There is no evidence that there are any charges related to Russia. In theory it is long standing legal theory that publishing "stolen" docs is legal. Now I suspect in people's hatred for Assange they will overlook the fact that if this new legal theory is allowed to stand that the first amendment is effectively destroyed. The government will be able to label something secret and getting access to the secret is now a crime. Free to publish but not free to receive information. Catch 22.
Trump is famous for requesting things to "make the deal easier" and then proceeding to ask for even more. So quite possibly Ecuador is going to be finding out fairly soon about additional things they need to do to get those loans.
There are thousands of Einsteins or Thomas Edisons that were never born because someone had a headache that evening. Should countries be tripping over themselves to encourage more babies? Is there some reason that you think an asylum seeker is more likely to be a Fields Medal Winner then a regular citizen? What about the country these people come from do you think we should strip theses countries of their brain power? Do you support regime change wars if the powers that be give you a good story about wanting "freedom" for there people while taking action that will likely kill maybe a hundred thousand people?
Say a small city has about 50 new job opening per year at there current growth rate and already has about 100 people looking for work. Do you believe, because your intentions and character are good and you mean well that somehow a magic fairy is going to come down and create more jobs just because more people show up? Do believe in type of job theory where if the wealthy are allowed to keep wages low, because of competition, that we all will be better off in the long run because of some "trickle down theory of labor"?
Preventing those companies from buying out others and using their incredible size and resources to quashing competition I can support. Splitting into pieces can make sense as well. It looks like Warren's definition of "Fair Use" is more in the context of selling widgets and does not appear to be tied to free speech issues. I guess that Elizabeth Warren isn't supporting a definition of "fair use" of these platforms that matches the United States Supreme court definition of free speech.
Crossing the boarder without going through customs is illegal. As an example from a news report on one of the migrants "... the man traveled from Honduras and had MS-13 gang tattoos, as well as a felony conviction for weapons misconduct in Maricopa County...". However we should be careful not to condemn the entire group do to just few criminals being present. That being said reporters should be allowed to report on crimes or criminal behavior, that is an essential part of their job. Unless there is specific data pointing to a reporter being engaged in helping a criminal then this reporter profiling is something that is in poor taste. The stopping at the boarder for extra questioning may constitute harassment which might be getting closer to illegal behavior. I would ask you when you say "...I'm really super confused about this". Is that really the case or do you just very strongly disagree or strongly disagree with the writers "facts"? A great way to win someone to your views is to make sure they understand that the are being listened to even if you disagree with them. Pretending not to understand, as an argument style, may be really unhelpful.
A low earth orbit, like the current space station, has roughly half the sky blocked out by earth plus the magnetic field of earth to somewhat protect it. Getting to the lunar gateway's weird orbit, if you were already on the moon, could take several days versus less delta-v to just go to low earth orbit which can be done at any time.
By object he is probably talking about matter in a solid state which would exclude gas or plasma. Also given Oumuamua's rotation rate the pieces of matter that makes up the object probably has to have some bounds with each other or it would fly apart.
"Medicare for All, definitionally, offers single-payer access..." Yes that is what the definition of Medicare for all should be but we are already seeing presidential candidates trying to redefine "Medicare for All" to the point that it doesn't mean much at all. I hope you right on Jayapal but till we see the bill's text we won't know.
Want to bet the actual legislation is just minor tweaks to ObamaCare re-branded as "Medicare for all"? Why do I suspect the article is overly optimistic and that the author is just reading into vague and noncommittal comments made in meetings that they think will make it into the bill?
I think he does mean interest rates, which are not currently at the zero bound, as the fed has raised them several times lately. I think he probably should have written "trapped too close to the zero bound" which would actually make more sense. For instance the last round of interest rate increase look like they caused the markets to get very sick. That puts pressure on the Fed not to do any more raises. However if the Fed does not raise rates and if some nasty down-turn happened at this point then would the fed accomplish much by dropping rates to zero? Another idea here being that if you muck around all the time with interest rates to solve problems the effectiveness of the medicine may wear off, particularly if this medicine has delayed people from making needed structural reform. By structural reform I mean rebuilding the middle class not cutting social security or crap like that. Let me put forward a very radical idea. I suspect we need to actually restrict the amount of debt that people can accumulate as it make the system as a whole incredibly brittle. Think of consumer debt like a sort of "tragedy of the commons" situation. An individuals debt load should be their own business but if just about everyone is loading up on debt then the overall economy could explode which is everyone's business. In addition if a creditor can resell bad debt to other unsuspecting buyers then they have an incentive to give toxic loans and credit cards to people as long as they aren't holding the large amount of toxic debt on their own books for very long.
