search results matching tag: Lock down

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (14)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (0)     Comments (101)   

Rep. John Lewis Takes Action on Guns

WeedandWeirdness says...

We are all fools @bobknight33 if we continue, as a nation, to just tear each other down, instead of build each other up.

When children in pre-school are being taught how to stand on toilets and be quiet so the shooter can't hear them in lock down drills, I realize the innocence of youth is lost to one child or another every time these horrific acts are carried out.

I grew up being afraid of dying due to Russia and Nuclear War, but children today are growing up afraid of being shot in school, in college, in a place of worship, in a movie theater, a mall, a night club. If there is something that can be done, shouldn't we starting clawing our way in that direction, instead of carrying on like it's just business as usual?

bobknight33 said:

Absolute stupid action of political officials. Fools all of them.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

radx says...

Obama, Merkel, Hollande, Renzi and Cameron are going to be in town on Monday. I suppose parts of the city will be locked down tighter than a duck's ass...

As if that wasn't enough, public transit workers are on strike next week, so it'll be quite a mess. On the upside, the resulting traffic jam ought to make it safer for cyclists like myself...

O'Reilly Can’t Believe Polls: Bernie Crushes Republicans

MilkmanDan says...

I think that the GOP is in full-on panic mode, and doesn't care about legitimacy / shot at winning for this election.

They (the party elites) will do absolutely everything they can to prevent Trump from getting enough delegates to lock up the nomination. Hence Colorado and Wyoming. Those actions make it seem like they prefer Cruz, but actually they dislike him close to as much as they hate Trump.

Although it is still mathematically possible for Cruz (559 delegates) to get enough delegates to lock up the nomination (1237 needed), realistically it is out of reach (826 still available). Trump (756 delegates), on the other hand, could well manage it. So, the GOP strategy is to avoid that at all costs by encouraging people to vote for Cruz or Kasich in primaries, or even better to encourage more state GOP offices to hold a smoke-filled room convention that grants all the delegates to #NeverTrump instead of even bothering to let people vote.

If they manage that, the contested national convention will get ugly. They (GOP elites) would turn on Cruz instantly -- cast aside. In any other election cycle they would have turned on him already, but with juggernaut Trump, they have to use him to get to the contested convention.

So the question becomes who if not Trump or Cruz? Who will the GOP try to push in? I think that right now, they aren't as worried about answering that question as they are about trying to get there. That being said, they have some options:

Mitt Romney was their first thought. He took some tentative steps towards playing along with the GOP plans, failed to generate any excitement, and has since faded back into relative obscurity. But he remains an option.

Next up was Paul Ryan. A lot of the GOP see him as the future of the party; the "great white hope". There was a flurry of activity making it seem like he was going to take up the flag, but has since denied that he would be interested in or even accept getting the nod. However, he was cagey and close to as vocal against getting the nod to be speaker of the house, and then accepted that. You never know.

Kasich would be another option. He's relatively benign, and wouldn't offend many more of the republican base than the GOP is already ready and willing to offend in order to prevent Trump (and to a lesser extent Cruz).


Of those, I tend to think that Romney is the most likely choice for the GOP in the end. I think it would be extremely stupid to foist "future of the party" Ryan into this election, which would certainly taint his political future. Kasich makes a lot of sense, but on the other hand, "in for a penny, in for a pound" -- as long as the GOP is willing to go to these great lengths to keep Trump out they might as well just own the illegitimacy of it, shoot the moon, and hand pick someone that a) they have complete control over, and b) has nothing to lose in terms of political future. Voila, Mitt Romney.


I also don't think that the GOP will just throw in the towel if Trump locks down the number of delegates needed for the nomination. I'm sure they already have some last-ditch, scorched earth preliminary plans in place for that contingency.

However, I think that they essentially already have thrown in the towel with regards to the election in general. At least to a sufficient degree that they don't give a rats ass about the chances for whoever is the republican nominee winning. That's a *distant* priority behind NOT TRUMP, among other things. Which is pretty stupid, because the likely nomination of Hillary on the democrat side gives them what should be a *golden* opportunity to steal the election. IF they could come up with a vaguely tolerable candidate ... which they won't.

Fairbs said:

So who do you think will come out on the Republican side? To me, it seems like it would have to be one of the three for any legitimacy and shot at actually winning. And if Kasich, then the big two have a lot to bitch about. Clusterfuck indeed.

Deadpool - Redband Trailer

Russell Brand debunks David Cameron's War Mongering

billpayer says...

