What scares me is that her job was to administer the department as the department head. The reason she had (and others had) work-around options is because the email system was difficult to work with. Now, as the department head, she just worked around this and allowed others to do so instead of, you know, delegating the task and ensuring that the system was fixed. Delegation is a big part of the presidency. I do not feel comfortable voting for Clinton. There is no candidate I feel truly comfortable with, at this time.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Additionally, I think the statute of limitations has passed and he can not be prosecuted for that crime. I seem to recall reading that he was also prosecuted for a lesser offense than AWOL as many soldiers are when they turn themselves in. This does not mean that I would not like to see Bush face a jury trial.
Yeah, I went on and did some searching shortly after posting. I learned that it is actually a mature UNIX OS and a RTOS. I was kind of shocked and a bit curious as to why I had not guessed it was UNIX based on the name - hindsight and all that, I suppose. I'd never heard of it until BB and never looked into it. So, to my mind, it was similar to saying airplanes were being run on Android or iOS.
You can pay to get real-time data (or as close to it as possible in your location and the speed of the infrastructure). The trading website that I use purports to do just that - they display the real time price or as close to it as possible. There is some lag, of course. I could do things to decrease that lag including going to the floor directly to get my information. Well, I think I would have to be on the observation deck. I suppose I could get licensed and go to the floor directly.
If you are going to claim that the barrier to entry is a higher cost to do those things then, well, I would like to point out that it is not unfair that I get to buy a BMW while you are stuck in a Ford Focus. I was more able to capitalize on my effort than you, if the above is true, and this is not unfair - it is just how things are. You are, for instance, in a very small percentage of advantaged people who is able to own a computer and access the internet. That is hardly unfair - it is just how it is. You may say that it is unequal, I would agree with that, but it hardly unfair without needing useless mental gymnastics and belief in unicorns or deities.
No, he is saying that the person closest to the starting gun will hear the sound first and have an advantage over the guy who is further away - even if it is a trivial advantage to human perceptions.
I do not agree with him, I do not think, but that is not what they are saying at all - using your analogy. As a hobbyist, well, I do not see a problem with HFT. It is legal and I do not feel qualified to determine if it is moral.
In that case the information. is about the market itself and not about the knowing insider information about the business in question. This may be immoral (I am not going to judge, though I invest a bunch it is a hobby and I will openly state that I do not have enough knowledge to judge) but it is not illegal. You can have information about the market, itself, and act on it. You can not have information about a business and act on it. An example, when I sold my business it was purchased by a publicly traded company. There was a point where I knew the sale was going to go through. I was also being paid in stocks, partially, but that is beside the point. In between the time that I knew the sale was going to go through and the time it was publicly announced I would have been tempting fate to have acted on that and bought or sold stocks in the soon-to-be parent company. As an aside, I was also restricted from selling the newly acquired stocks in the parent company for a period of time as per the terms of sale. I did not need to sell them so I kept the stocks and they grew. That is what tweaked me enough to actually decide to poke at the market. I do surprisingly well and you would be shocked at what I use for my trading strategy.
I think the issue is, to me, that when the SEC notices you and decides they do not like you then you are well and truly knackered. There is no escape. They can, will, and have hunted people down and I can certainly understand and justify the behavior. What I can not justify is their unwillingness to prosecute those who are intentionally (I simply can not think of any other way to put it - it must be intentional) ignored. That is not acceptable to me. People need to be prosecuted equally and I say this as someone who has some wealth built up - I deserve to go to jail if the bum on the street deserves to go to jail for the same offense.
I am a bit too hairy to be able to pull off the stilettos. I think that would attract more undue attention than just maybe some makeup, changing my facial hair, and changing my glasses. That *might* get me past any facial recognition software. I am sort of difficult for them to recognize as I am actually close to what NatGeo has decided the average male will be in a few generations.
Hmm... None of the ones that I read (I only read your link, thanks) looked angry, just vulgar and aggressive. Then again, I am not the greatest at picking up on behavioral cues I do not think. I am not an Aspie or anything, I just tend to not see the same thing others see. I'd call them an ass (I am one, personally) but not angry. Hell, I am almost never angry. I do not give you the right to control me - you can not make me angry. That sort of thing...
Maybe I am projecting and they are really angry? It just looks like an ass being an ass and we can decide if that is good or bad, I suppose. I am a bit of an ass but I am honest about it. I am also not infallible and freely admit that and am grateful for correction. But I am still an ass. I am just not an angry, or egotistical, ass.
