Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 1, Sentence 1.
The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
Executive power, by definition, means overseeing the day-to-day administrative activities of the government. Executive orders whose sole purpose is to manage those day-to-day administrative activities fall very clearly within the President's authority.
About twice as many Democrats voted for it. Only 1 Democrat voted against it compared to 30 republicans. That's a very significant difference.
It was poorly ordered. I think the intended meaning was "slightly more against it than for it", but because of it being right after the post about the Democrats, most folks read it as "slightly more against it than the Democrats".
The biggest problem, IMO, is why the Republicans were against it. Most of them seemed to vote against it not because it gave the government too much power, but because it gave the government too little. For example, they bring us folks like Mitch McConnell claiming that the lack of the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. (sic) Act is going to cause terrorism-related deaths in the U.S., rather than recognizing that the colossal resources and manpower that are going into data collection would be much more effectively spent in a more targeted way that didn't catch so many innocent people in the dragnet, and that the mere existence of the U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. (sic) Act that he so staunchly supports makes us more likely to miss a real terrorist threat rather than less.
So, in other words, these models were specifically made for and distributed by an ISP, and were not off-the-shelf models. The backdoors were there for the ISP managers.
Well, I trust my ISPs router
Because I assume my ISP is either incompetent or dishonest, I don't really care which, I simply don't trust them. And I sure as fuck don't trust them with access to my actual network. I want a layer of security between me and their shit, because I assume their stuff is trivially hacked.
My wife and I each have our offices set up where our own router is getting DHCP from the ISPs router, and then firewalling everything from it. We each have our own locked down wifi, and entirely separate networks. I'm pondering a third router to provide the guest wifi.
Other than disabling the ISPs wifi and using our own, I wouldn't even know the SSID or the password for the ISPs crap. I assume they haven't turned it on without asking, but I never check -- come to think of it, I'd have to find out how.
My parents and my in-laws have routers we've bought them to sit behind the crap the ISP provides. Because I know for a fact that in both cases the ISP provides a router with default wifi SSID and passwords which are published in the docs they give you.
Because it's printed in the "how to" for every damned subscriber, and you can't change it, you can pretty much imagine that if you find an SSID of the right name you can connect to it, and probably have management access to it.
For 99% of network users out there, these vulnerabilities are of no practical concern.
But the problem is so many households trust that the wide open, back doored, well known remote-admin credentialed, shitty routers they've been provided with give them any form of security.
Which means for the overwhelming majority of home users who aren't tech savvy and paranoid, these vulnerabilities are absolutely of practical concern
I'm betting a lot of home users figure they have the router from the ISP, so they don't need anything else.
That these are ISP models doesn't diminish the number of people who could be impacted
Honestly, go talk to a random neighbor
(3) They probably didn't have as much cash as "everyone knows they have", for the simple reason that the best way to convince someone to give you the mountain of cash you need is to make them thing you've as good as got it from someone else.
As a small business owner, this is so true
I just don't think those tactics would work all that well within the US. It seems like whenever an organization DOES try an astroturfing campaign ("Citizens for Enhanced Comcast Monopoly") it gets spotted so quickly for what it is that it seems to achieve negative results.
Russians aren't idiots, they simply think things will get better if they pretend to believe the lies and let their country and its leaders engage in one immoral act after another - just like Americans, or really anyone. And their reward is the same, too.
The professional Russian trolls are about as subtle.
Do we know Cold Fjord is not a Russian troll? After all, he's making American patriotism look bad by associating it with authoritarianism.
Thing is, you don't need to be very good at trolling if you are working full time at it. You will always get the last word against people who has better things to do than to argue with paid trolls.
You will always get the last word, and then what? The point of such trolling is to disrupt, to keep people arguing over stupid shit forever so they're too busy to discuss Putin's failures or what to do about him; if other posters ignore him, he has failed.
On the other hand, Rand Paul just killed the worst parts of the Patriot Act. Hopefully it'll stay dead, or at least maimed. I don't know too much about Paul, but I think I'm going to find out more about him, from the most objective and reliable sources I can find.
Until then, it's not really any better than vaporware.
Just because something's too expensive for cheap-ass home computer users doesn't mean it's "vaporware". There's a lot of other sectors in the computing market that can afford more.
Well to be fair, according to TFS, this company has done nothing but talk since 2001, almost 15 years now. Now it's finally got something ready for production.
How long has HP been talking about memristors? I don't think it's been this long.
I wonder how this (now proven) technology stacks up against (not yet proven) memristors in terms of density and speed.
I'm all for abolishing prolonged segregated housing AKA solitary confinement. Enforced solitude is torture.
" intentionally or unintentionally" is the key here. Intent is a huge matter in criminal proceedings.
This is actually somewhat topical, albeit apparently by chance.
If Silk Road specifically allowed users of its infrastructure to break laws using it, then they are culpable at least as accessories if not as conspirators. Apparently the jury was convinced this fellow was in charge of that, and he's getting punished. I would say "duly punished", but I do think life in prison for what he was convicted of doing is harsh.
You want to know who else is propping up illegal drug cartels? The governments who make it vastly more profitable to sell illegal goods with a high demand than to get those goods legalized and quality controlled.
Shouldn't it be, though?
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.