Thanks for the link... seen it before, but good nevertheless.
In the media lock down we have right now it takes someone like R.B. to make the mental leaps and join the dots.
If there is better sociopolitical commentary out there about current events I am all ears (links please).

If Brand was more 'together' he'd be towing the corporate news line and sucking that teat or joining the rest of the celebrity morons in drowning us in bullshit.
btw. this guy was just (days ago) character assassinated on Fox news, so he's making waves and also under fire.
Massive props for what he's doing and for keeping it 'real' ie. fuck bland talking heads and regurgitated government/corporate propaganda.

BIll Maher Unleashes Against Militarized Police

chingalera says...

What's coming inevitably will be as it's always been in the 'century-of-self ': The machine keeps peeps distracted by disinformation, issues to rally-behind, toys to play with and continual mind-fucking through Bernay's-style cradle-to-grave programming then....Suddenly, like three skyscrapers dropping into their footprints on International Shit-Box Tonight with Sham Cocksworth, yet another, 'create-the-crisis-provide-the-solution' scenario will further strengthen the resolve of the assholes who want ultimately to have the world to themselves and the bulk of humanity as dutiful robot-putty-slaves.

Technology, technique, fear, and an empty promise of safety and security (please, think of the children again, break to commercial) will shape the next worldwide crisis and urgency of action...and again, watch rights and individual responsibility deteriorate into a controlled chaos.

Fake alien invasion? Orchestrated and choreographed conflicts? Some scary flesh-eating disease? Most-likely the next planetary theatrical concoction will be some superfecta once again where fascism continues to reign supreme and the entire globe continues along the path of planetary lock-down.

Oh, and pusillanimous shit-heals with Cheeto-stained fingertips will between anime-clips and chicken-choking to porn, (who think they know how police fraternities work), will continue to pop-spit from the illusory comfort of their soiled computer chairs....

'Right...'Left' ?? Again, for the ChaosEngines of the world...a concocted and programmed, fucking illusion.

Why didn't OWS transform into a political movement?

billpayer says...

IMHO It would have become everything it needed to be...
Quite obviously it was destroyed because the Feds had access to everyone's phones and email. They incarcerated the leaders whenever they arose. They intercepted and locked down any meetings, they infiltrated important groups. The gov, the nsa and Bloomberg actively destroyed the movement with surveillance that no one could have foreseen or circumvented.

Speed Test Comparison Between All iPhones Ever Made

RedSky says...

Apple's strategy appears to be progressive in releasing new products and conservative in making iterations.

It's particularly obvious on the iPhone. (1) On screen size they've barely budged while competitors have offered options varying widely from 3-7 inches. While some would argue phones larger than 5 inches are ungainly, it's very much a personal preference and where there's clearly demand say for Samsung's Note series, the option should be available. (2) The UI may have also been revamped but compared to the customisability of Android, it's still immensely basic and locked down, (3) File access continues to be restricted through iTunes which keeps transferring files, and sharing them between apps a massive pain. Apple's bandaid solution to this is to stick a 'share' button everywhere, but this is hardly a real solution.

The problem is Apple's slow pace of change means they're losing their competitive advantage. I'd argue the big change that has kept the iPhone successful even as Android was beginning to catch up several years after the first iPhone was the (1) all metal design that came with the iPhone 4 & (2) the smoothness of their UI. Now with phones like the HTC One, the durable/water resistant series from Sony and the rumor that Samsung is going all metal with its next generation, the first advantage is going. The second went with Android Jelly Bean which mostly fixed Android's laginess. I just don't see anything coming along that will significantly differentiate them in the future, both the iPhone 5 and 5S really didn't offer anything as compelling as the build quality of the 4.

The iPhones main remaining advantages are its user friendliness and the relative strength of its app store. I'd argue the first is over-exaggerated, and even if it is such a large factor, the sheer fact that it has already seen sizable portions of the older generation being enticed into smartphones makes the next step of moving to a new UI a relative cinch. Effectively Android phone makers/Google can capitalize on the market Apple helped create. With the build quality gap diminishing and Android device prices coming down, while iPhone prices remain largely unchanged I think the incentive to switch will rise.

The App Store's strength is largely a factor of the revenue that it brings in for app creators. Yes, no doubt iOS apps are generally pricier and it's users more willing to pay. But with the dominance in market share for Android in developing markets, even if their consumers are poorer, it's only a matter of time before at the very least app makers move from the iOS first, Android second model to a simultaneous release. From there I think it will be a steady decline for iOS.

Syrian woman blasts McCain at town hall meeting

chingalera says...

