Syria is a prime example of a propaganda war. I have long thought this is why reporter's are being targeted by both sides, they interfere with the narratives of both sides by reporting facts.
We can't believe reports that come from those involved, they all clearly have an interest in preserving their narratives that excuse their actions. Without independent reporting on the ground, at best we're debating skewed versions of reality, and more likely pure fictions created by the involved parties.
That is their plan, because it denies a possibility of effective opposition to the actions they're hiding, skewing, or excusing.

Interesting and good, but it missed an opportunity to talk about another reason that Clinton removed the scrambling that reduced accuracy to ~100m in 2000:

It was fairly easily circumvented.

Your GPS device isn't sending anything TO the satellites -- just receiving FROM them. So, the scrambling had to be done on a system-wide scale; it couldn't skew your location 37m to the west and your friend a block away 62m northeast. So, every device in a particular area (that can see the same satellites) would be skewed by essentially the same distance and direction.

That means that all you needed to circumvent the scrambling was a GPS device relatively nearby at a known latitude and longitude. Then you took the GPS reported coordinates of that device and compared them to the known coordinates, and badda-bing you've got the skew figured out.

I remember that system being used to overcome the scrambling in the late 90's for robotics / AI competitions where things like early versions of drones or other robots had to autonomously navigate a maze or move towards some particular target coordinates.

Basically, if nerdy robotics enthusiasts could circumvent the scrambling, surely a motivated enemy military or terrorist group could too. So, there wasn't much point in continuing it. Ending the scrambling was a good thing for Clinton to do, but I'm sure that impracticality played just as much if not more of a part in his decision as benevolence towards citizens of the Earth / potential economic rewards for American companies did...

I understand, and "pollution per capita" is a logical argument. But from my point of view there are some critical problems and many flaws with following such reasoning. For example:

The US isn't the greatest emitter of Co2 per capita, but when that's brought up...the argument falls back to emissions in absolute terms. Many would say that that's hypocritical.

Wealth inequality is particularly bad in the US, with the top 20% of the population holding upwards of 88% of all wealth (while the total wealth of individuals isn't GDP, it does correlate with income flow). Doesn't this skew GDP per capita, holding the poor in the US to an unfair standard, vis a vis emissions? If it doesn't, then how is it unfair to poor, rural Chinese?

No international organizations agree on the definition of a "developing" country. Without this, aren't these types of arguments extremely subjective and open to abuse? The point being that there are very, very few "apples-to-apples" comparisons available. For example, would it be a fair comparison if I told you that China's per capita Co2 emissions exceeded the per capita emissions of the EU starting back in 2014?

But you're right...in that the US has polluted the most in absolute terms historically (with China catching up pretty fast). We didn't have a "God-given" right to do it; for most of it, we didn't even know that "it" (Co2) was a pollutant.

You're also right that as individual Americans we have more power to demand change. I understand and accept the dangers of climate change, and I very much want to do something about it. This is why I'm so frustrated with our current administration.

I just want you to understand that I'm not strictly pro-US and/or anti-China. In my opinion, climate change is giving us one resource to either take advantage of or to squander. That resource is time. And time isn't going to make accommodations for any nation, big or small, rich or poor.

This is why I'm troubled by a government like the CCP, that has plans to accelerate their emissions. We know better now (re. Co2), and so such actions on their part are unreasonably selfish. They know their actions will likely hurt or kill all of us, and yet they continue...with the hope that other nations will sacrifice so much as to be properly weakened while they themselves are strengthened.

I understand that in a perfect world, we'd have an equality of outcome. Wouldn't that be great? But we don't have the time left to make most of South America, much of Asia and virtually all of Africa economic equals. What we can do is get our own emissions down to as close to zero as possible, and help these nations build up an infrastructure using green energy. In this way, maybe we can try to foster at least an equality of opportunity energy-wise. The Chinese government has the funds to not only fully transform their own nation, but also to help to some degree in the aforementioned global initiative. But instead of being honestly proactive, they're creating a new cold-war mindset. This is not only wasting time, but also resources (both their own and those of the US in seeking to maintain their strategic edge militarily) that could be better used to help the less fortunate.

So what do we do? Well, I'm not entirely sure. But I can tell you that having other countries paint the US as a villain in this issue, and China as a saint certainly isn't helping.

