saladeen

You're avoiding my point. But that's ok.

We are discussing crime. If crime wasn't commited by firearms, there would be no need to have legal framework regulating firearms. However, once firearms are heavily regulated, the violence commited through use of firearms doesn't magically go away. Violent criminals just switch to other methods.

You can see similar things happening in UK recently, where they had a heavy campaign on banning knifes. This has resulted in increased use of acid attacks in gang/criminal violence.

GP asked about relation of gun laws vs death numbers. You are pretending to answer that, but you weasel in the change from 'general violence' to 'gun violence'. Of course if guns are more easily available, there will be more gun violence, but that's not what GP asked.

I meant that they are 'introducing' security fails so that once there'll be indications they're giving data to Uncle Sam they can claim they were hax'd.

But I'm not really serious with this 'conspiracy theory', it's just some food for thought/shitpostin'.

How old are you?

Between this and the Mac root login, looks like Apple has got 'an offer they can't refuse' from Uncle Sam, and are establishing plausible deniability by intentionally introducing security failures.

Thank you.

Could you please elaborate on your theory that it would benefit from NN repeal? I disagree but wish to understand your stance better.

These new-style tech companies have become very good at keeping the underdog/one-with-the-masses image while slowly turning into market-cornering behemoths the likes of Bell. Netflix is just following the Google's playbook IMO.

Also: this duality was why I was suspicious of the end result of the Net Neutrality (as opposed to net neutrality) in discussions couple days ago and I got completely shredded. People should be more critical of everything and not fall for feel-good phrases by faceless corps.

Thank you for clarifying that, the general issues quickly get interwoven with intra-US issues and I lose track.

I am not really here to preach. I just wanted to point out something, so that people who feel like me can make their own judgement with this extra data. It is not related to US nor the current anti/pro Trump craze, just a long-time wariness and dislike of the man based on what my father has told me (we emigrated from an asian country to Europe when I was young because of negative effects of Soros's games, and that's as much as I'm willing to share online about my reasons).

It is not, but I'd like to note one thing: while here Netflix is the 'bad guy', in the Net Neutrality issue they are positing themselves as the 'good guy'.

Yes, and that is all I wanted to point out. That Soros is investing heavily in affecting the public and official opinion on some topics, such as net neutrality.

And for this I get called a 'conspiracy theorist'.

Soros is not a 'boogie man', he is a man that sabotages countries for his own personal gain. I do not trust him, and do not trust his 'philantropic' reasons. The end game with him is always the same, getting more money for himself in the end. He uses legit humanitarian/human rights issues simply as tool towards that end goal, and this disgusts me.

As for your attempt at ridicule by association, I am not American so I'm not able to follow; I get that 'red cap circle' would be Trump supporters, but can you clarify the 'paid busloads of people to protest' part?

Thank you for attempting to ridicule me with the ole 'conspiracy theory'.

Go to the site ( battleforthenet.com ), scroll all the way down, it says 'built by Fight for the Future', and even links to it: https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

On that site, go to 'Supporters' page: https://www.fightforthefuture.org/supporters/

Open Society Foundations is listed there. They are not even hiding the connection.

George Soros directly providing funds for the #1 pro-NN site being peddled around social media sites, and simultaneously pushed into #1 spot on hundreds of subreddits 2 days ago = 'Soros conspiracy theory'. I somehow doubt you apply the same standards to the 'Russian hackers' 'conspiracy theory'. :)

To the rest of the readers, I am not arguing whether 'Russian hackers' is conspiracy theory or not, I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of how when public's perception and opinion is manipulated by Soros pouring in millions of $, it's completely ignored and we're all expected to pretend it's 100% grassroots, but if Trump&co were doing the same level of manipulation, we would never stop hearing about how it's completely manufactured. I am just tired of being manipulated, regardless of who it's coming from.

Most large bandwidth consumers do pay a 'kind of tax' to ISPs, by installing their own hardware at ISP's locations to lower the bandwidth use.

Here's an article about it too: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/soros-ford-foundation-shov...

In that case, here's the hash of the torrent: 376C45CE22B1DDE014F8AF2809BF4ECC798B4C19

In my online experience, 90% of people who straight up attack keto like this are vegans who want to keep propping up the dogma that 'animal products = bad for you'. They often also assume that keto = eating only meat.

Citation or reference to what?

Go to the site, scroll all the way down, it says 'built by Fight for the Future', and even links to it: https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

On that site, go to 'Supporters' page: https://www.fightforthefuture.org/supporters/

Open Society Foundations is listed there.

There's a project that uses QEMU to emulate the original xbox, xqemu: http://xqemu.com/

I wonder if this will help their project too.