Gotta give it up to her for being able to look Skeletor in the face standing so close. Once she started speaking with passion he was then compelled to turn his gaze from the floor to her face.....(cringe) I couldn't have met that snivelingly-sinister gaze as she did, YOW!


I'd imagine (and tout the idea constantly when people start bitching about being powerless in these situations) a most effective impact would be had in the form of protest through boycott:
For instance, the entire country buys no gasoline for a week, a month, etc.
Protest prison system woes and completely fucked drug laws by hitting more commodities, boycott cotton and coffee for six months and watch 'em squirm.

Week off Work protests stretch into month off work.
Laws violating the human rights of retail employees, the ethical treatment of squirrels in public parks, pick a cause and demand change through withdrawing your capitol and watch the cockroaches scatter!

Shut down the predictable meatbag habits and watch the shit change dramatically.

We are heading towards planet lock-down and we can make it easy for Babylon, or a pain in her ass.

Apple Creating Technology To Help Cops Hide Police Brutality

entr0py says...

I don't know, the idea that Apple has some plans to remotely lock down their phones doesn't make me want to blow anyone up, it just makes me not want to buy an iPhone. But everyone takes the news differently.

artician said:

USA! Creating more terrorists every day!

NSA Data Used by IRS For Tax Fraud

bmacs27 says...

Privacy and freedom are orthogonal. Privacy both grants freedom and takes it away. You're talking like there is a clear path for a centrist to take on this matter. My thought experiment was meant to expose a hypocrisy in too commonly held ideals. "Information should be free!" is often taken to mean that we should be able to access whatever information we want. On the other hand, "big brother" is a pejorative describing dystopian violations of individual privacy that reasonable people holding the former position often use.

We can't have it both ways. Either we get to know what people are up to (e.g. terrorists, banks, lobbyists, politicians, government agencies, etc) while coping with oversight of our own activities. Or we lock down all the information and cope with the inevitable cheat avoiding detection.

You can play the game of trying to break it down case by case, but the fact is surveillance can't really be implemented piecemeal. Once you decide to collect the information, you sort of get what you get.

newtboy said:

I prefer a world not governed with either/or questions and ideas consistently involving only extreme ends of the spectrum, but rather one where reasoned compromise and rational forethought rule the day.
Sadly I seem to be a minority.
If I must choose one over the other, I would always choose the choice that offers more freedom, and I realize that freedom is dangerous.

Military Drill in Miami ~ Training Exercize, Shots Fired

chingalera says...

@aaronfr-I can't elucidate more than a gut-feeling on the matter and a few questions perhaps.... Why in the fuck are they doing this and who is in charge?

What is the great necessity for such "readiness" and at whom would such an operation be directed?? The "invisible" terrorists who threaten the "American way of life, fuck you very much" OR as a means of overwhelming control should an open-ended lock-down occur and never end?

At face value, it's scary ball-flexing by the MIC who is used to doing whatever the fuck they deem necessary to maintain their control over the world full of slaves who are drunk playing the system's games by the system's rules, and it's complete insanity.

The only terrorists are an illusion created by the real terrorists, the 1 fucking percent.


OH, and they frequently use random events like a couple of punk Muslim freaks making homemade bombs to further their process of control-Opportunistic, scheming power-hungry control-freak sickoid sociopath inbred cunts, all.

How to share games on the PS4

RFlagg says...

The current XBox allows you to borrow, rent games. You can buy and sell used games without any issues as well. The upcoming XBox One however allows a title to be resold only once through a very specific process that they haven't revealed yet. You can't borrow a friends copy of a game, and I'd presume you can't take your game to their house to play there unless the game is tied to your account not just your XBox One... Either way...

As Jinx noted, this was likely done to appease the publishers. They've been wanting to get rid of the used game industry for some time (an industry I don't get anyhow, you'll give me less than half the used price of a game, then sell it for $5 less than a new copy... why buy used if it is only $5 less?).

The question becomes, as noted before, if the publishers make it worth Microsoft's time and losses due to that policy then it will work out, but if they support Sony just as well, or even after a short delay, then Microsoft gambled wrong. They are going to lose sales over the policy. That, the fact the system needs to connect every 24 hours or it will lock down even single player use until it connects again...

To play games online with XBox Live you need a paid Gold account. You can play games on the PS3 without a PS Plus account, but there are rumors that the PS4 will require a paid PS Plus account to play multiplayer. That will just be leveling the playing field, and if you still don't need a paid account to access Netflix (you need a paid Gold account on XBox to get Netflix or Amazon videos... and I think to access your YouTube account fully) on the PS4 then they'll still have an edge on the multimedia front.