If you can find it check out the book about an Alice Cooper 1973 tour called "Billion Dollar Baby". James Randi was part of the tour as he designed the guillotine and gallows the band used. He's quite the character in the book.

That book is also interesting because it was written by Bob Greene, who became infamous for his own reasons. And the Cooper band members resented him for writing what they felt was a trashy skewed version of his time with them on that tour.

No, being on RT does not negate his reputation, but it tarnishes it, imo. It doesn't make him a liar, it makes him SUSPECT....less trustworthy, not untrustworthy.
I think using the reporter's chosen organization's reputation as one piece of evidence to make that determination is proper, I think we may just disagree on the weight we give that piece of evidence.

I explained that he doesn't have to stoop to the level of demagogue to serve the propaganda machine by lending them his reputation, and that harm's his rep. He may be 100% honest and factual, but he still helps spread obvious propaganda just by his presence, and I think both he and they know it well, and that's a huge disappointment from him for me.

Yes Chomsky is a good example of how, even though he's correct in his assertions, he gives a skewed view by omitting a comparison with the only alternatives (in speeches).

Again, imo, all news is suspect, there is hardly an example of "hard hitting journalism" in main stream media today that's not tainted with bias either by the reporters or the news organization that employs them. I'm not special, I don't have access to good news, and I'm not sure I could recognize it if I did, at this point. I think most reporting done today is at least in part an echo chamber/bubble meant to reinforce bias, which is why it bothers me so much when one of the few decent reporters takes a job with a propaganda factory...choices matter, who you surround yourself with matters, and surrounding yourself with unapologetic liars should hurt anyone's rep, especially a reporter with a reputation for telling unbiased truth.

Being critical of power doesn't cut it for me if it's designed to hide or excuse other criticism of another power....that's why I need to see him be critical of Putin on RT to regain some trust...until then, bye Felicia.

I'd like to see footage of what happened directly before the slam. It's hard to judge whether the slam was justified or not when you don't have objective context. Witness testimony is inherently unreliable, as it is skewed by bias and students are far more likely to side with a fellow student over a cop.

Do you get your info from, faux or Trump?
I'm...wow...where to start?
"Neo-liberals" are anti war, so positive peaceful relations are what they're after, not illegal collusion and absolute capitulation to our (and our allies') detriment. The 'neoliberals' didn't even use the military to protect the Ukraine, even though we are bound to do so by treaties.
War profiteering companies are almost 100% owned and run by neocons, not liberals.

There is proof, publicly released proof. There is not yet a completed report submitted to congress, those take time to put together, verify, edit, recertify, sign off, and submit. 17 intelligence agencies have publicly stated they have plenty of 'proof', some hackers have gone on record as working on this project for the Russians at their direction, the methods and programs used have easily identified 'fingerprints' from previous Russian hacks.

The contents of the emails were completely innocuous, with absolutely no smoking gun. If you think differently, I think you've been duped by the fake news industry.
'No one cares' about the RNC emails because the Russians didn't release them, they weren't trying to hurt Trump, he's their dream president, a moron under their thumb that doesn't understand the idea of diplomacy, much less how to practice it. (That no one cares is totally not true, btw, I care...I even care that they were hacked, but I care far more that they were protected and helped repeatedly by a foreign nation they invited to illegally become involved in our election with the clearly stated intention of skewing our election for their benefit).
Sweet zombie Jesus, if Clinton had won after asking a national enemy to illicitly and illegally help her like Trump did, the right would be inconsolable and frothing at the mouth calling for revolution and blood.

...that and maybe use your tools properly (or a different one)?

Fingerboards or rollers work great, especially ones that mount to the fence that you can use to apply pressure from the top to help keep the piece of tipping. A sled/jig would have helped too.

But yeah, I learned the hard way how powerful table saws can be when a piece of 1/8" mdf I was cutting somehow skewed a bit, rode up onto the saw blade and was flung back into my abdomen. It felt like I got hit with a baseball bat and the welt it left was impressive. Never made that mistake again. It was frustrating too because I'm super cautious when it comes to hand placement, etc (push sticks, rollers, fingerboards all get used) - but I didn't really think about a piece of 1/8" mdf turning into a projectile!

