Europe is so obsessed with the US and trump that they are going to succumb to russia, china, and even iran.
The US has already succumbed to Russia, and China is outplaying them globally. Russia's asset has been weakening the US from the inside.
As much as ramageddon hurts, Emacs' appetite for memory is a solved problem and you can enjoy that Emacs Macht Alle Computer SchÃn.
Sorry, you're right, I cited the wrong case. in Cramer vs. USA (1945) there was never a question about whether Germany was an enemy. The focus was on whether Cramer provided aid or comfort, and the conclusion was that he didn't.
The definition of an "enemy" as a foreign power engaged in war with the USA comes from cases connected to the US Civil War, and English common-law sources used by the US Constitution framers.
Prosecutors face an enormous hurdle to charge someone with treason. Part of that hurdle is the fact that an enemy must be formally declared to be in a war with the USA before any charges of treason can be contemplated. This is as it should be: treason is a serious crime that demands serious conditions be met.
There are crimes other than treason that prosecutors can charge someone with for hostile acts against the USA. For example, the Rosenbergs were not charged with treason, but conspiracy to commit espionage, because at the time the USA was not at war with the Soviet Union, even though they were considered to be hostile adversaries.
Would providing aid or comfort to Iran count as treason? There isn't a declared war, but there has certainly been acts of war there.
They have? I thought they conquered parts of Ukraine years ago, and the occupants (especially the ones closest to Russian border and away from the fighting) are doing just "fine" (for whatever definition of that word describes living under military occupation).
I'm no fan of Russia or anything they are doing but *genocide* seems inaccuate.
When an occupied area of Ukraine - Bucha - was reconquered, they found plenty of raped, tortured, and killed civilians. Russian soldiers referred to these operations involving hunting down people in lists, filtration, torture, and execution as zachistka ("cleansing").
A fair peace would be withdrawal from all occupied territories, war crime tribunals from the leadership down to the individuals committing acts like these, and Russia paying compensation to the families of all victims of their acts as well as for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Confiscating all oligarch wealth might be a good start there.
These organizations are offloading their technology deficiencies onto the poor and incapable user.
I, as a seasoned professional that has seen every trick email that has ever been sent, cannot determine if certain messages are malicious or not. The users will never be able to do it themselves. And punishing them, whether that's reprimand, scolding, mocking, making them resit training, is NOT the right way to do it.
Exactly. IT orgs should put defenses in place to catch the majority of fishing emsils, using sender info,AI to recognize patterns etc. You won’t catch everything but can greatly reduce the chan crew s they get through.
I'm sure they've got that. This is a later layer of defense - training users to be aware that there are bad actors out there. I'm a consultant, and the organization where I'm at (doing completely other things) has an external vendor providing this. After you identify a mail, you get some micro training as well on factors that could indicate it is targeted - e.g. domain names looking almost like the real thing, creating a sense of urgency, checking where the links go before clicking them, etc. I believe this helps create and maintain a necessary awareness, even though there are a lot of other defenses too.
I mean, that's exactly what Linus did with git. A lot of his criticisms of existing stuff weren't justified (he went on misplaced rants about how version control software was bad in concept for years), and people have essentially cargo-culted git into areas it wasn't designed for because 'Linus is cool'.
Quick reminder that most commercial software doesn't actually have the problem that git was designed to solve - multiple masters. It was designed to be able to share kernel source trees between Linus' own, Red Hats and I think two others (Yggdrasil and SUSE? It's a long time back and I may be misremembering that). They all had their own quirks and patches, and they wanted to be able to handle commits to any of their trees and accept/reject as per their own preference.
[....]
Yggdrasil - that's a name I haven't heard in Linus contect for a long time. However, it was only relevant in the early 90s. Git was developed in early 2005, as a response to the controversy and problems using Bitkeeper: A proprietary distributed version control system that had provided free licenses for developers of free software, but with several caveats that many found unacceptable. In early 2005 the free license was revoked (due various unhappy devs reverse engineering it, IIRC - in particular Andrew Tridgell of Samba fame), and Linus responded by creating git.
For another blast from the past, here's an article about in the Linux Journal.
Also, in some cases there are two sides to the story. Take self driving cars: In the future, self driving cars could be safer than human drivers per kilometer driven, but still kill people due to failures in the software/hardware.
Potential gains should obviously not be a carte blanche for companies to do whatever they will with AI, but it should mean that society should have informed discussions about pros and cons for AI use in various settings. And while having people with actual knowledge being at the front of discussion, the hoi polloi should also be a part of it.
I know this is the internet, but the parent's statement does not deserve such an insult. Asking why a company would claim to have issues finding employees while they are simultaneously laying off employees, which is contradictory, is a reasonable question. Holding companies accountable, that use programs like this seemingly for their own benefit at the expense of Americans in the labor pool, benefits everyone.
Having trouble finding employees at the same time as laying off other employees is not necessarily contradictory, unless said workers have the same skills and experience.
One theoretical example - due to automating and streamlining internal processes, you could have too mqny support staff while at the same time having a demand for experienced developers. Or a transport company 100+ years ago transitioning to lorries wouldn't need as many horse support staff as they have, while trying to recruit mechanics.
Informing a woman, her menstrual period is late, is a mixed blessing in some countries: The government would like to get its hands on that data, in order to enforce its religious in-sensibilities upon her. Women with an Apple watch need to worry how committed Apple is, to privacy: If the government demands such data is forwarded to the government, Apple will fold faster than a cheap suit.
To be able to deny this to theocratic neofascist governments like Texas, the data is not available to Apple - it is stored encrypted on the device, and protected with end to end encryption so Apple can't read it. Easier to just subpoena all cell records of fertile women, and see if they are near women's health care locations out of state. Or just deny them the possibility of leaving the state at all.
Not a lawyer, but I don't think intent is necessary for it to be criminal. Negligence and can also have severe consequences that can be criminal.
"Negligence" isn't a magic word that you can say to remove intentionality requirement from any crime law, as you seem to think it is.
"Negligence"/"carelessness" vs "intent" is a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, to give one example.
Another: Let's say that you run a popular bar, and you've neglected a lot of regulations - a fire happens, and many die. You can and should be held accountable for that, even if you didn't intend to kill them.
"Carelessness", not "can". Looked ok when I pressed submit.
Not a lawyer, but I don't think intent is necessary for it to be criminal. Negligence and can also have severe consequences that can be criminal.
If a search for "playdate" comes up with objectionable shit, that says a lot about how your behavior has driven your search algorithm.
It's easy to read it as "playmate"- which were the unsafe pages in a magazine we read for the articles. Obviously.
Because he is not (currently) a dictator, he can't make his own laws. He's limited in what he can do.
Tariffs are one of the few things in which he is mostly able to do unilaterally. When all you've got is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
To be fair, the Supreme Court judged that Trump does not have that authority. The Supreme Court that has enough corrupt members that his executive order trying to annul the fourteenth amendment was struck down just 6-3 rather than the obvious 9-0 with a comment describing how to actually change the constitution.
In this case, it's a different kind of memory - High Bandwidth Memory, HBM.
"It takes all sorts of in & out-door schooling to get adapted to my kind of fooling" - R. Frost
