Umm... I'm relying on the research of others and very little of my own. So, for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure it's easier to immigrate to the US than it is to immigrate to Mexico, for instance. The US has some of the more lax immigration laws on the planet. I realize it's fashionable to say something about the EU at this point and I'll preemptively point out that they're moving within a union and to immigrate to one of those countries is actually quite difficult unless you're blessed with a certain amount of money or have obtained a specific set of documentation.
No, they meant what they said. It was just too complicated for you to understand. In that portion their indicating the positions held by those for whom the ends really do justify the means. It's a pejorative. It's not that complicated but I can see where some people would be confused. It's fairly common in literature.
Umm... So, I cheated and looked. None of those say any of the things you claimed. There's no banning Muslims or Mexicans in any of that. In fact, now that I've looked, I'm rather inclined to disbelieve your further utterances.
You can safely ignore them. Really. Unless, of course, your government agrees with them. You can chuck all the mail in the trash. If they want to then they can block their citizens from accessing your site. They can not burden you - even if you ship a product to their country. Keep in mind, they might arrest you if you ever decide to visit their country in the future. Assuming you're not going to? Stay the course and do what you want.
Read this thread. Look at the *many* incorrect statements about Tor and the onion network. This site is populated by people who self-identify as being into tech. These people don't understand the tech. It might actually be expecting a bit much for cops to know about it. They're expected to know many things. I imagine that Tor is pretty low on the list of things to expect them to know about - though it appears one of them realized this during the execution of the warrant. There's some speculation that they knew about it beforehand but that appears to be speculation that's assumed to be factual.
Those training sets and the process can't help but impact the people who do it. I'm not really qualified to say *how* it will impact them so I won't speculate but I am reasonably sure that it will have an impact. I'm willing to speculate that it probably doesn't take much exposure before it starts having an impact. I've pondered this in the past and I've wondered if it might be acceptable to have those who are predisposed to such actually do the work. Obviously, certain protective measures would need to be taken to prevent data leakage. I'm pretty sure I don't want to know what they're doing during their work breaks. However, they might actually be the most suited to do that work or make those value calls - if done properly. I'm not so sure, and again not qualified to opine, if it wouldn't have a negative impact on them. It'd make an interesting study.
Again, that's probability concerning there being evidence. Do not confuse a search warrant with an arrest warrant. Is there probable cause to believe that they'll be able to collect evidence that helps them determine guilt or innocence, find the guilty party, etc... An arrest warrant and a search warrant are entirely separate things. Was there a probability that they'd discover evidence there? The answer is yes. In fact, they did discover evidence. They discovered it was someone using TOR. I know it sounds odd but that is, indeed, evidence. In fact, it's evidence that shows that the people are less likely to be able to be proven guilty and thus subjected to an arrest warrant.
Right or wrong, the answer is that if you're equipment was used in the commission of a crime, they're going to want to look at it. It's actually a rather basic concept and no different just because it is "on a computer."
Actually, yes. Yes they will and do. They'll go grab the APs and search them for logs. Additionally, they'll include security footage in their search to see if they can identify *anyone* who was using a computer in the area at the time of the offense.
You don't think that they just say, "Well, the access could have been by any member of the public. Guess we gotta stop." Do you?
Actually, you're an idiot but you're not too far off. They *should* block as the default. The default mode should be blocking and then whitelisting the needed services. You can never keep up with blacklisting, no matter how many people you employ. You can keep up with whitelisting and, with adequate staff and policies, you can add things to the whitelist efficiently and effectively.
So yes, you should block at the router. It's better to pick which packets you let in than it is to try to deal with them after they're already on the network.
Hmm... Are you certain that there was uranium on that U-boat? I know they sent heavy water on one of them. My memory is saying U-531 but my memory isn't that good - and there were several sent, as I recall, and some did not fare that well in their travels. My memory is also saying that they did send uranium but that was quite a bit earlier. I'll remind you that my memory is faulty (several bad sectors and too full to defrag without deleting data) but that's how I recollect it happening.
It should be noted that it's not like Germany shipped one single load of stuff. They sent them things through the war. I'm thinking of the several subs that were sent just prior to the end of the conflict in Europe. I want to say that they are believed to have sent three subs and only one of them made it through the gauntlet. The US Navy wasn't too keen on letting things get through there and was getting pretty good at finding and sinking those who tried.