You know they train them in the summer, right? They even sometimes just use the sled in the dirt or on leaves and whatnot. I have seen a neighbor that has them pulling an old WWII era Jeep. They have wheeled sleds that they pull. In the case of the Jeep I assume he has it running and they only pull partially. I do not imagine they are pulling the whole vehicle's weight. Dog sled teams are not all that uncommon up my way. Hell, one of my other "neighbors" (a loosely applied term here) is an Iditerode (spelling?) racer. I believe she has won it a couple of times.
Are you high? I am not. I will be shortly. Until then...
No, you are entirely missing the whole point. If they can break encryption then, by all means, they are free to do so with a properly formed and served warrant. If they can not then they are not free to do so because I am not obligated to give them a key.
Them breaking the encryption in the context of a military action is an entirely different topic. Hell, even their capacity to break the key is the entirely a different topic. Theoretically they could brute force (in some cases) via a dictionary attack or similar. They are perfectly free to do so. I do not even have a problem with them doing so.
What I do object, and I object strongly, is the idea that encryption should be weakened for the sake of law enforcement or that we should be forced to provide incriminating evidence or to assist them in building a case against us. That is plain silly talk and entirely unacceptable. The technology has not one damned thing to do with it. If they can break the technology then, well, that's wonderful (I guess?) but, again, has not one damned thing to do with it.
I have made mental note of their username and generally read their comments. Do you have a specific idea in mind as to what they are angry about? They do not seem very angry to me, in other words. Certainly not as angry as some... Maybe I am just not good at picking up on those clues?
When everybody is yelling then nobody is listening. I refuse to even attempt to communicate with someone who is being loud unless they are being loud so that they can be heard above the din of the music or reasonable. Sadly, that took me a long time to learn.
On the other hand, when I do get angry (and I do) then it gets blown off pretty quickly. If it does not then I do not get loud. I get quiet. My voice lowers, is quieter, and is metered. I.. do... not... want... to... have... to... say... this... a... second... time... I am told it is scary but effective. I do not do it consciously, it just happens. It is not as slow as I typed it but it is hard to convey that sort of thing in text. I have never had much use for yelling even though I used to try to converse with the person who was yelling at me. I have since realized that it is generally ineffective.
That reminds me of the adage... Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. After that? Well, you're a mile away and you have his shoes.
If you are honking your horn or waving a finger then no, you will not get much in the way of results. I do beg to differ about the firearm. If you are waving about a firearm in public (or in private, in some situations) then you may very well get meaningful results. They may not be the results you were hoping for but they will be results. They may even be resolutions. There are not so very many places left that you can wildly wave around a firearm and expect people to just ignore your behavior. We can discuss that as being good or bad, if you would like, but that does not change anything as to how it will likely pan out.
You can *probably* get away with it on my lawn or something. You will still, certainly, get results and maybe a resolution. I will likely walk out and ask you what the hell you're doing and why are you doing it on my lawn. I'd be very unlikely to harm you in any way, I'd assume you were drunk - or that I was hallucinating. I've never had anyone show up on my lawn and wave a firearm about. I'd figure it had something to do with one of your female relatives and maybe some LSD. I'd probably tease you a little bit for showing up and waving a gun about. If you were going to shoot me then you would have been sneakier about it. I mean, yeah, come on... You're standing on my lawn and waving a gun around. I'd say the odds are pretty good that I am not going to be hurt or that you're a hallucination and I should stop eating acid for breakfast.
I would not try it on my neighbor's lawn for a variety of reasons. The important reason is that you will still get results but he will likely shoot you. The second is, well, he probably did not sex your daughter, wife, sister, or mother - that was me and you have the wrong address and should be waving the gun about on my lawn.
It turns out that a drunken depressed fuck who does not give a shit really makes an effective general. Who knew? (Notice, I did not say good...) I am related to Grant on my honky half. It appears the white half of me is related to all sorts of famous people. My mother was one of the Prescotts. Yes, I am even related to Bush - very distantly. I do not consider that a good thing but, hopefully, I am not to be judged by my relatives though I am to understand that I am somehow related to Obama (on the same side) as well though I learned this recently from a relative that cares about such. I guess I am even distantly related to the Queen of England and to others of note. They do not send me a Christmas card. I should try sending the Queen an email and invite myself over for dinner.
Anyhow, I guess some of this stuff is available online. I knew nothing about Bush, the Queen, or Obama until just recently. I did know about Grant and the Bunker Hill Prescott ("Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes!"). I guess Bush makes sense, it is the same family as Prescott-Bush of yore. There's a family crest and everything it seems. Meh... It is not really all that important to me. Well, no, it is of no importance. I just hope nobody equates me with Bush.
