The US intelligence community concluded Russia hacked emails to get Trump elected. Nevertheless Trump will be president.
Reality is like that, sometimes.
But the future CAN be changed. Step 1 is recognizing and accepting reality. Step 2 is taking action.
Unlike Mitch McConnell, who discounted clear evidence of an attack on our democracy because it profited his party (this time). He's broken his oath of office, and should be recalled. This isn't even a partisan issue.
Quote:
It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”
https://boingboing.net/2016/12/09/russia-hacked-2016-u-s-presid.html
[Originally published Dec 10, 2016 at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/aKey1XLRxx1. Subsequently, this reporting was confirmed and expanded into a detailed intelligence assessment, which Trump has mostly rejected]
2016/12/07
Actions, not words
Pay attention to actions. Appointing a radical climate change denier to head the EPA speaks far louder than all of the doubletalk, tweets, or meetings with Al Gore.
[Originally published Dec 7, 2016 at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/YrbN76nYjcj]
[Originally published Dec 7, 2016 at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/YrbN76nYjcj]
2016/11/23
We should have paper ballots and meaningful automatic recounts always
1. Now that this has been raised, it'll be a divisive issue forever until put to rest with actual recounts, not just statistical analysis.
2. This is not a partisan issue; we should all want accurate results.
3. I would be surprised given other data whether this would change the result of the election. But it's worth doing for 1 and 2.
4. For some reason which defies logic apparently only the candidates can request recounts. Jill Stein is also pushing for recounts despite having zero chance of winning, which seems like a win/win to me.
5. Recounts should be automatic in all races and a paper trail for each vote cast is the most reliable state of the art we have for doing this. I've been saying this for over a decade now as do most software engineers who look into the problem.
Ref: https://www.gregpalast.com/exclusive-jill-stein-just-called-green-party-filing-recount-michigan-wisconsin-pennsylvania/#more-12950
[Originally published Nov 23,2016 on Google+ at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/6tLPezgPnUR]
2. This is not a partisan issue; we should all want accurate results.
3. I would be surprised given other data whether this would change the result of the election. But it's worth doing for 1 and 2.
4. For some reason which defies logic apparently only the candidates can request recounts. Jill Stein is also pushing for recounts despite having zero chance of winning, which seems like a win/win to me.
5. Recounts should be automatic in all races and a paper trail for each vote cast is the most reliable state of the art we have for doing this. I've been saying this for over a decade now as do most software engineers who look into the problem.
Ref: https://www.gregpalast.com/exclusive-jill-stein-just-called-green-party-filing-recount-michigan-wisconsin-pennsylvania/#more-12950
[Originally published Nov 23,2016 on Google+ at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/6tLPezgPnUR]
2016/10/11
There is an elephant in the corner: It's not "Locker room talk"
There are a bunch of people this week tiptoeing around an elephant in the corner, pretending it's a hatrack. We need to call this out in each and every instance and point out there is a FREAKING ELEPHANT IN THE CORNER.
It is not "locker room talk".
It is not "bad language".
It is not "the way men talk with each other".
It is not "just words".
Donald Trump in 2005 boasted that he habitually sexually assaulted women. Let's get that nailed down from the start, because apparently some people don't believe the Department of Justice:
"Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape."
-- https://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault
Trump has chosen to deflect and minimize. A bunch of his supporters are choosing to go along. By focusing on the words, they pretend that everybody is upset about some "bad language" and "blowing it out of proportion". They pretend that Trump's non-apology apology is enough and everybody should just move forward and ignore the elephant.
(This lets supporters avoid having to confront the fact that they've been fooled by a dangerous narcissist. It's painful to do this for them; there are huge real world consequences for some Republicans too. But they are enabling Trump's candidacy and for that they bear responsibility.)
I'm guessing nobody who supports Trump would read this. But if you do, or if you know someone who does -- please carefully read the article below. It talks about the issue of minimization of abusive behavior in a family context. It applies equally well to the Trump candidacy.
Finally, any time someone says this is about "just words" or "locker room talk" or "the way men talk" just tell them: No.
We're going to use the correct words -- the best words. It's about sexual assault.
(AFTER we establish that: We can, if we can stomach it, discuss whether he really habitually sexually assaulted women, or whether he just habitually lied about doing it. Either one disqualifies him from even getting close to being President in any sane universe.)
http://flyingmonkeysdenied.com/2015/12/02/why-minimizing-narcissistic-abuse-is-always-wrong/
[Originally published on Google+ at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/HHt2iMNbShS on Oct 11, 2016. Subsequent events have confirmed my view of Trump's behavior, and of his supporters.]
It is not "locker room talk".
It is not "bad language".
It is not "the way men talk with each other".
It is not "just words".
Donald Trump in 2005 boasted that he habitually sexually assaulted women. Let's get that nailed down from the start, because apparently some people don't believe the Department of Justice:
"Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape."
-- https://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault
Trump has chosen to deflect and minimize. A bunch of his supporters are choosing to go along. By focusing on the words, they pretend that everybody is upset about some "bad language" and "blowing it out of proportion". They pretend that Trump's non-apology apology is enough and everybody should just move forward and ignore the elephant.
(This lets supporters avoid having to confront the fact that they've been fooled by a dangerous narcissist. It's painful to do this for them; there are huge real world consequences for some Republicans too. But they are enabling Trump's candidacy and for that they bear responsibility.)
I'm guessing nobody who supports Trump would read this. But if you do, or if you know someone who does -- please carefully read the article below. It talks about the issue of minimization of abusive behavior in a family context. It applies equally well to the Trump candidacy.
