ciarannolan

He said "black" instead of "African American" during a radio interview in 1983.

> He added: "I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? As you see, it gets in the lungs, it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that." [1]

There's video of this. He is 100% serious.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-suggests...

> Okay, and that's fine, but why her?

> [...] currently running as vice president in the upcoming election?

You're almost all the way there to answering your own question.

Oh man, I was way off. Thanks for this.

I thought just the individual mandate was struck down by the SCOTUS. What other pieces make up most of the new taxes and mandates that were repealed or ignored?

> a IRS Tax Software would look more than the universally hated Unemployment Systems, or the government healthcare markets

Consider that your opinion on what is "universally hated" is mostly shaped by the sources of information that you consume. Yours happens to be wrong. Overall the country views ObamaCare ~50% favorably, with some specific parts close to 90% approval.

> Following Republican efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the summer of 2017, KFF Health Tracking Polls have found a slight uptick in overall favorability towards the 2010 health care law. The most recent KFF Tracking Poll shows over half of the public (52%) hold favorable opinions of the ACA while about four in ten (41%) hold a negative opinion of the law. [1]

> Some 55% of Americans support the ACA, a record high since the law went into effect a decade ago, according to a recent report by the Kaiser Family Foundation, while 37% of the 130,000 respondents in the nationally representative poll hold unfavorable views. [2]

> But the election of Donald Trump and efforts by Republicans to repeal the ACA have boosted the law’s popularity. Since November 2016, on average, 49.4% of the public has had a positive view of the law, compared with 41.6% who view it unfavorably. [3]

[1] https://www.kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/6-charts-abou...

[2] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-affordable-care-act-is...

[3] https://www.ajmc.com/view/how-has-public-opinion-on-the-aca-...

That's what I was referring to. I added it to my comment to make it less snarky.

Did you read the AWS blog post? [1]

You are missing a massive part of the story. They are accusing the president of interfering in a public procurement process because of his personal dislike of Bezos/Amazon.

[1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/publicsector/jedi-why-we-will-c...

That is probably the weakest and least-relevant argument in the entire post.

Wondering if anyone in these comments actually read the post.

They are making a legitimate point about an unfair public procurement process that the president interfered in for personal reasons.

> There is a recurring pattern to the way President Trump behaves when he’s called out for doing something egregious: first he denies doing it, then he looks for ways to push it off to the side, to distract attention from it and delay efforts to investigate it (so people get bored and forget about it). And then he ends up doubling down on the egregious act anyway. On JEDI, President Trump reportedly ordered former Secretary Mattis to “screw’” Amazon, blatantly interfered in an active procurement, directed his subordinate to conduct an unorthodox “review” prior to a contract award announcement and then stonewalled an investigation into his own political interference. “Corrective action” was used as a way to halt our litigation, delay further investigations and incorrectly give the appearance that only one issue needed to be fixed while giving the impression that the DoD was actually going to fix something. While corrective action can be used to efficiently resolve protests, in reality, this corrective action changed nothing, wasted five months that could have been spent getting to the bottom of these serious concerns, and was designed solely to distract from our broader concerns and reaffirm a decision that was corrupted by the President’s self-interest

> Good grief I have no idea why these debates always descend into alarmism and philosophizing. Virtually every democratic country on this planet has national id cards. Switzerland, a bastion of democracy does, Israel does, South Korea does, Germany, does, if you emigrate from the UK to Switzerland, does anyone feel they've now entered a fundamentally new relationship with the state because of an ID card?

What is your argument here? A lot of countries do it, therefore it's okay?

> If you buy booze online in Germany on Amazon you can type in your ID and your age is verified within a minute, and the standard actually demands that those requests are ephemeral. Can anyone tell me why that's worse than some patchwork of private verification industries who leak your data every two months or sell them to god knows who?

Can you tell me why this is preferable to having someone look at an ID and verify it with their eyeballs?

> Does anyone seriously think not having an ID card stops the government from unifying data?

Absolutely.

There's a "but America" comment in all of these threads, usually more than one. It's boring and played out. I just downvote and move on.

Yes:

> Overall, the potency of illicit cannabis plant material has consistently risen over time since 1995 from approximately 4% in 1995 to approximately 12% in 2014.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4987131/

> Let's put aside politics and hold the intelligence agencies accountable.