I have sent off an irate email that resulted in my being told my company would, "Never work for the State of Washington again!" I replied saying that I agreed entirely. As far as I know, they still have not ever consulted in Washington since - in any city nor for the State nor any facility situated in Washington. I sold and retired. I think my angry email was justified.
Many times, however, I will have a rant typed out here (or at other sites) and will meander off or stop and think about it and never send it at all. Sometimes I just realize that I do not really have anything to say that is going to contribute to the conversation. Sometimes I realize that I am being baited and that nobody can be that stupid and still manage to operate a computer so they must be trying to troll.
So long as we're only talking about a "few cases" then we are in agreement. But how/when will you know if this is no longer true?
I do not remember who said it but it went something like this, "Fuck you, that's why." No, really, it was something like this, "Better that ten men go free than one man be unjustly convicted."
In other words, I do not give one shiny shit if the evil terrorists encrypted their data and the police can not recover it - even if it means good people (even my family) die because of it. I care about their actions - not their encryption. You do not get to trample my rights for your vague sense of security. If you try then I may act angrily and take away your rights in a violent manner. This is not a threat but something to give deep consideration. I would strongly suggest you think before you act or encourage others to act on your behalf.
My data, my rules. Your data, your rules. You do what you want with your property, I will do what I want with my property. If you try to prevent me from using my property then I may react "horribly inappropriately" (by your standards). If you want to access my data then you need to ask and to respect that I may well not give you the access you desire. I most certainly will not if it is a law enforcement agent asking. If they have a warrant they need not ask. I needn't assist them in reading that data nor will I.
Not that I have anything important, I do not even have any porn, but I do value my privacy.
You seem to be conflating the terms 'a lot' and 'the majority' methinks. You hear a vocal minority clamoring about such (I am one, for the most part) but those are not the majority. The majority are the ones you do not hear who vote for the same two parties year after year. I am not entirely sure why you would be confused by the two - they are not even similar things. Meh... Perhaps you are obtuse on purpose and had some sort of point that I am missing?
I looked into it and they are much older than I thought they were. Strange... I never even heard about them until the phones. It is interesting that they are a RTOS as well.
Slashdot Mirror
What scares me is that her job was to administer the department as the department head. The reason she had (and others had) work-around options is because the email system was difficult to work with. Now, as the department head, she just worked around this and allowed others to do so instead of, you know, delegating the task and ensuring that the system was fixed. Delegation is a big part of the presidency. I do not feel comfortable voting for Clinton. There is no candidate I feel truly comfortable with, at this time.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Additionally, I think the statute of limitations has passed and he can not be prosecuted for that crime. I seem to recall reading that he was also prosecuted for a lesser offense than AWOL as many soldiers are when they turn themselves in. This does not mean that I would not like to see Bush face a jury trial.
To be fair, I usually install Linux.
One is knowing the market and the other is knowing the business?
That is not a bad presumption to make. I sort of assume it will and thus wipe all new computers immediately and before connecting them.
Yeah, I went on and did some searching shortly after posting. I learned that it is actually a mature UNIX OS and a RTOS. I was kind of shocked and a bit curious as to why I had not guessed it was UNIX based on the name - hindsight and all that, I suppose. I'd never heard of it until BB and never looked into it. So, to my mind, it was similar to saying airplanes were being run on Android or iOS.
You can pay to get real-time data (or as close to it as possible in your location and the speed of the infrastructure). The trading website that I use purports to do just that - they display the real time price or as close to it as possible. There is some lag, of course. I could do things to decrease that lag including going to the floor directly to get my information. Well, I think I would have to be on the observation deck. I suppose I could get licensed and go to the floor directly.
If you are going to claim that the barrier to entry is a higher cost to do those things then, well, I would like to point out that it is not unfair that I get to buy a BMW while you are stuck in a Ford Focus. I was more able to capitalize on my effort than you, if the above is true, and this is not unfair - it is just how things are. You are, for instance, in a very small percentage of advantaged people who is able to own a computer and access the internet. That is hardly unfair - it is just how it is. You may say that it is unequal, I would agree with that, but it hardly unfair without needing useless mental gymnastics and belief in unicorns or deities.
No, he is saying that the person closest to the starting gun will hear the sound first and have an advantage over the guy who is further away - even if it is a trivial advantage to human perceptions.
I do not agree with him, I do not think, but that is not what they are saying at all - using your analogy. As a hobbyist, well, I do not see a problem with HFT. It is legal and I do not feel qualified to determine if it is moral.