The hard stance you speak of was always simple containment and ignoring, and then when their leader would start shaking sabres and making threats, he would get appeased with free food.

That was exactly my point. The problem was ignored, and at times when it couldn't be ignored, NK would bluff, and the rest of the world would appease them.

Regardless of how bad Trump is considered to be, and how true that will turn out to be, in my opinion this is the first time that someone is actually doing something that has a chance at ending this horrible situation that we've been just sweeping under the rug for the past few decades. He put a squeeze on their only ally, China, put in meaningful sanctions that are hitting where it hurts, the elite, and is calling out their leader on his bluffing tactics that worked well (for the leader and the elite) so far.

Hundreds of thousands of people, slowly languishing in famine and unspeakable suffering, all ignored because it's an 'inconvenient problem'.

It wasn't a real accusation and I definitely don't use it routinely, was just pointing out ridiculousness of politically charging a conversation about a very useful scientific tool which I am a great fan of. One can always find some angle to accuse someone of being someone else's agent.

Pushing of apps onto mobile users viewing sites inside browser has really gone evil. Reddit makes you click 'No, I don't want to install reddit app' or similar at least 3 times before letting you view the content.

Unrelated to that, as a HAM I've long (since 2000 or so) been preaching that if you want to know how internet will be changed by commercial and government interest, look into early radio history - it has many parallels with development of internet: an open, free to publish network primarily ran by enthusiasts that got progressively locked down until you had to be a major player to publish content on it, turned into ad-driven economy etc.

While everyone is focusing on the bottlenecks and such that this might have caused in homo sapiens, the main thing for me is the relation between Toba catastrophe and the main human migration out of Africa, which came 60kya. My theory is that Toba killed off or severely weakened populations of other human species (Neanderthals primarily) that were claiming the areas in Middle East and thus blocking our expansion.

So instead of (or along with) having being a major threat for us, I think it's what enabled us to become the global species we are today.

That is easily disproved: Khoisan people are the earliest offshoot off the sapiens evolutionary tree - they split from the rest of us cca 175 thousand years ago, and they are behaviouraly modern in all possible ways - they have large social groups, language, culture etc, which indicates those characteristics were already evolved by 175kya.

Let me let you in on a big mac daddy secret sauce:

Map both ctrl and esc to caps lock key: when it's pressed and released on its own, it sends an Esc; when it's used as a modifier key (pressed together with another key), it sends a Ctrl.

http://www.economyofeffort.com/2014/08/11/beyond-ctrl-remap-...

I propose Nition be known as Explanator2000 from now on.

The site returns direct pdf links only for paywalled journals. If you put in a DOI for an article that's hosted on a free-access journal, the site redirects you to the article's page on the journal, so you can download the pdf directly from them. This behavior might be the cause?

You probably just paste DOI codes there like most of us. Originally, sci-hub supported searching for codewords/topics (by using Google Scholar), but then their IPs got banned from Google Scholar and the workaround is to install this extension. It modifies Google Scholar pages so that all links to paywalled articles are replaced with links to sci-hub pdfs of same articles. Google would never approve this extension, so you need to install it in dev-mode.

But again, for most people's usage, it's completely unnecessary. Paste DOI -> get pdf works without any 'extensions' necessary.

I'd like to chime in:

I believe one of their goals was to lower testosterone in general population, to make for a meeker and more easily controlled population. This probably wasn't a 'fully evil' goal, since the horrors of WW2 were recent, and some of them thought that they could prevent that from happening again by engineering a less aggressive population.

From the onset of 20th century at least, it was known that testosterone is responsible for 'manly' characteristics (aggressiveness etc); in 1935 it was synthesized from cholesterol by Lavoslav Ruzicka. So, by the end of WW2 it was already well known that a) testosterone is what makes people aggressive and b) body needs cholesterol to synthezise testosterone. With this information in hand, it's easy to conclude that to get a less aggressive population, one should make them eat less saturated fat/cholesterol.

Enter Ancel Keys, a military-related dietologist (he created the ww2 K-rations, for example). Before mid 1950s, he was making rational scientific research into good/bad foods, and even published some material about the negative health effects of 'grain' ie carbs. But by the mid 1950s he made a full 180 and started attacking saturated fats and cholesterol as the cause of (especially heart-related) health problems. He started using bad science (selectively choosing countries for study to confirm his claim that it's high fat and not high carb diet that causes health issues), and using his pull to silence everyone claiming otherwise.

In 1960s/1970s he was joined by the Big Agro/Food who poured a lot of money into continued shifting of the blame from carbs onto fat, including silencing and ostracizing scientists and studies who dared to claim otherwise; this is the 'conspiracy' that we are familiar with, but I believe it started even earlier, with Ancel Keys, military, and 'powers that be'.