Another of Sony's big upsets was pricing the PS4 $100 under the XBox One price... now I'm going to hazard a guess they had a couple prices ready to roll based on the XBox's price and decided to undercut, it could have been the planed price from the start, but I'd guess they wanted to scare Microsoft. I'm also guessing Microsoft will announce "new cost saving measures" right before the holidays and adjust theirs down, they are already behind the 8 ball with the used and borrowing game limits, I can't see them letting Sony getting a huge boost from price as well... if they reverse course on borrowing/used games they might be able to keep the price up "we've heard the complaints from our users and have decided not to implement that feature at this time" sort of thing, but I'm guessing they are too far into that to reverse that and will just price match.

EDIT: I should note that I'm mostly a PC Gamer, followed by XBox games then PS3... well iOS games are probably after PC Games but before console games... I like XBox better as a gaming platform, but my PS3 has better networking for Netflix and Blu-ray support (XBox One gains Blu-ray support) so it is my multimedia machine of choice. I don't think I'll upgrade either system at this time though...

eric3579 said:

I don't play video games, but for some reason i find this kinda interesting. So, for the xbox is it that your friend is not able to play your copy of any xbox game if you lend it to him? Also do you have to be online with your xbox to get a game to play, and does that mean you have to pay an additional monthly fee to be online with your xbox?

How it Feels (through Glass)

Deano says...

You're still getting a little too excited. This is a simulation. None of this is final. But even the promise of this does not obviate the need for a phone, The interface certainly does not have the richness of a phone. And I've not seen them suggest this is a phone replacement.

There are areas where it will struggle:

Simply being able to see a large amount of information from the device and without interfering with normal sight. With my phone I can read quickly and then be back in the real world by looking up. I don't see myself reading reams of data with this thing. I'd love to try though!

The interface is different/more limited. You lose haptic feedback and long-presses to expose different functionality. I'd love to see how good a feature-rich note-taking app will work. Voice-recognition is the most likely use.

But voice recognition remains difficult and performs variably.

And nothing to say of how slow it might be to change networks, adjust settings etc. Many things might be locked down to ensure a smooth experience for the average user.


So, integration (or how Glass will be useful).

Glass will serve as a nice entry-point into the phone experience. You could open the notifications in Glass but you might want to focus on recording some video.
Or you hover on a film poster and have IMDB open up the details on the phone. You might have a lot of these moments in a day. Imagine building up a list of pictures, quick ideas/notes, something useful someone said and then take your phone out only when you sit down. Everything is there for review. Glass might be a very good inbox.

I could instantly sync my photos. It's thus backed up on the phone straight away (and later on the net) and could be auto-shared - I don't need to issue copious voice instructions. Same with video. Glass will gather data but you might want it to hand stuff off to the phone. And net access isn't always guaranteed.

Looking up real world objects, scanning barcodes, even raw data and have it converted into usable data. You could hold up your phone but it's a nicer experience to have a document rendering onto your phone while you look at a page of data or even take a phone call. And you don't have to get the phone out of your pocket. Multi-tasking for the win!

I view pdfs and spreadsheets on my Note 2 all the time. I've not scanned much because it seems hit and miss and there's no cool software to do much with it. This would be amazing with my laptop. I often get printed documents or scraps of paper. Being able to instantly scan and digitise on the go would be almost revolutionary.

The point is Glass will be a very useful *extension* of the device you are already carrying around. Which people will be carrying around for many years to come.

I hope it's cheap as chips because getting it pinched off your face would be fun

xxovercastxx said:

I'd like to hear what sort of integration you have in mind, because I can't think of one that would be useful.

Glass is literally an Android phone in a new form factor. I haven't seen Glass doing anything yet that my phone doesn't do, the lone exception being attach itself to my face.

If they can solve the battery problem, I think they could bring Glass to market by 2015. That's not to say more traditional phones will be instantly be replaced but Glass will be able to fully replace the phone of those who do purchase it.

One Pissed Off Democrat in Michigan Speaks Up

renatojj says...

@bareboards2 you make a good point, the villification of labor is very bad, I would also add that it's as bad as the villification of profit.

What really should be villified is government stepping in to solve issues with laws.

In a truly free market, unions, cartels, consumer groups, certification services (and many other kinds of associations and corporations I couldn't even begin to imagine) would each fight freely for their own special interests, as long as they didn't recourse to laws and force, which often lead to more problems and injustice. That's the real issue here.

There's a difference between being against unions, and being against unions that use government to get their way with one-sided laws, because the latter is what locks down the labor market imposing all kinds of hidden costs on society.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon