I am not objective enough to give you an answer. I was a functional user for... Hmm... For over 40 years with addiction, true dependence, kicking in probably at about five years. Except I was a functional user and some would call it a "chipper." I'd chip but I really just chipped every day, all day. I'd leave meetings to shoot up. I'd send drugs ahead if I had to fly. I was a functional addict until I retired and my brain felt like it no longer had to be functional (I have no better words than that.)
I went to quite. I spent five days in a world that does not (nor can not) exist. I was living in a science-fiction world, in post WWI history, and many other things - for at least five days. A good part of that mental break meant I thought I was actually in rehab (and in much worse shape than I was - we're talking skin grafts and metal reconstructed bones and an inability to get out of bed on my own. I called a neighbor asking them when my worker was going to show up and empty my damned catheter bag. They responded that I had no such thing. I didn't believe them. Then they showed up in my door and it was like a movie where things fade into focus and it was one of the scariest things I've seen in my life.
So, I don't have answers but I think I can safely say that there's potential for long-term maintenance care so long as we're willing to accept that there's going to be addiction and, with that, there will be abused.
That is odd - it's the literal first thing I check when I scroll down. "Do the numbers match?" So far, they match. I check because I need to know if i have to click to show all. I read at -1 and always have. Come to think of it - that might be a difference. Do you read at -1?
Actually, unless I'm missing something, Vermont has been sending him the DC for ages now. I'm not sure what you're using for the qualification of "newb" so it makes it impossible to really have a meaningful dialogue at this point.
I have much, much to respond. I sat here for a few minutes and decided that brevity, for a chance, would be my chosen route.
I am not even remotely kidding. Not only do have have my site's email configured to use Yandex, I have a standing offer to allow site visitor/participants to ask for and receive a Yandex email of their own. At some point, I'll document how it is done and let people do it themselves - it's not terribly difficult.
It does help to read Russian but I think, I'm not positive, that you might be able to find a path through without needed Russian. It hits a point where you must pass a CAPTCHA to get the service. It's in Cyrillic letters. It's possible to pass it. It's just a pain.
I dunno... I've been following and doing a lot of reading and I'm not sure that Sanders is easily tied to nefarious wealth acquisitions - as a general rule. There's probably a skeleton or two in his closet but he hides them pretty well. I've not come across anything major but he does appear to have an issue with honesty if Politifact is to be believed.
I could see that as a logical argument. The FOIA is nothing else but ensuring that there's a record and thus accountability. What's more valid and important than the elected officials acts being a matter of record and thus their being accountable for them? What greater law of the land can there be than the government needing to be accountable to the citizens?
So, yeah, I could make a well reasoned argument for that. I could probably find some precedent if you gave me a minute. I might have to bullshit and twist a few things but I could make it work with some research.
Nobody is innocent. No, not even the courts find anyone as innocent - regardless of how much evidence is brought forward. They're "not guilty." I'm not going to speculate if Clinton is guilty or not - I've neither the expertise nor the willingness to pretend that I do. However, I doubt that anyone else here has the capacity to say that she is guilty or not.
What we can say is that, at this time, she is neither convicted nor charged. That does not make her innocent. It does mean that, at this moment of time, she is not guilty by burden of proof. Many, many people do not seem to grasp things like that and the statement about "innocent until proven guilty" is a horrible statement. Oh, it's sort of true - but it's actually, "Not guilty until proven guilty."
That is not a difference without distinction. 'Cause I'm really friggen sure that Clinton is not even remotely innocent. I'm also positive that she's not been convicted so that, in the eyes of the law, she is not guilty. That we've somehow lost that perspective, the lack of guilt until proven guilty, is worrisome.
Umm... See, I've had that training. In fact, that's how come I bitch about my data having been stolen.
The thing is, I could be mistaken. So, I'm not going to say you're wrong but I think you might be. I'm pretty sure that it goes by some dude(tte) that's a classification specialist/officer and that their decision is final unless overridden by a *board.* I'm almost certain that's what was in my training but, to be honest, I really didn't pay much attention the *second* time that I went through it and I know that it has also changed since I last went through it. But, it's quite specifically not an individual - ever. Insofar as I'm aware, it is never an individual - once it has been classified, even if mistakenly classified.
So, you might not actually be correct. Do you have an actual reference for this? I did try a quick Google and I can't find anything to confirm what you said. I can see some opinions that state that but I don't see any actual documentation and none of them cite any specific portion of the regulations for further review.
