If you do a fresh install of Windows 7 these days? The update process is PAINFUL! You'll literally need to leave the PC downloading updates for a good 8-10 hours or more before it finally starts doing anything obvious.

That's why you slipstream updates into your installation image. Slipstreaming the various post-SP1 patch rollups as they're released will slash your installation time significantly, and there are only a relative handful of them at this point.

The only thing slipstreaming doesn't cover is updates to the .NET Framework. For whatever reason, they're not provided in a compatible format, but only as installer .exes. RT Seven Lite, however, will create an image that will run these installers (or others) in a post-Win7-installation step. It also facilitates slipstreaming the other updates, so it's useful to have on hand.

We can lobby consumer router manufacturers to include it. Openwrt has a bcp38 package with no configuration, done by Dave Taht and the Cerowrt folks.

Well, it could be directed to an IPV4 local network multicast address in the range of 224.0.0.0 to 224.0.0.255. That might at least wake up the device owner.

It might take some time for DNS changes to propogate. The IP address was set to localhost for a while to get the attacks off of the net.

First, I'm sure there's lots of Open Source being used in Google's implementation - just not where we can see.

There is a speech recognizer from CMU that might be a good starting point. I haven't heard about plain-language software, though. There is additional rocket science to be done. Not insurmountable given things we've already done.

Training with millions of people? Actually, that's the part that community development is good at.

If you surveyed how many citizens would support law against hate speech, it would probably be a significant number. And prospective citizens as well. So I don't think the problem with your proposal has anything to do with people in favor of shari'a law. It would not work with plain Judeo-Christian European European-descended folks.

OK. The folks who run Project Shield have been informed!

I've met Godwin and he'd be horrified that you are trying to shield Trump by invoking his name. The world doesn't need an automatic method to suppress discussion of atrocities, and Mike never meant what he said to be one. In fact, this is a quote of Mike directly:

If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler or Nazis when you talk about Trump. Or any other politician.

There's also Google's Project Shield, which is free for journalists.

That's a really good point. This service sure isn't going to throw someone off for being attacked too much. I'll ask someone at Google to expedite the process.

By the way, I've sworn to much the same text in my police deputy's oath. I volunteer for disaster services. It didn't limit me from opposing any law, I just have to follow them while they are still on the books.

Your next move, should you choose to make it, is to decry that if we actually had standards for citizenship (like every other goddamn country on Earth) we'd have to kick out all existing citizens that don't meet those standards, which is ludicrous. No one handles birthright citizenship the same way they handle citizenship through naturalization, and the lack of options for stateless citizens makes that idea cruel and untenable.

With all due respect, you're talking to yourself now. I wasn't thinking of this point at all.

The actual statement is "support and defend the constitution and laws of the United States". Now, obviously, you personally do not approve of every law, nor could anyone even know them all. If you swear "true faith and allegiance" to them you are swearing to follow and uphold the law, not to refrain from opposing it in a peaceful political manner as is supported by that very text. The only way as a citizen that you could actually break the first amendment would be if you were in a government position, because it's directed toward congress rather than the people. So, the typical prospective citizen can swear allegiance to that amendment with complete confidence that they will never be in a position for that to matter.

Some people call that "democracy.

Yes, but democracy doesn't mean that you have a right not to be criticized, shunned, fired, boycotted, and abused in any other lawful manner for your speech. However, this wasn't speech. It was deliberate spreading of falsehood and cheating the moderation system. Who in their right mind would not deplore such corruption?

Do not poke stick at bear.

Um... didn't we learn something from the abhorrence of google glass. I'd tolerate being in the room with someone wearing these as long as I knew ti was painful for the wearer to use them and put them in visible agony when they were activated. I'm thinking something like glass shard ear pieces and a 50Kv electro shock to the brain when turned on for ten seconds.