I can't wait to be disappointed. Hollywood will once again destroy and skew a character's image to appease the public. Talk to me when Harley Quinn gets the lasso of truth, breaks it's bounds and makes Wonder Woman her bitch. Amazonian queen my ass, this will be just another attempt to get 16 year old girls to drag their sex starved hormone men to shell out money to get laid, and it'll work. At least for the women. This is exactly why I bring my own popcorn bucket to the movies, drill a hole in the bottom, and hope she doesn't ask for extra hot butter.

Think about it this way. Stack the corn trays just once and you just doubled your output for a given area.

You're right about getting less mileage from taller crops. But every vertical layer would in theory still double the area you have to work with each time you added one.

Scale this up to a skyscraper sized building and you could supply any city with all the food it could need locally.

It probably could start to skew the market towards squatter plants as you say, but I can't see why most if not all of the things we grow now couldn't be viable. (doubly so if they ever nail the process of growing meat)

There just doesnt seem to be enough to be gained either by leaving or by staying in at this stage. A lose-lose situation.

Britain has avoided adopting Schengen rules and the Euro, so there is little it can complain about regarding the EU, really.

There is also little to cheer for, the Euro and Schengen area are not working as intended, rules are bent and broken at will, the "democratic" political process is at best incomprehensible, but apparently skewed toward unelected clerks applying social engineering solutions to imaginary problems.

Really leaving (not bindingly decided in this referendum) would lead to short term chaos and economic loss for both the EU and Britain. With what long term gains, exactly?

Democracy should be used to pick representatives who make responsible decisions, not to vote about what mood people are in on a given day.

It's also worth taking into account that google (and bing and yahoo) take your previous searches and perceived preferences into account in an attempt to guess what you're searching for.

If they think you're pro-Democrat anti-Republican your searches and auto-completes are going to be skewed that way.

Of course, that doesn't explain pro-Bernie anti-Hillary, but it could depend on the implementation on google's side... which could be a justifiable management decision... which could be voter manipulation with an excuse. Or not.

OK...first, keep in mind this is the PRIMARY, not the election. Rules are designed by the individual parties.
In CA, for Democrats, it's an open primary, meaning Democrats and non affiliated voters may vote in the Democratic primary. Many primaries are closed, meaning only people registered in the specific party may vote in it's primary...I think the Republicans do that in Ca.
In many cases, if there's a question about someone being allowed to vote in a primary, usually in closed primaries, like all the people that had registered Democrat but had been re-registered as Republican or Independent in NY were still allowed to vote, but only on 'provisional' ballots. In this way, they fulfil the legal requirements of allowing them to vote, but still find a way to never count that vote, skewing the results...in this election skewing them for Clinton in every case, independents are not voting for her.
Provisional ballots exist so they can 1)have a way to allow people to vote when there's a question about them being 'properly registered', fulfilling their legal obligation and 2)so they can discard those votes if they wish. It is insane to me that they only have to allow the voter to vote, but are not required to ever COUNT that vote....a vote isn't a vote unless it's counted.

Yes, our system is totally broken. It was already seriously damaged, then electronic voting and Citizens United happened and the entire system is now an untrustworthy cash and carry commercial system paid for and controlled by <40 people.
At least that's how I understand it.

There's a difference between oppression and privilege. As a straight white male you start with advantages over other people. These aren't advantages of talent or intelligence, they're purely socially constructed for no good reason other than one group hoarding power and influence for centuries.

It's perfectly natural, but that doesn't make it right.

Individuals aren't responsible for the social fabric, but people should at least acknowledge their place in the scheme of things.

Also, I think it's important to note that 99.9% of whites deserve equal or more than what they currently have. The system is wildly skewed by the ultra-rich vacuuming up a massive share of wealth and influence. It's just that we deserve to live somewhat better, whereas many minorities deserve far better treatment than they've had historically and continue to have.

Knives are just as deadly as guns, guns simply allow you to kill people quicker. Of course, I consider a knife to be an actual knife, 3.5 inches or greater and not a simple pen knife.

As far as the statistic, I simply typed in Google something along the equivalent of "Number of violent crimes by country per capita". That was literally one of the first results. The per capita is important because obviously the greater population will skew the stats otherwise. The fact is that crime is going to happen as long as underlying social issues remain unfixed. What weapon you are hurt or killed with really doesn't matter.