The last time, I dealt with data that should have been, at best, FOUO - and not Secret. The time before that, the data was actually seldom classified but I dealt with records from detainees and, as such, they might have contained classified documents and I had to transport them and their documentation so I needed to go through it. That was in the 80s. I repeated the process in about 2000 - just prior to 9/11 actually.
Why they still retained my data (I've been retired for eight years now) is beyond me. However, they appear to like to keep all that stuff - even though any such permissions are long since expired. I could be mistaken. I could be. I don't think I am, however. I distinctly recollect the topic of what it took to override classification. I also sort of recollect the penalties for "spillage." I kind of recommend the procedure for spillage but I imagine that has changed as well. It's far more intelligent to acknowledge spillage immediately upon learning about it than it is to not disclose it. They *really* frown on it if you don't - even if you're covering for someone else.
It's possible to zealously engage in an activity to the point where it is harmful - and I don't think that I know of any activity where that can't be true.
As an aside, your librarian might have even given you those first hits for free and now that you're an adult you can look back and see all that you've spent on the industry. It *is* like drug pushers!
I shouldn't do this to you but I'm going to... See, I discovered something not too long ago. I hate to admit it but it's true and if you don't have time to feed your addiction then this might help keep the cravings away, at least tame them a little. There are some very good audio books. I shit you not. It may take a minute to find a narrator that you appreciate but there's probably one out there. Depending on what you read, there are many choices.
I never thought I'd say this but audio books aren't that bad. Yeah... I know... Weird... But they're not that bad and I'm used to filling my addiction with something fairly close to speed reading - but with worse retention, it's entertainment and not academic. I'd give your favorite torrent site a check to see what you can find. Then, when you find something you like (if you do) then you can go spend too much money on buying them.
Yes I, of all people, just suggested that you go pirate. However, I suggest paying after you've decided you like them. You could try your local library - some of them actually have a good selection.
I've met countless people hunting - albeit not usually for fox. Also fishing... I've been to many formal dinners and even some fancy engagements that you'd probably call a ball - as dancing and drinking, while appropriately attired, was the goal and with a live small string quartet or even a marginally larger band. If you want to count the Birthday Ball then I've actually been to quite a few balls. But no, I don't think I've ever met anyone while hunting for fox. Deer? Yes. Fox? No. I do believe I'm allowed to hunt them but I can't actually imagine why I'd shoot one. It's not like I can eat it. Well, more like it's not like I am going to eat it.
I'm not even a criminal or anything. I'll give 'em $10 for that. I'm not sure what I'd do with 'em but it'd be an awesome buy. I'm pretty sure it'd not be illegal for me to buy them either. I'm positive it would be illegal for me to *use* them but I don't think it's a crime to buy 'em. Hell, a buck isn't bad at all.
Meh, I'm pretty sure they don't need my email address. My government already gave 'em a bunch of data. Well, they didn't *give* it to them but, if I read everything properly, they didn't try really hard to stop 'em. But, what the hell, I got some free credit monitoring service because that's really what I'm concerned about. I already have them set the flags to "do not issue credit" on the three major reporting agencies. In fact, financial impact is the least of my concerns.
I skipped the middle-man. I moved my email to being hosted by Yandex. Yes, yes that company. However, it might actually be safe from the NSA - specifically. I'm pretty sure Putin's reading it daily and I guess that's okay. Ah well... At least I keep mail separate from my domain - 'cause the domain is down as they dorked the move but I shan't burden you with my tale of woe. I do, on the other hand, want to vent. I'll spare you that too.;-)
Oh no, you can't just let it go at that. You gotta make up a good excuse - blame it on Iranian hackers or something. Or, better yet, insist it is correct due to some esoteric quantum function. You can't just leave us hanging.;-)
No, the only possible answer for 2+2 is 4. This is true - no matter how many semantics games you try to play. I have to run off for a while so you'll have to rely on the 'net for your answer but it's easy to find. 1+1 is never 3. Nor is 2+2 ever 5. The number 2 represents an integer, which is 2. Rounding does not matter - because the integer is 2. It is not 2.4 + 2.2 and then rounded to 5. It is 2+2 and only 2+2.
You can trust me on this. If the computer tells you anything else, it is broken or you input the wrong information.
Why would they? You're probably not a lesbian midget Eskimo.
It's like those people who say, "Oh, that lesbian stuff turns me on!" Umm... Why? They're lesbians. They are not interested in you and they'll only let you watch if they're fake lesbians who are porn actresses or otherwise in it for the money - which might be a good thing but certainly doesn't mean what they seem to think it means.
I dunno... I like to antagonize people (sometimes on either side but I do have my preferences) because it's good to get them to see the absurdity of that which they represent, or claim to, but I don't really have a dog in this fight. I have to say, I thought it was pretty funny. Maybe I have a warped sense of humor? I don't know. Probably - but that doesn't mean I didn't find it amusing.
As an aside, it's fun to watch the folks change over time. They fight and rail against the things you point out, they decry it as facile, and all that. But, if you watch for a while and pay attention it does seem to have an impact. Let's face it, there's a whole lot of absurdity on the 'net and it's really been amplified lately. I'm not sure where this path goes but I'm guessing that it's not good. Pendulums that swing quickly apply more force than those which do not. You might as well as enjoy it too. Pick someone and poke 'em to see what comes out. It's moral so long as you're honest about it.
I might be missing something - I've not really kept up as I don't even have a Reddit account. I did learn that there is a KGIII on Reddit but, alas, I'm not that person but I don't begrudge them the use of my moniker - I wasn't going to use it there. I don't know if they're trying to pretend to be me, I kind of doubt it, as they appear to be fond of basketball which is not something folks would expect of me. I have, on the other hand, had people try to impersonate me in the past. One of them did an almost good job but they got some details rather wrong. They also don't really write as poorly as I do.
Wait, what? I thought we were to be accepting of all sexual proclivities so long as they're performed by consensual adults? Why is it okay for you to denigrate someone's sexual preferences? It's not like they have a choice in who or what they're attracted to - those are innate, born to them, and to be respected.
Or is that not the case for this particular group and, if not, why not?
I just kind of mumbled for that section and hoped that my lips moved in what appeared to be the right pattern for the others who were singing along. I still do that.;-)
Well, I guess that's not really true. I've since learned the words but I had to look them up at some point. I think they might have been with the tab in one of the guitar magazines? No, no I am not good enough to play it.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not objective enough to give you an answer. I was a functional user for... Hmm... For over 40 years with addiction, true dependence, kicking in probably at about five years. Except I was a functional user and some would call it a "chipper." I'd chip but I really just chipped every day, all day. I'd leave meetings to shoot up. I'd send drugs ahead if I had to fly. I was a functional addict until I retired and my brain felt like it no longer had to be functional (I have no better words than that.)
I went to quite. I spent five days in a world that does not (nor can not) exist. I was living in a science-fiction world, in post WWI history, and many other things - for at least five days. A good part of that mental break meant I thought I was actually in rehab (and in much worse shape than I was - we're talking skin grafts and metal reconstructed bones and an inability to get out of bed on my own. I called a neighbor asking them when my worker was going to show up and empty my damned catheter bag. They responded that I had no such thing. I didn't believe them. Then they showed up in my door and it was like a movie where things fade into focus and it was one of the scariest things I've seen in my life.
So, I don't have answers but I think I can safely say that there's potential for long-term maintenance care so long as we're willing to accept that there's going to be addiction and, with that, there will be abused.
That is odd - it's the literal first thing I check when I scroll down. "Do the numbers match?" So far, they match. I check because I need to know if i have to click to show all. I read at -1 and always have. Come to think of it - that might be a difference. Do you read at -1?
Actually, unless I'm missing something, Vermont has been sending him the DC for ages now. I'm not sure what you're using for the qualification of "newb" so it makes it impossible to really have a meaningful dialogue at this point.
I have much, much to respond. I sat here for a few minutes and decided that brevity, for a chance, would be my chosen route.
I am not even remotely kidding. Not only do have have my site's email configured to use Yandex, I have a standing offer to allow site visitor/participants to ask for and receive a Yandex email of their own. At some point, I'll document how it is done and let people do it themselves - it's not terribly difficult.
It does help to read Russian but I think, I'm not positive, that you might be able to find a path through without needed Russian. It hits a point where you must pass a CAPTCHA to get the service. It's in Cyrillic letters. It's possible to pass it. It's just a pain.
For that kind of fame and fortune, I'd consider sucking Bill's dick myself!
Err... I should really post this as an AC. I can see it being taken out of context and not being taken as humor by the humor impaired. :/
In my defense, I'm just venting - I've got stress today! Gotta try to laugh somehow.
I dunno... I've been following and doing a lot of reading and I'm not sure that Sanders is easily tied to nefarious wealth acquisitions - as a general rule. There's probably a skeleton or two in his closet but he hides them pretty well. I've not come across anything major but he does appear to have an issue with honesty if Politifact is to be believed.
