Seems sad the govt assumes everyone has one or more of these accounts.
Just 8 short years ago, I was doing computer security inspections/reviews for US govt. agencies. We were told NOT to have such accounts as they are possible security holes. After all, if the bad guys know everything about you, you're easier to hack and or manipulate.
The worst confidential info "scandal" was when she gave the order to send talking points for the day...
So, you either don't actually know what SAP material is (in which case you're being willfully ignorant on this topic and should stop expressing opinions until you read up on it), or you DO know, and you're just being another liar in the service of a liar.
Yeah, because the FBI knows nothing about gathering information, amirite?
The FBI can only gather what's given to them, or what can be forensically recovered. If she blew away 30,000 emails, and they've got under 20,000 of them to look at, there's some they couldn't get. It's not really very complicated.
seriously. What event? Aside from the scandal itself what, exactly, did Hilary do that was a) a criminal offense and b) revealed in the emails?
The emails revealed that she was incredibly reckless in handling classified information - some of it SAP-level stuff so sensitive that it can't even be talked about when it's 100% redacted, content-wise. People lose their careers and their liberty over such carelessness. And we're now seeing evidence of pervasive corruption as her family was enriched while their family business sold access to her while she was in office. So, you're either simply not paying attention or (more likely) you know all of this and are a Shillary.
While I'm on it, which is it? Is she a fool who couldn't run an email server or a Machiavellian genius who successfully evaded the FBI and an entire political party's attempts to bring her to justice?
She's had a long career of throwing underlings under the bus or having her party cover for Clinton Machine mis-steps. So yes, incompetence (but mostly arrogance). And no, she hasn't evaded the FBI or congress
Her team did not "delete" emails -- that is a deliberately misleading term.
Yes, they did delete them. They even SAID they deleted them. That the server that had contained them had had all of its contents destroyed once they were done picking out the stuff that was work related.
What *actually* happened is they used discovery software to filter emails based on keywords.
But the lie she told was that her lawyers read each and every email. She knew that wasn't true, and so was lying. But that's OK, because her supporters know she lies to them, and they like being lied to.
People should really appreciate the amount of effort the FBI put into looking for malfeasance.
People should also recognize that they FBI could only look for corruption (and worse) within the material they had available. Clinton did not provide all of the requested material. She said she did, but that was another lie. Not an oversight, but a lie. Because we're not talking about "oops, a couple of emails you should have seen slipped through the cracks" - but "oops, thousands and thousands of emails you should have seen in that pile I printed out without header info were deleted."
In short: this fantasy that Hillary attempted to delete evidence is completely without basis
Other than the part where, you know, her records were deleted after her team put on a show of pulling out what they thought would make the appearance of complying with her requirements
What she *has* done is tried to *misrepresent*, the most egregious being her assertion that Comey agrees with her.
That was egregious, but it's hardly the worst of it. She knowingly, willingly, and repeatedly lied about her motivations and actions, and deliberately slow-walked and stonewalled at every turn. The fact that she'd whip up yet another lie to make it sound like the FBI's very clear identification of her multiple "untruths" on the matter is only egregious because it shows that she's still willing to lie even when she knows that we all know she's doing it. None of that matters, of course. Her supporters like that she lies, and none of that is legally meaningful. What IS legally meaningful is her testimony in front of congress. She spent long hours carefully avoiding direct answers to questions to she wouldn't perjure herself. We'll see if she's still as slippery on that front as her reputation suggests.
Separate from all of that, of course, is the actual content of the messages now being read. They exhibit a very clear pattern of tying access to her and her policy influence to being willing to dump piles of cash into her family business while she was in office. Legal jeopardy there? Hard to say. That would once again be Loretta Lynch's call, and we already know where she stands.
That’s according to a new report from Verified Voting, a group that advocates for transparency and accuracy in elections.
... A cornerstone of democracy, the secret ballot guards against voter coercion. But “because of current technical challenges and the unique challenge of running public elections, it is impossible to maintain the separation of voters’ identities from their votes when Internet voting is used,” concludes the report, which was written in collaboration with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the anticorruption advocacy group Common Cause.
Honestly, yes. KDE was the first desktop environment I tried when I started dabbling around in Linux back in the late 90's. I continued to use KDE for several years into the 3.0 series because compared to Gnome it just felt more polished and capable. As a matter of fact I remember at some point one of the big Linux groups (may have been a branch of Red Hat) announced that they'd be adopting Gnome as their "official" platform and I immediately though "Well, that's the end of Linux as a desktop option, because Gnome sucks.".
Somewhere along the way though KDE did indeed stagnate, and Gnome and even XFCE started to feel just a little more put together. Eventually Gnome went a little off the rails too but thankfully Mint forked off Cinnamon and it is wonderful IMHO (though I did successfully use XFCE for a bit while Cinnamon was still stabilizing). I still will download and boot into some of the other DE's like KDE every now and then, but none of them feel right. Cinnamon on the other hand has manged to keep pace with technology and looks like not trying to upend the entire UI paradigm.
Unless it changes drastically though, I no longer have any interest in KDE - and my interest in Gnome is limited only to backporting the useful bits into Cinnamon.
Without a time machine we could go back and forth on this, but I'm quite confident that in a decade or so I'll be proven right on this, and you'll be about like the Cliff Stroll who in 1995 was writing about how the internet and online shopping would never take off:
Some sort of autonomous Segway device or drone might come to the restaurant to pick up the food? It's a longer way off than driverless taxis.
Why would you think that? The "self driving" bit is the hard part. Once that's good to go adding in an electric box that opens and closes when provided a code (one for the restaurant to open with, one for a person to open to retrieve food) would be absolutely trivial.
The technology is already too far along to think it won't work.
It won't just happen - consumer-ready self-driving cars will be completely ready and commonly sold within 10 years and the technology will be damned near perfect in 20 years.
I'd wager that once Uber goes this route it won't be doing it with individuals providing their own car. It'll be a big fleet of cars owned by Uber that they rent out. That eliminates the need to share revenue with anyone else, and over the long haul the price of the car to them won't really be that big of a deal.
This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian