she clearly violated some law. Please be more explicit.
The subpoena doesn't cover personal emails, and her team already made and kept copies of the work-related emails for the investigation. Whether she "did it right" is another matter that may eventually come up, but so far I have yet to see a CLEAR violation of any written law.
But the GAO has to make its findings public, or at least put it in congressional review reports. Congress persons are political animals by nature, both parties, and if they can take something out of context or cherry-pick bits and re-package them into a scary-sounding narrative to score political points, they will.
Look how they mangled issues with emails, back-up systems, file formats, servers, hard-drive failure rates, etc. in the Lerner/IRS situation. (Granted, some of the mangling of IT concerns* may have been sheer ignorance instead of intentional political manipulation.)
Transparency is a double-edge sword. I'm not choosing sides here, only saying that they are probably between a rock and a hard-place.
* They probably also mangled non-IT subjects, such as law, but I don't know enough about those topics to readily spot mistaken notions or claims.
I've been around a while, and I don't see how that is different than in the past. There has always been a fairly large gap between specialties where bugs and bad design can sink a company versus software with fuzzy up front requirements that is allowed to organically mature to some extent.
Yip. I've also been tossed around by the boom and bust cycle. California was highly glutted after the dot-com bust and I tried to move out of state, which was very difficult due to family issues. My legacy tool skills are the only thing that saved me, being that all those web newbies had no pre-web experience.
I suspect that something more programmer-friendly will soon replace the bloated layer-heavy HTML/CSS/Lamp stack et al currently used; and techies will fired en mass. "Remote" GUI standards are ripe for a big factoring event in the industry. Common GUI dev does not have to be rocket science. It's like the days of Windows C++ just before VB and Delphi came along, making GUI's a snap (initially), putting many of them out of work.
Fortunately for them, the Windows market in general was expanding such that there were plenty of projects that needed the speed or control of C++ GUI's still. But the same may not be true of the next Idiom Cleaning event.
It's pretty obvious to me that the real solution is to store passwords in a hardware black-box (with a mirrored spare) that only allows a limited number of tries for a given password and all passwords per time period. E.i. throttled.
Computers are getting to fast to permit them to chomp on raw encrypted files.
If the STEM wages in other countries are almost double relative to the local standard of living, then typically those people would put more effort into it. Capitalism incentives 101.
The threat of being outsourced here also tends to make one treat hands-on technical work as a mere stepping-stone job, hoping to move into management, which pays more relative to heads-down tech work. If it's a temp job, obviously one will tend to put less effort into fine-tuning their skills.
I thought the main purpose was to help you remember the company, not to produce sales then and there. Nobody really expects to do much "real" business at conventions.
Conventions are a "notion" system and bragging tool: bigger booth = bigger company, to help separate you from little guys. And for a little guy, demonstrate that your company exists and has enough money to at least afford a (small) booth.
"Firearms" is a vague term. At the very least, there are multiple interpretations and usages of it, some which have it cover just about any weapon that produces fire or fire-like heat. Thus, nukes could qualify under such a reading.
Someday a politician may promise "A chicken in every pot, and a nuke in every garage".
Over time we seem to be generally learning that our planet is rather unique in terms of our moon size, formation steps, and specific position in the "right kind" of galaxy per heavier elements and stellar explosion danger.
However, the flip side is that we've been learning how tenacious and flexible life is.
Thus, while matches to our particular circumstances may be rare, there may also be more than one path to sophisticated life.
For example, large Earth-sized moons of gas giants, oceans of mid-sized gas giants, and tidally-locked rocky planets around red dwarfs may also be able to harbor complex life.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you claiming the Blumenthal messages were never copied to the appropriate department persons? Do you have evidence of this? Note that even IF she did not CC'd them directly, that does not mean she didn't later send a copy.
I don't know their reasoning, I cannot read their minds. I've heard the department archives are in poor shape, for whatever reason.
I meant "hearsay", not "heresy". My apologies.
Harrison Ford's plane.....oh, wait
If you mean "Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system."
Then sending to or CC'ing a person using an agency system would be abiding by the law since it would be recorded under their account. I've seen no evidence that she failed to do such. Only heresy from political opponents.
Exactly what word or term did she violate? I don't see anything specific enough. I cannot see the computations taking place in your mind to conclude she clearly violated some law. Please be more explicit.