Compared to Japan, Germany was a bunch of cowards. (By the way, your attempt to revise history is a bit silly. You might want to start by learning how Torch went and who they encountered along the way.)
Well, it's not like Nanking was going to rape itself. Yes, the world should have just stood back and allowed the atrocities to continue unabated. Because anything less is forcing Japan to commit more atrocities. Err... Yup. That's it. Thus, it's the fault of the US (and not the League of Nations?). By the way, the US was not a part of the League of Nations - in case you don't know.
I'm not sure why but a whole bunch of people are really confused about that. No, the US was not a part of the League. No, the US was never actually a part of the League. No, the US didn't even really have enough power (yet) to do much of anything to influence the League. More importantly, the citizens of the US didn't want to be a part of the League. They were mostly hoping to go back to just being isolationists at the time. But yeah, those Korean women weren't just going to make sex slaves out of themselves. Those medical and chemical weapons abuses weren't just gonna happen without those resources to make war and conquer the people surrounding Japan.
The US' ambitions? If by US you mean League of Nations then, maybe - and then only just maybe. The thing is, the US was not a member of the League of Nations. We were mostly isolationists still. I don't think you actually know anything about what you speak of. You know, your local library probably has some books on the subject or you can try the 'net and a bunch of documentaries. Documentaries won't be perfect but they'll do. Try to get documentaries from varied sources, if you go that route. Don't watch just US documentaries, just BBC documentaries, just Germany's versions or anything. Some of the ones from Russia are actually not too bad if you keep in mind the obvious biases. A good one is Emperor Hirohito's War.
Seeking an armistice is not surrender. Per the Potsdam agreements, there was only one option for Japan, German, and Italy. They were not ready to take that option and hoped to make it painful enough to get be granted some accords and have a better position after the war.
Does nobody read any of the many, many books on this? Why would you guys attempt to revise it.
The angry Russians also had a great deal to do with the surrender. Those who claim the bombs had nothing to do with the surrender are idiots. Those who claim that they surrendered because of the bombs are also idiots. Amazingly enough, it takes quite a bit to get some nations to surrender - usually more than one reason. Another reason was their rapidly dwindling stockpile of resources and inability to get more shipped in as there was now a giant US Navy in the way.
I've seen *many* people argue that that's not true. I've even debated them and shown them the many figures and historian accounts. Some of them seem inclined to bring it up every now and again on this site. They claim (incorrectly) that Japan was trying to surrender at the time, that Japan had tried to surrender just before that, and a few other arguments - none of them true or accurate.
Some folks have managed to paint themselves a picture of things that never existed. They've somehow concluded that Japan's history is very different than what it really is. I don't know where they get this information - it's not from the Japanese. While there are many Japanese who still *actively* worship war criminals (ancestral worship), it's not common and most Japanese (by which I mean all) that I've met knew their country's history accurately - as far as I can tell. The revisionist history isn't really all that common among the Japanese.
By the way, I've been to both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They don't seem to be much in the way of perpetual victims or revisionists. I really don't know where the silly Westerners are getting these ideas, it's not from Japan. Yes, they have some that do the ancestral worship (and an unusual trend that I've noticed concerning that) but they don't really seem to be revisionists.
Boy, you sure told him, and the other two! Brilliant and witty! We award you one gold star for the demonstration of intelligence and one gold star for your touch of class.
I'm part black and I'm comfortable saying that black people should stop being thugs and glorifying the gang culture. I believe I'm being honest when I say why it has some appeal and why they might do so. That is not an excuse. The white kids shouldn't be emulating it and doing the same damned things. And, seeing as I'm asking for wishes, can I get some equality in the halls of justice?
But yeah, those black people should stop being thugs and seeing that as a role model to look up to. There are many problems in the black community that come from within the community. One can have that discussion without being a racist. In fact, if people would stop decrying anyone who brings it up as a racist, then maybe you could have that conversation. But that'd require rational thinking and cooler heads.
"You shits be trippin' yo. Punk ass cracker, fliping his shit. Feel me? Bitch. flapin' and flopin' and stroke right out there on the floo'. You feel me? Down there doing the fish and shit. Nigger be trippin, hear me? What, you shook son? You ain't scaret now are you? Shit nigga..."
Translated from a South Eastern United States, Gulf-Region Ebonics, that translates to: You two dumb-asses are going to have a stroke because you spend all your time finding shit to be irate about. The both of you will find offense, even if you have to manufacture it. You'll see slight where none is intended and you'll and the best part about it is that if you stopped and listened to each other then you'd probably find out you have a lot of the same concerns and far more pressing matters.
I'd even speculate that it's beneficial to some (though it might not be intended but would be a great side affect) to keep the masses scrabbling at each other instead of trying to claw their way upwards.
Oh, that's actually about what I think a few of my relatives would say. It's just how they talk. I don't really like it either. They're actually not felons or anything. They're pretty normal people. The best part about it is the two that I'm specifically thinking of - that talk about like that, are really from Nova Scotia. And yeah, they do speak a different language than you do. There's actually lots of dialects of American English. Some of them are even officially recognized by fancy talking linguists. That actually might be fairly accurate. I've been down in the Florida panhandle since December. I've had a little practice - to the bemusement of the missus.
At any rate, yeah. I'm part black and am pretty happy saying the thugs that were acting out were being thugs and acting out of line. They're a discredit to their species but they're certainly not alone in that and not that because of the color of their skin. They're that way because they choose to be. That's what makes it even worse.
You should get an interview and wear one of these. When they make you play the part of a woman, you should play it like it's a martial arts video game and just start attacking the first person you see like you would a mortal combat character. Well, assuming they're virtual people and not real life people. If they're real life people you'll definitely not get the job. You could be Chun Lee from Street Fighter II. I bet they won't have programmed in a response for that. It will also be funnier than hell. If it's real people then you should just make the moves and every now and again step back and make the noise and pretend you're throwing a fireball. We just need to sneak in some hidden cameras. This is even better if you're a balding, pasty white, fat man.
I'd never read that before. It was greatly amusing. The thing is... I'd kind of want to turn it on. We'll have to find another way to cool it. If we ran it on a planet that was insanely cool AND were able to capture the energy from the two being in proximity then we might be on to something. I kid when I say it but it'd be kind of awesome if turning it on caused the nearby stars to dim for a brief second. Yes, yes the picture in my head is most awesome. Thanks for the link. (Can you imagine the sound of it powering on?)
Slashdot Mirror
Umm... I'm relying on the research of others and very little of my own. So, for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure it's easier to immigrate to the US than it is to immigrate to Mexico, for instance. The US has some of the more lax immigration laws on the planet. I realize it's fashionable to say something about the EU at this point and I'll preemptively point out that they're moving within a union and to immigrate to one of those countries is actually quite difficult unless you're blessed with a certain amount of money or have obtained a specific set of documentation.
No, they meant what they said. It was just too complicated for you to understand. In that portion their indicating the positions held by those for whom the ends really do justify the means. It's a pejorative. It's not that complicated but I can see where some people would be confused. It's fairly common in literature.
Umm... So, I cheated and looked. None of those say any of the things you claimed. There's no banning Muslims or Mexicans in any of that. In fact, now that I've looked, I'm rather inclined to disbelieve your further utterances.
You can safely ignore them. Really. Unless, of course, your government agrees with them. You can chuck all the mail in the trash. If they want to then they can block their citizens from accessing your site. They can not burden you - even if you ship a product to their country. Keep in mind, they might arrest you if you ever decide to visit their country in the future. Assuming you're not going to? Stay the course and do what you want.
Oh, it probably shields privacy. The question is who does it shield and which side of privacy is it on?
Read this thread. Look at the *many* incorrect statements about Tor and the onion network. This site is populated by people who self-identify as being into tech. These people don't understand the tech. It might actually be expecting a bit much for cops to know about it. They're expected to know many things. I imagine that Tor is pretty low on the list of things to expect them to know about - though it appears one of them realized this during the execution of the warrant. There's some speculation that they knew about it beforehand but that appears to be speculation that's assumed to be factual.
Those training sets and the process can't help but impact the people who do it. I'm not really qualified to say *how* it will impact them so I won't speculate but I am reasonably sure that it will have an impact. I'm willing to speculate that it probably doesn't take much exposure before it starts having an impact. I've pondered this in the past and I've wondered if it might be acceptable to have those who are predisposed to such actually do the work. Obviously, certain protective measures would need to be taken to prevent data leakage. I'm pretty sure I don't want to know what they're doing during their work breaks. However, they might actually be the most suited to do that work or make those value calls - if done properly. I'm not so sure, and again not qualified to opine, if it wouldn't have a negative impact on them. It'd make an interesting study.
