No it isn't. If I'm going to hire someone to link in a library, give me somebody who has some clue what the library is doing. The initial results will be better, and if there's something wrong with the chosen black box, we'll have a chance of figuring it out.
It's useful in determining whether someone knowingly transmitted classified info in the clear. Nobody goes to jail for accidentally sending a newspaper article about a classified operation. Certainly nobody goes to jail when somebody else accidentally sends the newspaper article to her email account.
Prior to massive regulations insurance was affordable.
Um, that's if they're willing to sell it to you. I could not get insurance for epilepsy pre-ACA because the medications I needed were expensive, and also because people always called 911 after every seizure which meant routine ER visits, about two per month. Since insurers wanted to keep their insurance "affordable" for healthy dickheads trying to decide if they even needed it, that meant telling me GFY- which they did because there were no "massive regulations" preventing them.
There were three emails marked classified. Only one was actually classified. None of them were marked classified in the header, but the body. The news doesn't report whether Hillary sent or received the classified email. The FBI thinks that whoever sent the email didn't notice the markings.
Nobody would go to jail under those circumstances. To top it off, the reporting I read was that the emails had to do with State department phone call talking points that are declassified after the phone call.
"Everyone working in intelligence all agree that if they did what she did, they'd 100% be charged. Never understood that one."
No need to understand something that isn't true. Go look at what they actually found on her. It amounted to nothing. The second hand stories that travel around are overblown, to say the least.
The reason Comey couldn't recommend prosecution is that he didn't have enough evidence for a prosecution. No prosecutor would agree to take the case.
Are we complaining about the regulation or this application? Does every law need to be written so that it's idiot proof?
Same argument regarding raw milk, vaccines, etc.
That's where I draw the line. Plenty of people, namely kids, would get themselves killed drinking 3 day old raw milk.
There are plenty of Rightist anti-vaxxers.
And it ain't the right that thinks humanity is a blight on Mother Earth.
Yet another anti-science view of the right.
"People desperately need a universal solution which is secure, decentralized, fault tolerant, not attached to your phone number, protects your privacy, supports video and audio chats and sending of files, works behind NATs and other firewalls and has the ability to send offline messages."
I don't see the sense in that. There's so much evidence to the contrary.
May as well say people desperately need a universal language. May I interest you in Esperanto?
Actually, this is just a normal monthly fluctuation, and an unimpressive one at that: http://www.slate.com/content/d...
Giving Trump credit for this is ridiculous- it's like taking a dump and bragging that you lost weight.
Well how about this -- Assign users their passwords?
So you create an account, and then it says: "OK, your password is: u82r6bz5pe2kxwqqnrbh"
If third party content is available on Neflix, it should also be available on Amazon, the same way music can be played by any radio station that's willing to pay the royalties.
"There is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress." -- Mark Twain