Thanks, agreed. IMO, the test instrument business that was spun off as Agilent and later again as Keysight really should have retained the Hewlett-Packard name.
It's a crime this company carries the name of Bill Hewlett and David Packard .
Meanwhile Judge Aileen Cannon reprimanded Jack Smith in the "national secrets stored in a bathroom and obstruction" case for filing a document 23 words over the limit. Trump gets away with threatening judges, court staff, and witnesses with a slap on wrist.
I'm going to let some impulsive rich brat who paid $36B too much for a social media company, only to tank it and transform it into his own personal political misinformation machine to handle all my finances? Riiiiight.
Yea, but Trump knows Putin is a good guy and Trump declassified those secrets anyways, just by thinking about it, so no way that "intel leak" to Russia (which really wasn't an intel leak because it was declassified) could have caused any damage. (/s)
I'm surprised this isn't studied and reported on much now, or at least I haven't seen it. Trump and the Republicans indirectly killed some non-zero number of Americans with misinformation and the general politicization of the pandemic. If we ever experience another pandemic with a virus that is as deadly as ebola but with a longer period of time before symptoms are evident, Republicans are going to kill many more people.
I'm typing this on a ten year MacBook Pro that is running a currently supported version of MacOS and runs as fast as the day I bought it. I have two MacBook Airs that are eleven years old and still in secondary service. I have a pile of Dell and Lenovo Windows laptops of similar age that can still run but are basically doorstops or suitable for beater Linux or BSD machines, definitely not daily drivers.
What did Jim Jordan know about the insurrection and when did he know it?
This pose was specifically intended for tee shirts, banners, and protests. There's going to be a lot of money made off this picture.
This article is written like a security consulting firm pamphlet.
Putin would promise Trump limitless wealth, a fresh new wife, and oligarch status for residence in Moscow. Trump would enjoy this status until he was no longer of use to Putin.
Is the Secret Service actually empowered to stop a former official (not in office) from doing anything? It's my understanding former office holders can waive SS protection, so I would presume compliance with SS recommendations or orders is purely optional. Of course there's nothing stopping SS from phoning Jack Smith to let them know Trump just boarded a plane to Moscow....
This probably isn't of interest in the GA indictment in which Trump is commenting about, but I'd have to imagine Jack Smith is taking notice that a criminal defendant accused of mishandling classified information is joking about flying to Russia. It's plausible that Trump has classified information at other properties. While less plausible as Trump is a total dope, it's technically possible he's got classified information digitized and ready to go with him to Russia. This should be setting off alarm bells everywhere. Anyone else with four major indictments with 91 charges would have been locked up in jail by now.
Who says he has to forfeit campaign donations? He can just have it all funneled to some Swiss bank account or Bitcoin. His followers are total morons and will gladly send whatever money they have, wherever he's located.
I think there was going to be a conference. Trump may or may not have produced the "total exoneration" document he's been crowing about. If he did, it undoubtedly would have been the same drivel cited in the indictment as fabricated misinformation/lies. If he didn't, he'd say it was still being finished. Either way, the conservative world would be citing the document as proof of his innocence. I think the document is merely a distraction. Trump was going to use this conference as a call to arms directed at his idiot thug horde. He's badly wanting to launch January 6th 2.0 against Fulton County. I think he backed off when his lawyers told him he'd end up in a jail cell until trial. This is all total speculation on my part, but quite plausible I think.
They'll blame it on renewables, even thought it's only like 9% of Texas' power, and they'll ironically complain there's not enough coal and gas fired generation plants.
Indeed. An old EE mentor told me once that most component aging takes place the first two weeks of operation. If it operates for two weeks, it will probably operate for a long, long time after that. When you're burning in a piece of gear, it helps the testing process if you put it in a high temperature environment as well (within reason) to place more stress on the components.
We're talking about law enforcement agencies, not an IT department. Of course it's technically possible to image a machine quickly. However, there are all kinds of steps and rules for chain of custody, transporting evidence, cataloging it, storing, examining it, etc. and a finite number of personnel to perform the work. Revisiting the child pornography example I used, fingerprints and DNA evidence on equipment could be quite relevant to a case. There may even be a need to examine hard drive platters (old school spinning disk, not SSD obviously) to determine if there was data deleted in the past. It's rather simplistic to say it's a matter of just imaging and returning as quickly as possible. I agree the equipment being gone often presents a hardship for a defendant, but arguing that it's intentionally set up this way to inflict cruelty ignores the reality of investigations.
How is a law enforcement agent staring at some workstations and computers to know what equipment was involved in the alleged crime they are raiding the facility for? If the FBI was raiding a home for child abuse and pornography, there's no way they have the access or expertise at the time of a raid to know the server in the corner is only for Mastodon, the box over there is just a Linux firewall, and that box over there is a porn server. There's no practical way to trust a defendant on site as to what is relevant to an investigation or not. I agree that unnecessary confiscation is a problem, but in general I don't think the ill intent is there. I'm not a law enforcement officer, nor am I lobbying in any way for them, I'm just putting myself in their shoes in this situation.