well maintained roads
What the hell have you been smoking?
well maintained roads
What the hell have you been smoking?
Yeah, it couldn't be all those coal burning plants they are building and bringing online faster than the rest of the world can reduce pollution. Definitely the outdoor bbqs.
Your database is exposed to the internet and doesn't have a password? How is it you are still employed?
It would have been big news if we learned they weren't leaking credentials and huge number of posts discussing how that was possible.
What about the response makes you think that? The only relevant piece of information I actually can see in the response is the inference that Apple is asking them to re-run the tests (presumably with Apple engineers in attendance). The implication is that Apple is trying to reproduce what Consumer Reports saw, and is unable to, so is asking them to do it again. This sounds exactly like what everyone involved should want to happen: make sure that the tests are reproducible, and thus representative of what users would see. So to me the Consumer Reports response seems unjustified, and very defensive.
You are assuming that everyone who codes is competent to code review all types of code. Some people are great programmers but have little or no experience with encryption. They are going to have to trust that the people who specialize in encryption actually know what the hell they are doing.
Stop breaking the laws you are supposed to uphold, you fucks.
And Trump would record every sneeze and fart of all Muslims and illegal immigrants if he could.
The worse tyrants may be the stealth tyrants.
Given our government is already attempting to do that to everyone in this country, that would be marked improvement on privacy.
Actually, in the case of Germany the U.S. is older as a country by something like a hundred years. The unification of something like what we now call Germany did not begin until the German Empire began in 1871. The Confederation of States was formed in 1781, and the Constitution (so U.S.) was seven years later in 1788. So depending on when you were talking about, either 100 years, or 93 years. Prior to that you don't really have anything that could be called Germany, rather you have separate German-speking states. It does not look like you understand history enough to be using it to make broad sweeping statements like you are doing.
Another major problem in your argument is that the U.S. is much bigger, population wise, that most countries it is going to be compared to. So when you say things like "richest", that is true for aggregate wealth. But it is not true for per-capita income (U.S. is #11).
And the statement "Capitalism and free markets have lifted more people out of poverty and lifted the standards of living of more people than any other system yet tried, combined" ignores that China has lifted billions of people out of poverty. You can make lots of truthful bad statements about China, and I certainly would not want to live there. But it does prove that statement wrong.
But even more to the point: Germany has a much more social-based system than ours. Clearly in areas of heath-care, education, workers rights, and welfare systems. But they are doing better than the U.S. in terms of growth, average wage, and unemployment. How does your argument survive that?
I advise you to read more about Ben Carson before you defend him as a good person to be a Cabinet Secretary. He does not seem to be very able to reason out issues. Having seen a number of his interviews and lines of logic I really do wonder how he made it though medical school, let alone planned out complicated procedures (which he does seem to have done). Maybe I should believe him that he passed because God gave him the answers in a dream:
Skip the obvious bias in the source, just watch the video of him saying this himself. Or go look up his (still maintained) views on the Pyramids. This is not a rational thinker.
Clinton did not sign off, the State Department did, as did 8 other Federal departments. The person at the State Department who was in charge of it has expressly said that Clinton was never involved in that discussion, and never expressed any opinions on it, as the process was not important or controversial enough to warrant it. And while it did wind up with a Russian company owning a good chunk of the Uranium mines in North America (primarily in Canada), there are export restrictions that prevent any of the product mined there from going to Russia (among most every place).
And she and her close friends did not benefit financially, the accusation is that it was the Clinton Foundation (a charitable organization) that got the money. So far there have been some vague accusations that "the Clintons used the Foundation as their personal piggy bank", but no case of that ever happening has come to light. The Foundation is regularly audited, and that would have shown up by now. The Foundation is generally accepted as being a very good user of its money in doing good around the world.
So explain to me how something she was not involved in, and did not benefit financially from personally was somehow a strike against her.
They would form a drum circle and sing kumbaya in an attempt to get the water flowing. Nobody wants that. Hell, I'm in California and that would push me over the edge.
I believe the count was closer to 600,000. Other than that, your observation is correct.
Sanders? You mean that guy who thought Hugo Chavez was a great leader and Venezuela was an economic model the US should follow? That Sanders?
I'll be these same people pointed and laughed when Texans said the same thing.
"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead." -- Lucy Van Pelt