Nonsense.
Having an unencrypted swap isn't driving your call into a wall. Having an unencrypted swap is a potential security leakage for applications that may have disk data unencrypted in their ram. It's not some magical interface to the encrypted disk.
But that is true for anything. If you plug in an encrypted drive in an insecure system and decrypt it, the encryption doesn't matter.
This is an idiotic statement, akin to- since a car crash is dangerous, why bother wearing seat belts?
Security is not a boolean.
There is no such thing as a boolean true "secure" system. There are only shades of security. Arguing that all security should be thrown out because the system itself doesn't meet some standard or definition guruevi the wise has set is the pinnacle of silliness. Fuck it.
No, you're right. Fuck it. Removing all passwords and running a chmod 777 across the entire drive as we speak. I thank you for your insight, and whatever moron modded you up.
Plenty of lawyers say she broke the law I will take their word for it.
And plenty of lawyers say she didn't. Why won't you take their word for it?
At the end of the day, the law enforcement agency investigating her behavior decided her behavior was not criminal. That's really the end of the discussion.
Assuming you are a lawyer there can be different legal opinions and that is why you have a trial
No. You do not have a trial because two lawyers have differing opinions. You have a trial because there is reason to believe that you have committed a criminal act. The agencies charged with investigating this decided there wasn't enough to indict or prosecute. Ergo, no criminal act. The opinion of some lawyers really doesn't matter. Everyone has opinions.
As for dragging the country down, a white wash is what does that.
Nobody is white washing shit- you're gaslighting. Trying to confuse the truth you claim to be trying to get out. Peddling opinions with no basis in fact. They're nothing more than dressed up conspiracy theories by people who should fucking know better. You- as an engineer- should know fucking better.
showing that we have one system of justice for all this is setting the country straight
How the hell does trying to force indict someone under the espionage act against the wishes of the professionals who do such charging showing we have one system of justice? It isn't that at all- it's lining up nobles at the guillotine.
A country needs to get rid of corruption and where if shows up we should stamp it out with the full measure of the law
Who could possibly disagree with this? The problem, is that this isn't what you want. What you want is to indict someone for a crime they did not commit, simply because you do not like their politics and behavior. That is sickening.
If you cannot see that then you are deliberately blind or blinded by the media.
No, asshole. That's the problem, I'm not blinded by the media. These fucked up efforts to wield the justice department as a weapon, on both sides of the spectrum, are fucked up, and you have swallowed that load, and asked Big Daddy Fox for more. Your lack of independent thinking has dropped our collective IQ. Thanks.
Miss handling classified information. This is illegal
Horse shit. The only statute that comes close to "mishandling classified information" is Title 18 of the USC, Section 1924, which no sane prosecutor would try to bust her for, as it not only require intent, but has a nebulous requirement of lack of authorization, while federal rules in place actually give her, as the head of the State Department, the authority to so authorize the location they were stored. When you make stupid arguments, you make it really easy to defend her. You make it hard to actually be critical of her stupid behavior, when you're clearly too fucking stupid to critically assess the situation.
In short, quit making assertions that aren't factual. Quit being full of shit. Educate yourself. Quit dragging our fucking country down.
This is what bugs me about you. You're not even aware of the text of any imaginary statutes that you're accusing her of violating. You're confusing things you don't like with law. You're confusing department rules with law. These distinctions are important. Nobody said what she did wasn't stupid, and against the rules. But idiots like you calling it a crime sound like rabid dogs foaming at the mouth, and it's pathetic.
I've already shown that you were completely full of shit in your former post, now you're just throwing more spaghetti at the wall hoping something will stick. Why don't you cite what statute you think she is in violation of, and then actually read it.
No, a prosecutor in the Justice Department decides if something is worthy of prosecution. The FBI investigates and gathers the facts that the prosecutor uses to make the determination.
You can say that as many times as you like, but it just doesn't make it true. I'm sorry.
As far as optics are concerned, and given the fact that half the country now think he was part of a conspiracy to elect Clinton, which is, imho, one of the stupidest fucking things I've seen come out of the righty conspiracy theory mill, you're right. He could have saved himself a lot of trouble by punting it off his side of the field.
What's important though, is non-optically speaking- what he did was completely normal. He has discretion to decide of an alleged infraction is worthy of prosecution, or likely to be prosecuted, and according to the IG report- he was correct in his assertion that it wouldn't be, making claims of conspiracy seem kind of strange to me.
Second best armed, perhaps. As for powerful? World news is making it pretty clear that America's soft power is declining rapidly with the lack of respect for Cheetoh.
I'd say Xi in China is probably the most powerful man alive right now.
Wrong. The FOIA makes no comment on whether or not their emails must be retained, or where they must reside.
The FOIA only requires agencies to have a plan to give the public access to the records it does keep.
Several other unrelated (FRA is a big one) acts create the statutes that detail things they must retain, as well as a myriad of rules imposed all up and down the bureaucracy.
Please, educate yourself before you continue spouting complete fucking falsehoods masqueraded as facts. This shit is why the media is such a shit show. They're marketing to idiots such as yourself who don't fucking care what the difference between fact or fiction is anyway.
This is blatantly fucking false. The fact that you keep spouting literally false information with very heavy implications is disgusting. Is it a smear campaign, or are you really so willfully ignorant? Or just fucking stupid?
That said, he was found to be insubordinate and appropriately fired--which makes it odd for Trump to be investigated over firing him, but whatever.
It actually doesn't.
The question to how appropriate it was for him to be fired comes down to intent, which is an open question since Trump did himself no favors with regard to making it very believable he did it to stop an investigation that personally affected him.
That he ended up being exonerated in that decision technically, it is his intent that is under investigation.
Law enforcement exercises its own jurisdiction on deciding whether to send a case up to prosecutors every single day. That's literally how it works.
What I want to know, is did you really not know that, or are you so blinded by partisan hatred that you're willing to sacrifice your intellectual honesty to crank up your blood pressure a few more notches?
You aren't getting it. Declassification is irrelevant, as it wasn't needed.
As a head of a federal agency, the secretary of state has the right to declare whether or not their server was "secure". Information need not be classified. That law defers to the executive in handling of classified material, and only seeks to punish where someone violates the executive controls on said material. The executive (by executive order) had delegated the responsibility for that information to any department head that may handle such material.
I can't speak to your creds, but if you really do know what you're talking about, i'm finding it mind boggling that you don't actually understand the structure of authority with regard to classified information.
What a ridiculous fucking assertion.
We are raping this place. Ya, we're shitting all over the environment that sustains us. Half of us because we believe the sky fairy wasn't lying when he said that the Earth was unchanging, and that we were its master, and that it'd stay bountiful as long as we kept fucking it and each other. The other half are just greedy parasites.
We don't disagree here.
But nothing of value lost? Get the fuck out of here. You see any other footprints on the moon? We could be, for all we know, the most advanced species in the galaxy, or ever to emerge. We're a deeply flawed animal, but we're also mind blowingly incredible. If you can't see that, you should seek psychiatric help for your depression, or just fucking off yourself.
They aren't individually of course, as trees must eventually die.
But something amazing happens when a tree dies. Another pops up to take its place.
Trees, as an extant body of biomass that regrows as it dies.. colloquially known as a forest, are absolutely a net sink. That forest will never emit more carbon than it took to grow it.
Of course, with long enough time spans, even forests will die, and desequester that carbon.
But then again, with long enough time spans, that coal would have worked its way back to the surface in some kind of carbonaceous silicate form and have been weathered back into the atmosphere as well.
You seem to be under the impression that we would just bottle the CO2 and leave it there.
Drop it into a hole a mile deep in the Earth wold be preferred, really.
That's a really dumb assumption because both carbon and oxygen are really useful.
They sure are. That's why we're in the problem we're in;)
Get rid of the shit. Re-sequester it. We pulled it out of long-term storage and threw it into the atmosphere, and there isn't a hell of a lot we can do with it that won't put it back into the atmosphere. We need to reduce levels, not stop growth. It's already too high, and a ball is already in motion that is already bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is a brilliant way to look like you're getting shit done when the people who care have attention spans that give gnats a run for their money.
Nonsense. Having an unencrypted swap isn't driving your call into a wall. Having an unencrypted swap is a potential security leakage for applications that may have disk data unencrypted in their ram. It's not some magical interface to the encrypted disk.
Here's your sign.
I compile modules out-of-tree all the time....
Never a filesystem module, I'll admit, but they can function fine as a module afaik... Am I wrong?
But that is true for anything. If you plug in an encrypted drive in an insecure system and decrypt it, the encryption doesn't matter.