In that case the information. is about the market itself and not about the knowing insider information about the business in question. This may be immoral (I am not going to judge, though I invest a bunch it is a hobby and I will openly state that I do not have enough knowledge to judge) but it is not illegal. You can have information about the market, itself, and act on it. You can not have information about a business and act on it. An example, when I sold my business it was purchased by a publicly traded company. There was a point where I knew the sale was going to go through. I was also being paid in stocks, partially, but that is beside the point. In between the time that I knew the sale was going to go through and the time it was publicly announced I would have been tempting fate to have acted on that and bought or sold stocks in the soon-to-be parent company. As an aside, I was also restricted from selling the newly acquired stocks in the parent company for a period of time as per the terms of sale. I did not need to sell them so I kept the stocks and they grew. That is what tweaked me enough to actually decide to poke at the market. I do surprisingly well and you would be shocked at what I use for my trading strategy.
I think the issue is, to me, that when the SEC notices you and decides they do not like you then you are well and truly knackered. There is no escape. They can, will, and have hunted people down and I can certainly understand and justify the behavior. What I can not justify is their unwillingness to prosecute those who are intentionally (I simply can not think of any other way to put it - it must be intentional) ignored. That is not acceptable to me. People need to be prosecuted equally and I say this as someone who has some wealth built up - I deserve to go to jail if the bum on the street deserves to go to jail for the same offense.
I am a bit too hairy to be able to pull off the stilettos. I think that would attract more undue attention than just maybe some makeup, changing my facial hair, and changing my glasses. That *might* get me past any facial recognition software. I am sort of difficult for them to recognize as I am actually close to what NatGeo has decided the average male will be in a few generations.
I don't even know where to begin... This is Japan, you know...
Hmm... None of the ones that I read (I only read your link, thanks) looked angry, just vulgar and aggressive. Then again, I am not the greatest at picking up on behavioral cues I do not think. I am not an Aspie or anything, I just tend to not see the same thing others see. I'd call them an ass (I am one, personally) but not angry. Hell, I am almost never angry. I do not give you the right to control me - you can not make me angry. That sort of thing...
Maybe I am projecting and they are really angry? It just looks like an ass being an ass and we can decide if that is good or bad, I suppose. I am a bit of an ass but I am honest about it. I am also not infallible and freely admit that and am grateful for correction. But I am still an ass. I am just not an angry, or egotistical, ass.
You know they train them in the summer, right? They even sometimes just use the sled in the dirt or on leaves and whatnot. I have seen a neighbor that has them pulling an old WWII era Jeep. They have wheeled sleds that they pull. In the case of the Jeep I assume he has it running and they only pull partially. I do not imagine they are pulling the whole vehicle's weight. Dog sled teams are not all that uncommon up my way. Hell, one of my other "neighbors" (a loosely applied term here) is an Iditerode (spelling?) racer. I believe she has won it a couple of times.
Are you high? I am not. I will be shortly. Until then...
No, you are entirely missing the whole point. If they can break encryption then, by all means, they are free to do so with a properly formed and served warrant. If they can not then they are not free to do so because I am not obligated to give them a key.
Them breaking the encryption in the context of a military action is an entirely different topic. Hell, even their capacity to break the key is the entirely a different topic. Theoretically they could brute force (in some cases) via a dictionary attack or similar. They are perfectly free to do so. I do not even have a problem with them doing so.
What I do object, and I object strongly, is the idea that encryption should be weakened for the sake of law enforcement or that we should be forced to provide incriminating evidence or to assist them in building a case against us. That is plain silly talk and entirely unacceptable. The technology has not one damned thing to do with it. If they can break the technology then, well, that's wonderful (I guess?) but, again, has not one damned thing to do with it.
I have made mental note of their username and generally read their comments. Do you have a specific idea in mind as to what they are angry about? They do not seem very angry to me, in other words. Certainly not as angry as some... Maybe I am just not good at picking up on those clues?
When everybody is yelling then nobody is listening. I refuse to even attempt to communicate with someone who is being loud unless they are being loud so that they can be heard above the din of the music or reasonable. Sadly, that took me a long time to learn.
On the other hand, when I do get angry (and I do) then it gets blown off pretty quickly. If it does not then I do not get loud. I get quiet. My voice lowers, is quieter, and is metered. I.. do... not... want... to... have... to... say... this... a... second... time... I am told it is scary but effective. I do not do it consciously, it just happens. It is not as slow as I typed it but it is hard to convey that sort of thing in text. I have never had much use for yelling even though I used to try to converse with the person who was yelling at me. I have since realized that it is generally ineffective.
That reminds me of the adage... Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. After that? Well, you're a mile away and you have his shoes.