Lol.

They retracted the paper because of political pressure, not because of any factual errors (this is pretty clear in both the timing of the retraction and the retraction statement).

> While our data and statistical approach were appropriate for investigating whether officer characteristics are related to the race of civilians fatally shot by police, they are inadequate to address racial disparities in the probability of being shot.

That's not what my comment addressed. It addressed the probability of non-white officers shooting to kill being higher than that of white officers. I think that conclusion is still supported by the paper (as in the last line of your quote).

Unfortunately non-white police are more likely to use deadly force [1], so you'd get the same social justice outrage. Good idea in principle though.

[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/116/32/15877.full.pdf

> [...] after the shit that came out on Twitter about how things are done in their "move fast, break things, kill people" organization.

Like what?

What changes are being made in iOS 14 that are so impactful to FB's business?

They absolutely will get away with this. Zero doubt in my mind.

They'll take a plea, say "aww gee sorry", and ride off into the sunset with billions. It's the American way.

> It's still what science used to be in the golden age in the West.

Care to elaborate?

Here's a better search of this stuff:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

It's not unique in this regard, therefore it doesn't matter? Is that your argument?

Also, comparing the relative power of newspaper men to Google doesn't make much sense.

From the criminal complaint:

> The hackers’ ransom was paid in December 2016 via bitcoin, even though the hackers by that time had refused to sign the NDAs in their true names and had not yet been identified by Uber. Uber’s staff continued to work on identifying the hackers and were able to eventually identify them in January 2017, at which point SULLIVAN dispatched security staff to interview both hackers and obtain signed NDAs from them in their true names.

How did they identify them, and is the DOJ going after the hackers too?

edit: finished reading the PDF:

>H. The Hackers Pleaded Guilty to Federal Crimes. >>50. On August 2, 2018, a Grand Jury in the Northern District of California returned an indictment charging Brandon Charles GLOVER and Vasile MEREACRE with crimes related to extortion involving computers under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(7)(B) and 1030(c)(3)(A). The indictment alleged that GLOVER and MEREACRE, between December 2016 and January 2017, conspired to extort a online employment-oriented service (“COMPANY ONE”) by obtaining over 90,000 confidential user accounts and using those accounts as a means to obtain money.

Your central error is in assuming that people work because they want to ("freely"), rather than because they have to.

If you can't understand why people have to work, I don't think I can help explain that.

GP isn't comparing anything. They're pointing out how laughable a maxim like "People freely working is not exploitation." is.

The "liberal states bad" trope has popped up on conservative media in the last year or so, so you'll see a lot more of it on places like HN.

Again, your original claim:

> Anyone on WiFi AC or up are backdoored right now by NSA. All of them are compromised, no doubt in my mind. All the LTE. All the x86 hardware on the market. All of it.

Still _zero_ evidence of any of this. Why not post some?

You also ignore questions like..

> If SECONDDATE has been around since 2005, and they are bulk installing it on millions of routers in the US, where are the people coming out saying "I found some NSA shit on my router"? Is there a _single_ example to support this?

> Just this week a 20GB dump of private Intel source was dumped with backdoors included. > That's the sort of thing that's going to happen again with the newly published Intel backdoors. >> This is not even remotely true. You have to read more than just the headlines.

> If SECONDDATE has been around since 2005, and they are bulk installing it on millions of routers in the US, where are the people coming out saying "I found some NSA shit on my router"? Is there a _single_ example to support this?

The wiki on this topic cites 551 sources. I guess they're all fake too?

Interesting article, but I think you're way over drawing your conclusions.

> how much would you bet that NSA is NOT bulk hacking WiFi routers of ENTIRE US CITIES FROM THE AIR?

I would bet very good money that they are not doing this. If SECONDDATE has been around since 2005, and they are bulk installing it on millions of routers in the US, where are the people coming out saying "I found some NSA shit on my router"? Is there a _single_ example to support this?

> Just this week a 20GB dump of private Intel source was dumped with backdoors included.

> That's the sort of thing that's going to happen again with the newly published Intel backdoors.

This is not even remotely true. You have to read more than just the headlines.

> Anyone on WiFi AC or up are backdoored right now by NSA. All of them are compromised, no doubt in my mind. All the LTE. All the x86 hardware on the market. All of it.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Please provide some.