The subpoena doesn't cover personal emails, and her team already made and kept copies of the work-related emails for the investigation. Whether she "did it right" is another matter that may eventually come up, but so far I have yet to see a CLEAR violation of any written law.
Cite one clear-cut law that she broke.
Politicians may be naive about technology, but it seems techies are naive about law. Touche!
I don't believe that was true at the time.
No, 5% of humanity will evolve to survive those
But the GAO has to make its findings public, or at least put it in congressional review reports. Congress persons are political animals by nature, both parties, and if they can take something out of context or cherry-pick bits and re-package them into a scary-sounding narrative to score political points, they will.
Look how they mangled issues with emails, back-up systems, file formats, servers, hard-drive failure rates, etc. in the Lerner/IRS situation. (Granted, some of the mangling of IT concerns* may have been sheer ignorance instead of intentional political manipulation.)
Transparency is a double-edge sword. I'm not choosing sides here, only saying that they are probably between a rock and a hard-place.
* They probably also mangled non-IT subjects, such as law, but I don't know enough about those topics to readily spot mistaken notions or claims.
I've been around a while, and I don't see how that is different than in the past. There has always been a fairly large gap between specialties where bugs and bad design can sink a company versus software with fuzzy up front requirements that is allowed to organically mature to some extent.
So will God Goo get us first, or AI?
"How cute, a selfy ... Oh shit!"
Yip. I've also been tossed around by the boom and bust cycle. California was highly glutted after the dot-com bust and I tried to move out of state, which was very difficult due to family issues. My legacy tool skills are the only thing that saved me, being that all those web newbies had no pre-web experience.
I suspect that something more programmer-friendly will soon replace the bloated layer-heavy HTML/CSS/Lamp stack et al currently used; and techies will fired en mass. "Remote" GUI standards are ripe for a big factoring event in the industry. Common GUI dev does not have to be rocket science. It's like the days of Windows C++ just before VB and Delphi came along, making GUI's a snap (initially), putting many of them out of work.
Fortunately for them, the Windows market in general was expanding such that there were plenty of projects that needed the speed or control of C++ GUI's still. But the same may not be true of the next Idiom Cleaning event.
It's pretty obvious to me that the real solution is to store passwords in a hardware black-box (with a mirrored spare) that only allows a limited number of tries for a given password and all passwords per time period. E.i. throttled.
Computers are getting to fast to permit them to chomp on raw encrypted files.
An idiot may not know that :-)
If the STEM wages in other countries are almost double relative to the local standard of living, then typically those people would put more effort into it. Capitalism incentives 101.
The threat of being outsourced here also tends to make one treat hands-on technical work as a mere stepping-stone job, hoping to move into management, which pays more relative to heads-down tech work. If it's a temp job, obviously one will tend to put less effort into fine-tuning their skills.
I thought the main purpose was to help you remember the company, not to produce sales then and there. Nobody really expects to do much "real" business at conventions.
Conventions are a "notion" system and bragging tool: bigger booth = bigger company, to help separate you from little guys. And for a little guy, demonstrate that your company exists and has enough money to at least afford a (small) booth.
What's the alternative term? "Non-virtual human-body-based visual attention-capturing mechanism"? Too long, for one.
Do you have to put it in such negative terms? That really drains the fun from my visits there ... I mean my friend's visit.
So we need a meter for meters now.
"Firearms" is a vague term. At the very least, there are multiple interpretations and usages of it, some which have it cover just about any weapon that produces fire or fire-like heat. Thus, nukes could qualify under such a reading.
Someday a politician may promise "A chicken in every pot, and a nuke in every garage".
I meant before.
Over time we seem to be generally learning that our planet is rather unique in terms of our moon size, formation steps, and specific position in the "right kind" of galaxy per heavier elements and stellar explosion danger.
However, the flip side is that we've been learning how tenacious and flexible life is.
Thus, while matches to our particular circumstances may be rare, there may also be more than one path to sophisticated life.
For example, large Earth-sized moons of gas giants, oceans of mid-sized gas giants, and tidally-locked rocky planets around red dwarfs may also be able to harbor complex life.
Which one would get me jailed there?
Angle 1: "Your claim is a steaming pile of shit!"
Angle 2: "Your logic resembles the quickly-disintegrating chemical bonds as found in recently-emerging solid waste products of typical mammals."