If you are honking your horn or waving a finger then no, you will not get much in the way of results. I do beg to differ about the firearm. If you are waving about a firearm in public (or in private, in some situations) then you may very well get meaningful results. They may not be the results you were hoping for but they will be results. They may even be resolutions. There are not so very many places left that you can wildly wave around a firearm and expect people to just ignore your behavior. We can discuss that as being good or bad, if you would like, but that does not change anything as to how it will likely pan out.
You can *probably* get away with it on my lawn or something. You will still, certainly, get results and maybe a resolution. I will likely walk out and ask you what the hell you're doing and why are you doing it on my lawn. I'd be very unlikely to harm you in any way, I'd assume you were drunk - or that I was hallucinating. I've never had anyone show up on my lawn and wave a firearm about. I'd figure it had something to do with one of your female relatives and maybe some LSD. I'd probably tease you a little bit for showing up and waving a gun about. If you were going to shoot me then you would have been sneakier about it. I mean, yeah, come on... You're standing on my lawn and waving a gun around. I'd say the odds are pretty good that I am not going to be hurt or that you're a hallucination and I should stop eating acid for breakfast.
I would not try it on my neighbor's lawn for a variety of reasons. The important reason is that you will still get results but he will likely shoot you. The second is, well, he probably did not sex your daughter, wife, sister, or mother - that was me and you have the wrong address and should be waving the gun about on my lawn.
It turns out that a drunken depressed fuck who does not give a shit really makes an effective general. Who knew? (Notice, I did not say good...) I am related to Grant on my honky half. It appears the white half of me is related to all sorts of famous people. My mother was one of the Prescotts. Yes, I am even related to Bush - very distantly. I do not consider that a good thing but, hopefully, I am not to be judged by my relatives though I am to understand that I am somehow related to Obama (on the same side) as well though I learned this recently from a relative that cares about such. I guess I am even distantly related to the Queen of England and to others of note. They do not send me a Christmas card. I should try sending the Queen an email and invite myself over for dinner.
Anyhow, I guess some of this stuff is available online. I knew nothing about Bush, the Queen, or Obama until just recently. I did know about Grant and the Bunker Hill Prescott ("Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes!"). I guess Bush makes sense, it is the same family as Prescott-Bush of yore. There's a family crest and everything it seems. Meh... It is not really all that important to me. Well, no, it is of no importance. I just hope nobody equates me with Bush.
I have sent off an irate email that resulted in my being told my company would, "Never work for the State of Washington again!" I replied saying that I agreed entirely. As far as I know, they still have not ever consulted in Washington since - in any city nor for the State nor any facility situated in Washington. I sold and retired. I think my angry email was justified.
Many times, however, I will have a rant typed out here (or at other sites) and will meander off or stop and think about it and never send it at all. Sometimes I just realize that I do not really have anything to say that is going to contribute to the conversation. Sometimes I realize that I am being baited and that nobody can be that stupid and still manage to operate a computer so they must be trying to troll.
I have a suggestion. You should send them an email and tell them what you really think.
So long as we're only talking about a "few cases" then we are in agreement. But how/when will you know if this is no longer true?
I do not remember who said it but it went something like this, "Fuck you, that's why." No, really, it was something like this, "Better that ten men go free than one man be unjustly convicted."
In other words, I do not give one shiny shit if the evil terrorists encrypted their data and the police can not recover it - even if it means good people (even my family) die because of it. I care about their actions - not their encryption. You do not get to trample my rights for your vague sense of security. If you try then I may act angrily and take away your rights in a violent manner. This is not a threat but something to give deep consideration. I would strongly suggest you think before you act or encourage others to act on your behalf.
My data, my rules. Your data, your rules. You do what you want with your property, I will do what I want with my property. If you try to prevent me from using my property then I may react "horribly inappropriately" (by your standards). If you want to access my data then you need to ask and to respect that I may well not give you the access you desire. I most certainly will not if it is a law enforcement agent asking. If they have a warrant they need not ask. I needn't assist them in reading that data nor will I.
Not that I have anything important, I do not even have any porn, but I do value my privacy.
You seem to be conflating the terms 'a lot' and 'the majority' methinks. You hear a vocal minority clamoring about such (I am one, for the most part) but those are not the majority. The majority are the ones you do not hear who vote for the same two parties year after year. I am not entirely sure why you would be confused by the two - they are not even similar things. Meh... Perhaps you are obtuse on purpose and had some sort of point that I am missing?
I looked into it and they are much older than I thought they were. Strange... I never even heard about them until the phones. It is interesting that they are a RTOS as well.