pdx

That's as it should be. Nobody should expect every person in the country to individually solve the problem of how best to allocate that resource. The donation bin is the correct solution, so that the resource can be graded, sorted, sold locally, or compressed into bales and sold internationally.

Like all technology, it can be used for good or evil. Same as it ever was.

Instead of going dark, you could have also said "Sounds like the killer app for circumventing national firewalls in authoritarian countries". or "Sounds like the killer app for securing confidential data from hackers". or "Sounds like the killer app for untraceably moving value between people at scale".

There is. It's SAFE Network. https://safenetwork.org/

SAFE will certainly store files, and it will do so in such a way that nobody will know who is reading them or who published them, striving to be completely censorship resistant. Think TOR hidden services that your grandma can use.

The network strives to be completely autonomous. Sort of like the bitcoin network is, with no human able to distrupt, roll-back, or alter the data on the network. But rather than just storing a blockchain autonomously, it stores files and data.

One of the pieces of data it will store will be the SAFEcoin tokens, which will be able to have their owners changed by the network when they are sent from one user to another. Because the consensus group that signs these ownership transfers is relatively small, you end up with a system that scales. The larger the network, the more transfers per second it can do, since it's effectively parallel processing. Only a very small subset of nodes are involved in a transfer from Lisa to Sally, and a completely different set of nodes would handle a transfer from Tom to Fred, and so on. No bottlenecks in the secure transfer of coins or data.

SAFEcoin tokens are pretty much plain vanilla data objects, which means you can do the same thing with any other data, such as create other secure tokens for other applications.

> the dossier wasn't the beginning of the investigation, as > we've seen in multiple articles that came out over the > last few weeks.

Yes, a pile of articles, stating without proof, the same thing, all coming out at the same time .. almost as if they were coordinated. When specific facts of said articles are proven to be incorrect, small retractions that never make the news cycle are issued.

  > the only reason his "associates" were caught up in 
  > surveillance reports is because they called criminals 
  > who were already under surveillance. It's like if the 
  > FBI is wire-tapping Al Capone, and you called Al Capone. 
  > Sure, you'd get listened to, but they aren't tapping YOU.

It was the unmasking that was illegal and blatantly politically motivated. NSA has wide discretion to conduct surveillance on people outside of the US, but there are supposed to be legal barriers to snooping on US citizens. If the NSA picks up communications from a US citizen in the course of monitoring a foreign national, it is practice to "mask" the identity of the US person. Additionally, the identification of a US citizen mentioned in discussions between two foreign nationals is supposed to be masked.

That was classic, and nobody would have ever known about it if the impossible hadn't occurred and he actually won. How many times did it happen before Obama did it and how many times in the future will it happen? Regardless of whether you're red or blue, this is not the path you should wish the country to follow.

My one example? Yes, I gave one example. You're a bit of an ass, aren't you? OK, here's 6 more from the top of Google.

https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2017/04/armed-citizen-p...

CCW citizens are very often the people who take down such shooters. Your comment seems to imply otherwise.

A recent example is the Texas church shooting that happened recently, where an armed citizen with a non-concealed firearm in that case, wounded and then chased down the shooter, unfortunately after he had already killed multiple people. Sadly, nobody in the church was armed, as even CCW holders who frequently go armed will not think to do so at church.

I don't like Common Core because it attempts to solve a problem that does not exist. The way we learned math was sufficient to enable us to build atomic bombs and go to the moon, all with slide rules for the most part. It has a proven history of working and working well.

The math shown in this article as well as much common core does not provide the user/student with understanding. Instead, they are taught incantations and rituals to get to an answer. This is a recipe for a society of math illiterates. Who is pushing this and why do they want such a society?

Common Core is not a better system than the one taught for a hundred years in this country. If you disagree, I would love to see the evidence. I'm sure before such a huge change was made to our educational system, there must be MOUNTAINS of such evidence that was presented. No? Not really?

I agree with you. There is nothing to see here.

You have GOT to be fucking kidding. Have you actually been asleep for the last 6 years?

Don't know. Why are we not talking about servers in closets and smashed blackberries and bleach-bit? Why, instead, are we talking about those mean old Russians!

Why are we not talking about the Democratic primary rigging? Seems like that's a subject that even liberals should like to talk about (at least half of them), but again, it's Russia Russia Russia.

Seems like there are some folks who would rather change the subject to Russia Russia Russia.

He said "No citizen of the US needs to be protected".

US Citizens are allowed to hear opinions of others when engaging in political discussion. That's why it's called a discussion. If you "protect" them, because the opinion they are hearing might be from a boilerroom overseas or more likely, a DNC or RNC funded organization here in the US, you are almost certainly going to swing the pendulum too far and end up doing far more destruction to the democratic process than those you started off "protecting" us from.

Look at Facebook's use of snopes.com as their "fact checkers". We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased.

People who say they are protecting you from something are usually victimizing you instead. Please don't protect me.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is notoriously biased [1] against any non-progressive ideology, which includes alt-right and libertarian ideals. If this is indeed their actual opinion, it is wrong. I suspect even they know it is not true. Alt-right traces is lineage back to Ron Paul and the tea-party.