This is an idiotic statement, akin to- since a car crash is dangerous, why bother wearing seat belts?
Security is not a boolean.
There is no such thing as a boolean true "secure" system. There are only shades of security. Arguing that all security should be thrown out because the system itself doesn't meet some standard or definition guruevi the wise has set is the pinnacle of silliness. Fuck it.
No, you're right. Fuck it. Removing all passwords and running a chmod 777 across the entire drive as we speak. I thank you for your insight, and whatever moron modded you up.
Christ, you fail hard, man.
You do know the entire OS isn't open source, right?
In particular, go ahead and show me the source for Finder.
Plenty of lawyers say she broke the law I will take their word for it.
And plenty of lawyers say she didn't. Why won't you take their word for it?
At the end of the day, the law enforcement agency investigating her behavior decided her behavior was not criminal. That's really the end of the discussion.
Assuming you are a lawyer there can be different legal opinions and that is why you have a trial
No. You do not have a trial because two lawyers have differing opinions. You have a trial because there is reason to believe that you have committed a criminal act. The agencies charged with investigating this decided there wasn't enough to indict or prosecute. Ergo, no criminal act. The opinion of some lawyers really doesn't matter. Everyone has opinions.
As for dragging the country down, a white wash is what does that.
Nobody is white washing shit- you're gaslighting. Trying to confuse the truth you claim to be trying to get out. Peddling opinions with no basis in fact. They're nothing more than dressed up conspiracy theories by people who should fucking know better. You- as an engineer- should know fucking better.
showing that we have one system of justice for all this is setting the country straight
How the hell does trying to force indict someone under the espionage act against the wishes of the professionals who do such charging showing we have one system of justice? It isn't that at all- it's lining up nobles at the guillotine.
A country needs to get rid of corruption and where if shows up we should stamp it out with the full measure of the law
Who could possibly disagree with this? The problem, is that this isn't what you want. What you want is to indict someone for a crime they did not commit, simply because you do not like their politics and behavior. That is sickening.
If you cannot see that then you are deliberately blind or blinded by the media.
No, asshole. That's the problem, I'm not blinded by the media. These fucked up efforts to wield the justice department as a weapon, on both sides of the spectrum, are fucked up, and you have swallowed that load, and asked Big Daddy Fox for more. Your lack of independent thinking has dropped our collective IQ. Thanks.
No divining necessary. Trump cast his own motives in question to any reasonable person. Please tell me with a straight face you disagree.
Miss handling classified information. This is illegal
Horse shit. The only statute that comes close to "mishandling classified information" is Title 18 of the USC, Section 1924, which no sane prosecutor would try to bust her for, as it not only require intent, but has a nebulous requirement of lack of authorization, while federal rules in place actually give her, as the head of the State Department, the authority to so authorize the location they were stored. When you make stupid arguments, you make it really easy to defend her. You make it hard to actually be critical of her stupid behavior, when you're clearly too fucking stupid to critically assess the situation.
In short, quit making assertions that aren't factual. Quit being full of shit. Educate yourself. Quit dragging our fucking country down.
This is what bugs me about you. You're not even aware of the text of any imaginary statutes that you're accusing her of violating. You're confusing things you don't like with law. You're confusing department rules with law. These distinctions are important. Nobody said what she did wasn't stupid, and against the rules. But idiots like you calling it a crime sound like rabid dogs foaming at the mouth, and it's pathetic.
I've already shown that you were completely full of shit in your former post, now you're just throwing more spaghetti at the wall hoping something will stick. Why don't you cite what statute you think she is in violation of, and then actually read it.
No, a prosecutor in the Justice Department decides if something is worthy of prosecution. The FBI investigates and gathers the facts that the prosecutor uses to make the determination.
You can say that as many times as you like, but it just doesn't make it true. I'm sorry.
As far as optics are concerned, and given the fact that half the country now think he was part of a conspiracy to elect Clinton, which is, imho, one of the stupidest fucking things I've seen come out of the righty conspiracy theory mill, you're right. He could have saved himself a lot of trouble by punting it off his side of the field.
What's important though, is non-optically speaking- what he did was completely normal. He has discretion to decide of an alleged infraction is worthy of prosecution, or likely to be prosecuted, and according to the IG report- he was correct in his assertion that it wouldn't be, making claims of conspiracy seem kind of strange to me.
