"I just came from a meeting, today, in the situation room, in which I’ve got people who we know have been on ISIL websites living here in the United States — US citizens. And we’re allowed to put them on the no fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association I cannot prohibit those people from buying guns!"
Based on browser history — pardon? What the president just confirmed is that someone from the government is noting everyone's browsing history, determining which websites are not to be visited, and furthermore, if someone does visit the website for whatever reason they get put on a no fly list.
The Anonymous Conservative goes on an epic rant about this revelation.
Now, how are they finding out who is visiting those websites? How big is the unit watching that? What websites are considered verboten by the Fedguv? Who determines the status of a website? Do they have a warrant to surveil what websites people are visiting? Is there any oversight, by any elected body? Nobody knows, because that section of the government is completely hidden from everyone’s view, and the media will never dare ask, for some unimaginable reason.
Imagine how powerful the machine is, that it is actually aware of who is looking at what online. Imagine how powerful the machine is, that an airline executive picks up the phone to hear a disembodied voice say, “You aren’t going to sell this guy a plane ticket today.” No airline asks questions, and nobody asks for a court order or government document. Imagine the power, that the American media dare not mention anything about it. Everyone just jumps to do what they are told. What does the government have on the airline people, the media, the politicians, that everyone will be so blindly obedient, and never even act as if the beast stalking them could possibly exist?
* * *
This isn't necessarily shocking, but it should get people to understand that the government does in fact know much more than they let on. After all, this NSA data center in Utah wasn't built for nothing
'Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works,' he writes
'It's far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification'
'The Confessions of Congressman X' will be released May 24 by a small Minnesota-based 'vanity press' publisher
No the best option is really simple. Have a mandatory paternity test at each birth, which verifies if the male partner involved is really the father. If a woman has a child and KNOWINGLY claims that anyone other than the biological father is the biological father -- then this is a clear case of fraud. I'm not sure how it could be seen any other way.
Right -- but if users love it -- especially when they love it versus your next two versions -- why not support it for the next 20 years? Its not like the kernel of Windows 7 and Windows 10 are radically different. Fundamentally the biggist issue with every Windows upgrade after 98 (where we went to Win2k, and then WinXp, and then
Support Windows 7 until it has 5% Windows market share, and (as a company Microsoft should) then challenge yourself to make a new Windows release that finally makes people WANT to upgrade....
Programmers used to batch environments may find it hard to live without giant listings; we would find it hard to use them. -- D.M. Ritchie