I could see that as a logical argument. The FOIA is nothing else but ensuring that there's a record and thus accountability. What's more valid and important than the elected officials acts being a matter of record and thus their being accountable for them? What greater law of the land can there be than the government needing to be accountable to the citizens?
So, yeah, I could make a well reasoned argument for that. I could probably find some precedent if you gave me a minute. I might have to bullshit and twist a few things but I could make it work with some research.
Nobody is innocent. No, not even the courts find anyone as innocent - regardless of how much evidence is brought forward. They're "not guilty." I'm not going to speculate if Clinton is guilty or not - I've neither the expertise nor the willingness to pretend that I do. However, I doubt that anyone else here has the capacity to say that she is guilty or not.
What we can say is that, at this time, she is neither convicted nor charged. That does not make her innocent. It does mean that, at this moment of time, she is not guilty by burden of proof. Many, many people do not seem to grasp things like that and the statement about "innocent until proven guilty" is a horrible statement. Oh, it's sort of true - but it's actually, "Not guilty until proven guilty."
That is not a difference without distinction. 'Cause I'm really friggen sure that Clinton is not even remotely innocent. I'm also positive that she's not been convicted so that, in the eyes of the law, she is not guilty. That we've somehow lost that perspective, the lack of guilt until proven guilty, is worrisome.
Actually...
Umm... See, I've had that training. In fact, that's how come I bitch about my data having been stolen.
The thing is, I could be mistaken. So, I'm not going to say you're wrong but I think you might be. I'm pretty sure that it goes by some dude(tte) that's a classification specialist/officer and that their decision is final unless overridden by a *board.* I'm almost certain that's what was in my training but, to be honest, I really didn't pay much attention the *second* time that I went through it and I know that it has also changed since I last went through it. But, it's quite specifically not an individual - ever. Insofar as I'm aware, it is never an individual - once it has been classified, even if mistakenly classified.
So, you might not actually be correct. Do you have an actual reference for this? I did try a quick Google and I can't find anything to confirm what you said. I can see some opinions that state that but I don't see any actual documentation and none of them cite any specific portion of the regulations for further review.
The last time, I dealt with data that should have been, at best, FOUO - and not Secret. The time before that, the data was actually seldom classified but I dealt with records from detainees and, as such, they might have contained classified documents and I had to transport them and their documentation so I needed to go through it. That was in the 80s. I repeated the process in about 2000 - just prior to 9/11 actually.
Why they still retained my data (I've been retired for eight years now) is beyond me. However, they appear to like to keep all that stuff - even though any such permissions are long since expired. I could be mistaken. I could be. I don't think I am, however. I distinctly recollect the topic of what it took to override classification. I also sort of recollect the penalties for "spillage." I kind of recommend the procedure for spillage but I imagine that has changed as well. It's far more intelligent to acknowledge spillage immediately upon learning about it than it is to not disclose it. They *really* frown on it if you don't - even if you're covering for someone else.
You do a good service to your country!
Err... I think? I'm not actually sure how to respond to that. :/
It's possible to zealously engage in an activity to the point where it is harmful - and I don't think that I know of any activity where that can't be true.
As an aside, your librarian might have even given you those first hits for free and now that you're an adult you can look back and see all that you've spent on the industry. It *is* like drug pushers!
I shouldn't do this to you but I'm going to... See, I discovered something not too long ago. I hate to admit it but it's true and if you don't have time to feed your addiction then this might help keep the cravings away, at least tame them a little. There are some very good audio books. I shit you not. It may take a minute to find a narrator that you appreciate but there's probably one out there. Depending on what you read, there are many choices.
I never thought I'd say this but audio books aren't that bad. Yeah... I know... Weird... But they're not that bad and I'm used to filling my addiction with something fairly close to speed reading - but with worse retention, it's entertainment and not academic. I'd give your favorite torrent site a check to see what you can find. Then, when you find something you like (if you do) then you can go spend too much money on buying them.
Yes I, of all people, just suggested that you go pirate. However, I suggest paying after you've decided you like them. You could try your local library - some of them actually have a good selection.
That's the Austrian branch. *nods*
I've met countless people hunting - albeit not usually for fox. Also fishing... I've been to many formal dinners and even some fancy engagements that you'd probably call a ball - as dancing and drinking, while appropriately attired, was the goal and with a live small string quartet or even a marginally larger band. If you want to count the Birthday Ball then I've actually been to quite a few balls. But no, I don't think I've ever met anyone while hunting for fox. Deer? Yes. Fox? No. I do believe I'm allowed to hunt them but I can't actually imagine why I'd shoot one. It's not like I can eat it. Well, more like it's not like I am going to eat it.