[1] http://www.dailywire.com/news/8967/7-things-you-need-know-ab...

   > Correct, but for that argument to hold within the 
   > context of this case we would need the government to 
   > show that most people who visited this site did so with 
   > the intent to incite imminent lawless action. 

Of course that's not true. For the government to prosecute all of those visitors requires additional proof, to be sure. However, for the government to gather evidence on a subset of those visitors who have already been arrested and are being charged with politically inspired violence, is perfectly appropriate.

   > much as the moniker "alt-right" legitimizes white 
   > supremacists.

Actually, alt-right was coined as a term to differentiate people who adhere to the traditional republican/libertarian views about personal liberty and small government from the neo-conservatives such as Romney, McCain, Graham, and others who push so strongly for nation-building and big government.

The collection of people that are drawn to the ideal of small-government and liberty is larger than the subset you describe.

   > It's also extremely pertinent that the warrant is being 
   > executed against an organization exercising political 
   > speech. 

Why? If you hurt me (many innocent people were hurt), but you do it because you feel "political", it's OK?

Isn't the law supposed to be blind, or do political groups have a "get out of jail free" card?

    It just means you think that people from other countries 
    are less deserving of job opportunities than people from 
    your country.

Society is a hierarchy of loyalty. Unless you're a self-absorbed, autistic, single 20 something, you have loyalty to others in various degrees. You support your family above my family. You support your company above my company. You support your neighbors above my neighbors, and yes, you should support the citizens of your country above the citizens of my country.

It's very fashionable to virtue signal that you have no loyalty to your country and that we should all live under a one world government.

I do not share that wish. I love that we do not have a mono-culture of government in the world, but have 195 different decentralized experiments happening on how to best run the world. I would hate to have a single experiment running with nowhere to look to or flee to, if it all goes awry.

But I live in one of those 195 experiments, and my fellows that share that with me, my countrymen, I support above the other 194. That's called being human.

Really, how? Because somebody compromised the server? So what? If they did that, all bets are off.

You are concerned with a compromised server? If I control your server, I can harvest whatever a user types in, even on an HTTPS page.

Why do you speak of unencrypted HTTP? Who cares? Only AES-256 encrypted data is sent and it's decoded locally. You could publish it on the front page of the New York Times (if anybody reads that anymore) and be secure, because you are publishing encrypted content.

It's really unclear what your point is here.

    In April 2005, the Chicago Tribune cited a statistic that 
    35 percent of those who died in Iraq and Afghanistan were 
    from small, rural towns, in con­trast to 25 percent of the 
    population. This point runs counter to the picture, painted 
    by Rangel and others, of heavy enlistment reliance on poor, 
    black urban neighborhoods. Indeed, recruits are disproportionately
    rural, not urban, and as rural concen­tration rises, so 
    does military enlistment. [1]

[1] http://www.heritage.org/defense/report/who-bears-the-burden-...

That rumor started in November 2016, or a bit earlier, when Assange went dark for awhile, right after tweeting about a large police presence outside the embassy.

I don't think it's a very popular conspiracy theory that Obama would have killed him. Just a few people who remember SECSTATE Clinton talking about droning him, and that has given them fuel for this speculation.

> Obama's CIA Posed as Russian Hackers

They're referring to the UMBRAGE program.

    “With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types, 
    but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack 
    techniques were stolen from,” Wikileaks said in a statement.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/03/07/wikileaks-cia-...

Immigration of skilled labor is always valuable. Japan, the US, France, Germany, etc should always welcome it, and should have policies that allow people with verified and needed skills to immigrate.

However, drowning your citizens in a sea of immigrants is cultural suicide. If your culture is such that it has allowed your ancestors to build a country that immigrants want to flee their own countries to live in, then your culture is worth preserving, rather than allowing it to be replaced by the culture of those who would happily flood into it.

That means, you can't solve your demographic problems by opening the floodgates. Instead, you need to fix the economic problems that are making people hesitant to have children in the first place.

   > We know it because children who didn't get the vaccine     
   > show Autism symptoms around the same time.

That, my friend, is you making shit up. I know that you made it up, because such a study, comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated children has never been done, despite a huge number of people asking for it.

    > the link is just not there.

Watch the 'Vaxxed' documentary [1] about a CDC whistleblower who tells exactly WHY "the link is just not there".

[1] http://1337x.to/torrent/1789192/Vaxxed-From-Cover-Up-To-Cata...

Hearsay evidence from Giuliani, as told to us by The Washington Post.

Are you aware that Jeff Bezos controls the Washington Post, and is rapidly anti-Trump? It is clear to many that the Washington Post has a leaning in all of it's political journalism that borders on MSNBC levels of bias.

Got anything else?

Agreed. Obviously it needs to be expanded. As is often mentioned, Saudi Arabia should be included because of 9/11.

This woman was from Pakistan which suffers terrible internal terrorism problems. While the government of Pakistan is great, there is obviously a terrorism problem in that country. It seems like perhaps that would be grounds to make Pakistan another possible 'country of concern'.

He said that in his signing statement, or in some other speech referring to the executive order? Where's your link?