For many Pro-Brexit people they felt May's deal didn't really leave the EU. A very major sticking point is that provisions in the exit agreement, refereed to as the "backstop", that in theory and possibly in practice could legally trap the UK in a half completed transition deal forever with the UK always subject to EU rules. Overall the agreement May put forward is basically an agreement to start the next phase of negotiations to start discussions on a transition agreement which would maybe hopefully be finished by the year 2020 or 2021 or a day after never. Also paying 39 billion pounds and not knowing what the next phase of negotiations would deliver.
For Remainers(Anti-Brexit) the agreement was to start the process to leave the EU so of course those people didn't like the agreement either.
Read the Dilbert Principle. If you are in too much of a hurry here is the Wikipedia summary of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle
The situation seems completely unfair but you need to move on, life has some sucky points sometimes and a magic fairy isn't going to come down and fix things and set them right. I suspect talking with the management will only make things much much worse. You look much better to an hiring company if you currently have a job. Put your resume out and when a good offer comes in jump. Do not let the fact that you did great work and an idiot got promoted suck the life out of you.
Also Cost-Based can do some really dumb things if a table's contents change by quite a bit before stats are run again. I like being able to give hints so that you can switch between Cost or hierarchy based queries.
Some companies are better then others. I am confused about why you would ask a question that is intellectually equivalent of "... have you stopped beating your wife.." /S
Speaking of delusions, the dollar amounts and timing of the spending indicate this was more likely a click-bait farm and/or social experiment and not an operation focused on influencing the outcome of the 2016 election. You could argue they were practicing up and getting data to do operations for future elections.
Advertising would be considered influencing elections, like Russia is claimed to have done. Trying to split the American people that openly would almost certainly backfire and push undecided voters to Trump. China is already, in some ways, doing some targeting specific voters like the soy bean tariffs. What are you proposing to get the middle class growing again?
I suspect the author may want to sit down with someone and do a ton of practice interviews so they can be told here is 5 or 10 pieces of information that you should not volunteer to a recruiter. Here is another 5 or 10 ways to honestly answer/avoid some questions. That being said it seems like at some point the author may need to level about not having the best people skills but I am not sure how to say that without coming off as a big red flag.
It seems like a very good sign that the author isn't blaming everyone else for their problems.
Have you tried the latest fad? Serverless functions, so you take maybe a 128 to 512 MB of memory virtual machine and have it run a function that is maybe a few hundred lines of code? I double dare you to find something less efficient. Even better is the speed between machines isn't going to get that much faster as some jerk has declared the speed of light to be a constant so say hello to some fun latency issues. To top it off after you invest massive amounts in serverless functions, with all there lockin, you have no control over what Amazon, Microsoft or xxx are going to be charging you in 5 or 10 years. Particularly if the fad falls out of favor and these companies decide to wind the operations down.
Thanks for the excellent link. Quite a good read. From the article: [In order to prevent flamewars on Hacker News, articles with "too many" comments will get heavily penalized as "controversial"....] Ok, that isn't exactly even a slightly sophisticated method that could be extended to decide some comments are "high quality". In theory if you wanted to implement article ranking you need a method that ranks articles based on comment quality. Without a automated method you are really just using humans to do the ranking.
Leaving off the problem of negative/angry/.... comments, is the current state of sentiment analysis or AI sophisticated enough to determine that a set of comments are higher quality?
What computer algorithm can be used to code up "...front page position should be determined by quality of conversation not voting"? Are we talking about sentiment analysis?
Material strength is really important. Atmospheric pressure is about 14 pounds per inch at sea level. You can probably drop that to 10 pounds per inch or maybe less. For a square foot of wall, at 10, you would be at 12 * 12 * 10 or 1440 pounds of pressure. So for the cylinder style of design a one foot high band say 30 feet in diameter would have over 40,000 pounds pushing on it. That design uses basalt fiber, which has been around for quite some time and is quite strong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basalt_fiber
Sort of. It looks like if some critical code is interrupted, by a CPU move, then the process would get some code restarted. The idea being since, in some cases, CPU moves can be rare you aren't paying for the expense of locks to guard against this and just let the OS tell the process, hey I moved you will you were doing something critical, let me restart that for you. This isn't a full solution for all process locks but for a number of locking scenarios restarting the code is all that is needed.