Again, that's probability concerning there being evidence. Do not confuse a search warrant with an arrest warrant. Is there probable cause to believe that they'll be able to collect evidence that helps them determine guilt or innocence, find the guilty party, etc... An arrest warrant and a search warrant are entirely separate things. Was there a probability that they'd discover evidence there? The answer is yes. In fact, they did discover evidence. They discovered it was someone using TOR. I know it sounds odd but that is, indeed, evidence. In fact, it's evidence that shows that the people are less likely to be able to be proven guilty and thus subjected to an arrest warrant.
You know... It's not about probability of guilt or innocence but the probability of finding evidence, right?
Right or wrong, the answer is that if you're equipment was used in the commission of a crime, they're going to want to look at it. It's actually a rather basic concept and no different just because it is "on a computer."
Actually, yes. Yes they will and do. They'll go grab the APs and search them for logs. Additionally, they'll include security footage in their search to see if they can identify *anyone* who was using a computer in the area at the time of the offense.
You don't think that they just say, "Well, the access could have been by any member of the public. Guess we gotta stop." Do you?
Actually, you're an idiot but you're not too far off. They *should* block as the default. The default mode should be blocking and then whitelisting the needed services. You can never keep up with blacklisting, no matter how many people you employ. You can keep up with whitelisting and, with adequate staff and policies, you can add things to the whitelist efficiently and effectively.
So yes, you should block at the router. It's better to pick which packets you let in than it is to try to deal with them after they're already on the network.
Hmm... Are you certain that there was uranium on that U-boat? I know they sent heavy water on one of them. My memory is saying U-531 but my memory isn't that good - and there were several sent, as I recall, and some did not fare that well in their travels. My memory is also saying that they did send uranium but that was quite a bit earlier. I'll remind you that my memory is faulty (several bad sectors and too full to defrag without deleting data) but that's how I recollect it happening.
It should be noted that it's not like Germany shipped one single load of stuff. They sent them things through the war. I'm thinking of the several subs that were sent just prior to the end of the conflict in Europe. I want to say that they are believed to have sent three subs and only one of them made it through the gauntlet. The US Navy wasn't too keen on letting things get through there and was getting pretty good at finding and sinking those who tried.
Compared to Japan, Germany was a bunch of cowards. (By the way, your attempt to revise history is a bit silly. You might want to start by learning how Torch went and who they encountered along the way.)
Come to think of it... Which assets had the US seized? Be specific and show your sources.
Well, it's not like Nanking was going to rape itself. Yes, the world should have just stood back and allowed the atrocities to continue unabated. Because anything less is forcing Japan to commit more atrocities. Err... Yup. That's it. Thus, it's the fault of the US (and not the League of Nations?). By the way, the US was not a part of the League of Nations - in case you don't know.
I'm not sure why but a whole bunch of people are really confused about that. No, the US was not a part of the League. No, the US was never actually a part of the League. No, the US didn't even really have enough power (yet) to do much of anything to influence the League. More importantly, the citizens of the US didn't want to be a part of the League. They were mostly hoping to go back to just being isolationists at the time. But yeah, those Korean women weren't just going to make sex slaves out of themselves. Those medical and chemical weapons abuses weren't just gonna happen without those resources to make war and conquer the people surrounding Japan.
The US' ambitions? If by US you mean League of Nations then, maybe - and then only just maybe. The thing is, the US was not a member of the League of Nations. We were mostly isolationists still. I don't think you actually know anything about what you speak of. You know, your local library probably has some books on the subject or you can try the 'net and a bunch of documentaries. Documentaries won't be perfect but they'll do. Try to get documentaries from varied sources, if you go that route. Don't watch just US documentaries, just BBC documentaries, just Germany's versions or anything. Some of the ones from Russia are actually not too bad if you keep in mind the obvious biases. A good one is Emperor Hirohito's War.
Seeking an armistice is not surrender. Per the Potsdam agreements, there was only one option for Japan, German, and Italy. They were not ready to take that option and hoped to make it painful enough to get be granted some accords and have a better position after the war.
Does nobody read any of the many, many books on this? Why would you guys attempt to revise it.
The angry Russians also had a great deal to do with the surrender. Those who claim the bombs had nothing to do with the surrender are idiots. Those who claim that they surrendered because of the bombs are also idiots. Amazingly enough, it takes quite a bit to get some nations to surrender - usually more than one reason. Another reason was their rapidly dwindling stockpile of resources and inability to get more shipped in as there was now a giant US Navy in the way.