Dude, no kidding. It could happen! ;-)
Err... Ignore me - I'm venting.
I'm not even a criminal or anything. I'll give 'em $10 for that. I'm not sure what I'd do with 'em but it'd be an awesome buy. I'm pretty sure it'd not be illegal for me to buy them either. I'm positive it would be illegal for me to *use* them but I don't think it's a crime to buy 'em. Hell, a buck isn't bad at all.
Meh, I'm pretty sure they don't need my email address. My government already gave 'em a bunch of data. Well, they didn't *give* it to them but, if I read everything properly, they didn't try really hard to stop 'em. But, what the hell, I got some free credit monitoring service because that's really what I'm concerned about. I already have them set the flags to "do not issue credit" on the three major reporting agencies. In fact, financial impact is the least of my concerns.
I skipped the middle-man. I moved my email to being hosted by Yandex. Yes, yes that company. However, it might actually be safe from the NSA - specifically. I'm pretty sure Putin's reading it daily and I guess that's okay. Ah well... At least I keep mail separate from my domain - 'cause the domain is down as they dorked the move but I shan't burden you with my tale of woe. I do, on the other hand, want to vent. I'll spare you that too. ;-)
> I'm not sold on this experiment.
From the sounds of things you are - you sound like you've bought one.
Oh no, you can't just let it go at that. You gotta make up a good excuse - blame it on Iranian hackers or something. Or, better yet, insist it is correct due to some esoteric quantum function. You can't just leave us hanging. ;-)
No, the only possible answer for 2+2 is 4. This is true - no matter how many semantics games you try to play. I have to run off for a while so you'll have to rely on the 'net for your answer but it's easy to find. 1+1 is never 3. Nor is 2+2 ever 5. The number 2 represents an integer, which is 2. Rounding does not matter - because the integer is 2. It is not 2.4 + 2.2 and then rounded to 5. It is 2+2 and only 2+2.
You can trust me on this. If the computer tells you anything else, it is broken or you input the wrong information.
Have you tried just looking?
Why would they? You're probably not a lesbian midget Eskimo.
It's like those people who say, "Oh, that lesbian stuff turns me on!" Umm... Why? They're lesbians. They are not interested in you and they'll only let you watch if they're fake lesbians who are porn actresses or otherwise in it for the money - which might be a good thing but certainly doesn't mean what they seem to think it means.
And no, no you can't fuck a lesbian straight.
I dunno... I like to antagonize people (sometimes on either side but I do have my preferences) because it's good to get them to see the absurdity of that which they represent, or claim to, but I don't really have a dog in this fight. I have to say, I thought it was pretty funny. Maybe I have a warped sense of humor? I don't know. Probably - but that doesn't mean I didn't find it amusing.
As an aside, it's fun to watch the folks change over time. They fight and rail against the things you point out, they decry it as facile, and all that. But, if you watch for a while and pay attention it does seem to have an impact. Let's face it, there's a whole lot of absurdity on the 'net and it's really been amplified lately. I'm not sure where this path goes but I'm guessing that it's not good. Pendulums that swing quickly apply more force than those which do not. You might as well as enjoy it too. Pick someone and poke 'em to see what comes out. It's moral so long as you're honest about it.
Err... Wouldn't proof be her lost case?
I might be missing something - I've not really kept up as I don't even have a Reddit account. I did learn that there is a KGIII on Reddit but, alas, I'm not that person but I don't begrudge them the use of my moniker - I wasn't going to use it there. I don't know if they're trying to pretend to be me, I kind of doubt it, as they appear to be fond of basketball which is not something folks would expect of me. I have, on the other hand, had people try to impersonate me in the past. One of them did an almost good job but they got some details rather wrong. They also don't really write as poorly as I do.
Wait, what? I thought we were to be accepting of all sexual proclivities so long as they're performed by consensual adults? Why is it okay for you to denigrate someone's sexual preferences? It's not like they have a choice in who or what they're attracted to - those are innate, born to them, and to be respected.
Or is that not the case for this particular group and, if not, why not?
I just kind of mumbled for that section and hoped that my lips moved in what appeared to be the right pattern for the others who were singing along. I still do that. ;-)
Well, I guess that's not really true. I've since learned the words but I had to look them up at some point. I think they might have been with the tab in one of the guitar magazines? No, no I am not good enough to play it.