Second best armed, perhaps. As for powerful? World news is making it pretty clear that America's soft power is declining rapidly with the lack of respect for Cheetoh.
I'd say Xi in China is probably the most powerful man alive right now.
Intent means nothing about violating the law.
Mens rea is a component of many laws.
You use a personal e-mail server for official Government business? That's illegal.
No, it's not. Against the rules in some cases, yes.
Now, intent may shade what kind of punishment you receive - but you still violated the law.
See #1.
Now riddle me this, batman- are you stupid, ignorant, or gas lighting?
Wrong. The FOIA makes no comment on whether or not their emails must be retained, or where they must reside.
The FOIA only requires agencies to have a plan to give the public access to the records it does keep.
Several other unrelated (FRA is a big one) acts create the statutes that detail things they must retain, as well as a myriad of rules imposed all up and down the bureaucracy.
Please, educate yourself before you continue spouting complete fucking falsehoods masqueraded as facts. This shit is why the media is such a shit show. They're marketing to idiots such as yourself who don't fucking care what the difference between fact or fiction is anyway.
This is blatantly fucking false. The fact that you keep spouting literally false information with very heavy implications is disgusting. Is it a smear campaign, or are you really so willfully ignorant? Or just fucking stupid?
That said, he was found to be insubordinate and appropriately fired--which makes it odd for Trump to be investigated over firing him, but whatever.
It actually doesn't.
The question to how appropriate it was for him to be fired comes down to intent, which is an open question since Trump did himself no favors with regard to making it very believable he did it to stop an investigation that personally affected him.
That he ended up being exonerated in that decision technically, it is his intent that is under investigation.
Law enforcement exercises its own jurisdiction on deciding whether to send a case up to prosecutors every single day. That's literally how it works.
What I want to know, is did you really not know that, or are you so blinded by partisan hatred that you're willing to sacrifice your intellectual honesty to crank up your blood pressure a few more notches?
I've come to the conclusion that you're lying through your teeth.
The Secretary of State is not the DNC. I'm curious where you got that notion? Was it a right-wing publication?
You aren't getting it. Declassification is irrelevant, as it wasn't needed.
As a head of a federal agency, the secretary of state has the right to declare whether or not their server was "secure". Information need not be classified. That law defers to the executive in handling of classified material, and only seeks to punish where someone violates the executive controls on said material. The executive (by executive order) had delegated the responsibility for that information to any department head that may handle such material.
I can't speak to your creds, but if you really do know what you're talking about, i'm finding it mind boggling that you don't actually understand the structure of authority with regard to classified information.
*partisan
And vice versa, you partison dolt.
nothing of value will be lost.
What a ridiculous fucking assertion.
We are raping this place. Ya, we're shitting all over the environment that sustains us. Half of us because we believe the sky fairy wasn't lying when he said that the Earth was unchanging, and that we were its master, and that it'd stay bountiful as long as we kept fucking it and each other. The other half are just greedy parasites.
We don't disagree here.
But nothing of value lost? Get the fuck out of here. You see any other footprints on the moon? We could be, for all we know, the most advanced species in the galaxy, or ever to emerge. We're a deeply flawed animal, but we're also mind blowingly incredible. If you can't see that, you should seek psychiatric help for your depression, or just fucking off yourself.
They aren't individually of course, as trees must eventually die.
But something amazing happens when a tree dies. Another pops up to take its place.
Trees, as an extant body of biomass that regrows as it dies.. colloquially known as a forest, are absolutely a net sink. That forest will never emit more carbon than it took to grow it.
Of course, with long enough time spans, even forests will die, and desequester that carbon.
But then again, with long enough time spans, that coal would have worked its way back to the surface in some kind of carbonaceous silicate form and have been weathered back into the atmosphere as well.
You seem to be under the impression that we would just bottle the CO2 and leave it there.
Drop it into a hole a mile deep in the Earth wold be preferred, really.
That's a really dumb assumption because both carbon and oxygen are really useful.
They sure are. That's why we're in the problem we're in ;)
Get rid of the shit. Re-sequester it. We pulled it out of long-term storage and threw it into the atmosphere, and there isn't a hell of a lot we can do with it that won't put it back into the atmosphere. We need to reduce levels, not stop growth. It's already too high, and a ball is already in motion that is already bad.