> If the goal had simply been surrender, then a single demonstration in some sparsely populated area would have been the first move.
According to whom?
Only one country has behaved so deplorably that they had nuclear weapons dropped on them.
I've seen *many* people argue that that's not true. I've even debated them and shown them the many figures and historian accounts. Some of them seem inclined to bring it up every now and again on this site. They claim (incorrectly) that Japan was trying to surrender at the time, that Japan had tried to surrender just before that, and a few other arguments - none of them true or accurate.
Some folks have managed to paint themselves a picture of things that never existed. They've somehow concluded that Japan's history is very different than what it really is. I don't know where they get this information - it's not from the Japanese. While there are many Japanese who still *actively* worship war criminals (ancestral worship), it's not common and most Japanese (by which I mean all) that I've met knew their country's history accurately - as far as I can tell. The revisionist history isn't really all that common among the Japanese.
By the way, I've been to both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They don't seem to be much in the way of perpetual victims or revisionists. I really don't know where the silly Westerners are getting these ideas, it's not from Japan. Yes, they have some that do the ancestral worship (and an unusual trend that I've noticed concerning that) but they don't really seem to be revisionists.
Boy, you sure told him, and the other two! Brilliant and witty! We award you one gold star for the demonstration of intelligence and one gold star for your touch of class.
I'm part black and I'm comfortable saying that black people should stop being thugs and glorifying the gang culture. I believe I'm being honest when I say why it has some appeal and why they might do so. That is not an excuse. The white kids shouldn't be emulating it and doing the same damned things. And, seeing as I'm asking for wishes, can I get some equality in the halls of justice?
But yeah, those black people should stop being thugs and seeing that as a role model to look up to. There are many problems in the black community that come from within the community. One can have that discussion without being a racist. In fact, if people would stop decrying anyone who brings it up as a racist, then maybe you could have that conversation. But that'd require rational thinking and cooler heads.
"You shits be trippin' yo. Punk ass cracker, fliping his shit. Feel me? Bitch. flapin' and flopin' and stroke right out there on the floo'. You feel me? Down there doing the fish and shit. Nigger be trippin, hear me? What, you shook son? You ain't scaret now are you? Shit nigga..."
Translated from a South Eastern United States, Gulf-Region Ebonics, that translates to: You two dumb-asses are going to have a stroke because you spend all your time finding shit to be irate about. The both of you will find offense, even if you have to manufacture it. You'll see slight where none is intended and you'll and the best part about it is that if you stopped and listened to each other then you'd probably find out you have a lot of the same concerns and far more pressing matters.
I'd even speculate that it's beneficial to some (though it might not be intended but would be a great side affect) to keep the masses scrabbling at each other instead of trying to claw their way upwards.
Oh, that's actually about what I think a few of my relatives would say. It's just how they talk. I don't really like it either. They're actually not felons or anything. They're pretty normal people. The best part about it is the two that I'm specifically thinking of - that talk about like that, are really from Nova Scotia. And yeah, they do speak a different language than you do. There's actually lots of dialects of American English. Some of them are even officially recognized by fancy talking linguists. That actually might be fairly accurate. I've been down in the Florida panhandle since December. I've had a little practice - to the bemusement of the missus.
At any rate, yeah. I'm part black and am pretty happy saying the thugs that were acting out were being thugs and acting out of line. They're a discredit to their species but they're certainly not alone in that and not that because of the color of their skin. They're that way because they choose to be. That's what makes it even worse.
You should get an interview and wear one of these. When they make you play the part of a woman, you should play it like it's a martial arts video game and just start attacking the first person you see like you would a mortal combat character. Well, assuming they're virtual people and not real life people. If they're real life people you'll definitely not get the job. You could be Chun Lee from Street Fighter II. I bet they won't have programmed in a response for that. It will also be funnier than hell. If it's real people then you should just make the moves and every now and again step back and make the noise and pretend you're throwing a fireball. We just need to sneak in some hidden cameras. This is even better if you're a balding, pasty white, fat man.
I'd never read that before. It was greatly amusing. The thing is... I'd kind of want to turn it on. We'll have to find another way to cool it. If we ran it on a planet that was insanely cool AND were able to capture the energy from the two being in proximity then we might be on to something. I kid when I say it but it'd be kind of awesome if turning it on caused the nearby stars to dim for a brief second. Yes, yes the picture in my head is most awesome. Thanks for the link. (Can you imagine the sound of it powering on?)