That's more or less what he just said, so I'm not sure how rewording it makes it "forgivable"...
Are you truly so ignorant as to not be able to make the connection between the Keystone pipeline and climate change? The keystone pipeline represents a massive investment in fossil fuel infrastructure, at a time when it has become blatantly obvious that the US needs to instead invest in alternate clean energy technology. If the US is to continue to be a leader in technological progress they - as Obama right decided - need to take a bold stand against the entrenched Oil and Coal lobby and reinvest in new energy sources. Does it cost more in the short term? Yes. No matter what, there is going to be a painful and expensive period where we transition away from fossil fuels, but that process has already begun to happen, albeit slowly.
No, it hasn't. Energy use is expanding and will for the foreseeable future, particularly abroad. Moving to electric cars simply means we burn coal instead of oil.
It doesn't have to be that way. If lunatic leftists would quit getting in the way of nuclear power we could have clean, dependable energy.
Not that I agree or disagree, but I've heard this argument advanced: by building a pipeline, you increase overall production cost efficiency; the supply and demand curve meet at a lower pricepoint, and oil is consumed at a higher rate.
The rate doesn't really matter. The looney left needs to come to grips with the fact that every drop of oil that humans can find is going to be dug up and either burned or turned into something else. Every lump of coal that humans can find is going to be dug up and burned. This is reality. Trying to delay it isn't going to do anything except harm economies in the short term.
But, then, the actual point is heavier regulation, so I guess it works out for them.
You think servants will be punished for obeying their masters, plus, in many cases, making their masters richer? If the wealthy and powerful started that, they'd have to fight the pitchfork-wielding townsfolk themselves. Never gonna happen.
Bullshit. Not only has it happened, it was such a stupid defense that we gave it a sarcastic name, the "Nuremberg Defense". 70 years ago we (our civilization) listened to people all day long whine "I was only following orders" and they'd be hanging the next morning.
Something rotten has happened since then in our culture, and we will pay heavily for it.
The US Marshall Service deputies work for the federal judiciary, much like a county sheriff handles local court matters. This is most likely all "criminal forfeiture" which isn't the problem in the US. This is the proceeds of actual criminal activity as verified by a court.
The problems are with "civil forfeiture", which is handled by the FBI on the federal level. Civil forfeiture needs to be shut down entirely, and any LEO found to have taken part in it should be prosecuted. Yes, I'm serious.
I see this and his age, and I can only think, "does he realize that, while Obama can make some action, the majority of such a thing has to come from Congress?"
I can only see him as being a brat trying to make a name for himself targeting a well targeted person.
The biggest thing on his table politically about climate change recently, might have been Keystone, which he didn't let go through
WTF does the Keystone pipeline have to do with climate change? The Canadians are selling the oil to China, anyway, it'll just take a different route.
So tired of this mindless repetition of "facts" from partisans on both sides.
Not to mention that I'm sure we can find over a dozen activities this kid takes part in that negatively impact the climate.
Let me help you:
"Xiuhtezcatl Tonatiuh... hip-hop-savvy Coloradan...,' he told me here at the U.N. COP21 climate change summit in Paris.
I'm guessing he didn't row a boat to Europe.
New technology market deployments go in stages, including the following:
1) The underlying technology becomes available and financially viable. The window opens.
2) An explosion of companies introduce competing products and try to capture market share. They are in a race to jump through the window.
3) There is a shakeout: A handful become the dominant producers and the rest die off or move on to other things. The window has closed.
We've seen this over and over. (Two examples from a few decades back were the explosions of Unix boxes and PC graphics accelerator chips)
IoT applications recently passed stage 1), with the introduction of $1-ish priced, ultra-low-power (batteries last for years), systems-on-a-chip (computer, radio peripheral, miscellaneous sensor and other device interfaces) from TI, Nordic, Dialog, and others. It's in stage 2) now.
In stage 2) there's a race to get to market. Wait too long and your competitors eat your lunch and you die before deploying at all. So PBHs do things like deploy proof-of-concept lab prototypes as products, as soon as they work at all (or even BEFORE they do. B-b ) They figure that implementing a good security architecture up front will make them miss the window, and (if they think that far ahead at all) that they can fix it with upgrades later, after they're established, have financing, adequate staffing, and time to do it right - or at least well enough.
So right now you're seeing the IoT producucts that came out first - which means mostly the ones that either ignored security entirely or haven't gotten it set up right yet. Give it some time and you'll see better security - either from improvements among the early movers or new entrants who took the time to do it right and managed to survive long enough to get to market. Then you'll see a shakeout, as those who got SOMETHING wrong fail in competition with those who got it right.
If we're lucky, one of the "somethings" will be security. But Microsoft's example shows that's not necessarily a given.
In this case, though, the POINT of the product is security, so getting it wrong - visibly - may be a company killer. (I see that, in the wake of the exposure, the company is promising a field upgrade with this issue fixed in about a month. If it does happen, and comes out before the crooks develop and use an exploit, perhaps this company will become another example for the PHBs to point at when they push the engineers for fast schlock rather than slow solid-as-rocks.)
Being in the industry, the reason I was given was (1) the electrolyte is very expensive right now
Vanadium pentoxide (98% pure was about $6/lb and falling as of early Oct and hasn't been above $14 in years) and sulphuric acid?
and (2) investors need a demonstration of return.
Always the bottom line. B-)
During the primary you get to spout all kinds of shit. This is also why I tend to shake my head when people claim that Sanders is useful because "he forces Clinton to the left".
No he doesn't, he's just making Clinton pretend to like the left for a few months.
Rubio will be back to "The law is the law" as soon as drug decriminalization is back under discussion. And all of a sudden, any memory of nonsense involving ignoring gay marriages will be history.
I use Firefox despite critical components being designed and written by Brandon Eich, who's a contemptible homophobic jackass (and would have continued to use it even if he hadn't resigned.) I use OpenSSL despite the jackwagon who wrote it being some anti-GNU zealot. Those are two examples, and I'm sure I can find a thousand more utilities written by people I'd never go to a party with.
You're unwilling to work with systemd simply because you don't like the author, and are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater because you are afraid to deal with your animosity against the author. OK, we get it.
But perhaps you need to reconsider your priorities if your approach to life is to decide what technologies to use on the basis of personality quibbles with people you'll never ever meet.
systemd's great. I can't comment on Poettering because, quite honestly, I've never really followed the guy. He could be as bad as Eric Raymond. He could be as nice as Bruce Perens. I'll bitch about him if I find out something that makes me think he's giving the F/OSS communit(ies) a bad name or is behaving in an exclusionary manner, but I'm not going to reject a long needed technological upgrade that's exactly what we need right now on that basis.
The ransomware gets its name from the fact that the "DecryptorMax" string is found in multiple places inside its source code.
They distributed the source code with the ransomware?
Or the strings in the source code ended up generating strings in the object code and something like the "strings" tool found them.
Computers can figure out all kinds of problems, except the things in the world that just don't add up.