Finally, any time someone says this is about "just words" or "locker room talk" or "the way men talk" just tell them: No.
We're going to use the correct words -- the best words. It's about sexual assault.
(AFTER we establish that: We can, if we can stomach it, discuss whether he really habitually sexually assaulted women, or whether he just habitually lied about doing it. Either one disqualifies him from even getting close to being President in any sane universe.)
http://flyingmonkeysdenied.com/2015/12/02/why-minimizing-narcissistic-abuse-is-always-wrong/
[Originally published on Google+ at https://plus.google.com/115608553892438743738/posts/HHt2iMNbShS on Oct 11, 2016. Subsequent events have confirmed my view of Trump's behavior, and of his supporters.]
2016/10/09
The many meanings of "custodial parent"
Today I Learned: The term "custodial parent" has yet another distinct meaning on top of the five I already knew about. Some of these are almost but not quite the same as each other. Pay attention, there will be a quiz later.
"Custodial parent" can mean:
1. The parent who has physical responsibility for a child in question at a particular instant in time, used when talking about custody schedules.
2. The parent who has the majority of the physical custodial instants in the sense of #1 when compared to a co-parent, across some predetermined regular time period which is context dependent.
3. A parent who has physical responsibility for a child all of the time ("sole physical custody"), except when delegated to others or during visitation with the other parent.
4. The parent who receives net nonzero child support from a co-parent for one or more children. (Terminology used by California Department of Child Support Services.)
5. The parent at whose home the child in question sleeps a majority of the nights in a year, to amount to at least 1/2 of the nights in a year (rounding up), or if the parent is not at their regular home on a particular night, then the child either sleeping at their regular house or sleeping where the parent is counts. (IRS rules for form 2441). Note this can be different from #2. Also there are special rules for parents who work nights.
6. The parent with the legal right to make educational, medical, and other major decisions about a child ("legal custody").
The "noncustodial parent" is the parent who is not a custodial parent. (Both parents can be noncustodial in the sense of #5, and a parent can be "noncustodial" in the sense of #4 but "custodial" in senses 1,2,3,5, and 6. And of course with multiple children, one can be both custodial and noncustodial with respect to different children simultaneously for all of these senses.)
[Originally published on Google+]
"Custodial parent" can mean:
1. The parent who has physical responsibility for a child in question at a particular instant in time, used when talking about custody schedules.
2. The parent who has the majority of the physical custodial instants in the sense of #1 when compared to a co-parent, across some predetermined regular time period which is context dependent.
3. A parent who has physical responsibility for a child all of the time ("sole physical custody"), except when delegated to others or during visitation with the other parent.
4. The parent who receives net nonzero child support from a co-parent for one or more children. (Terminology used by California Department of Child Support Services.)
5. The parent at whose home the child in question sleeps a majority of the nights in a year, to amount to at least 1/2 of the nights in a year (rounding up), or if the parent is not at their regular home on a particular night, then the child either sleeping at their regular house or sleeping where the parent is counts. (IRS rules for form 2441). Note this can be different from #2. Also there are special rules for parents who work nights.
6. The parent with the legal right to make educational, medical, and other major decisions about a child ("legal custody").
The "noncustodial parent" is the parent who is not a custodial parent. (Both parents can be noncustodial in the sense of #5, and a parent can be "noncustodial" in the sense of #4 but "custodial" in senses 1,2,3,5, and 6. And of course with multiple children, one can be both custodial and noncustodial with respect to different children simultaneously for all of these senses.)
[Originally published on Google+]
2016/08/06
Projection
And the projection ramps up, right on schedule:
"She is a totally unhinged person. She's unbalanced. And all you have to do is watch her, see her, read about her,” Trump said during a campaign rally in Windham, N.H., Saturday evening. “She will cause — if she wins, which hopefully she won't — the destruction of our country from within."
(Does the situation, objectively considered, match the words only when target and speaker are reversed? Projection.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/06/trump-in-series-of-scathing-personal-attacks-questions-clintons-mental-health/
[Originally published on Google+. Note: On Aug 2, 2016, four days before this, the campaign manager for Donald Trump, Paul Manafort, secretly met with and gave internal polling data to Konstantin Kilimnik, a known affiliate of Russian intelligence agencies.]
"She is a totally unhinged person. She's unbalanced. And all you have to do is watch her, see her, read about her,” Trump said during a campaign rally in Windham, N.H., Saturday evening. “She will cause — if she wins, which hopefully she won't — the destruction of our country from within."
(Does the situation, objectively considered, match the words only when target and speaker are reversed? Projection.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/06/trump-in-series-of-scathing-personal-attacks-questions-clintons-mental-health/
[Originally published on Google+. Note: On Aug 2, 2016, four days before this, the campaign manager for Donald Trump, Paul Manafort, secretly met with and gave internal polling data to Konstantin Kilimnik, a known affiliate of Russian intelligence agencies.]
2016/03/03
Apple Says "No" To Forging the One Ring
Basically, Apple is being ordered to help forge the One Ring, and is saying "No."
It falls in the category of things that might possibly seem like a good idea at the time, but in hindsight, are terrible, no good, very very bad ideas that later on you wish you could send someone back in time to prevent.
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-gets-backing-in-fbi-iphone-case-from-aclu-privacy-groups-tech-titans/#ftag=CAD590a51e
[Originally posted on Google+]
It falls in the category of things that might possibly seem like a good idea at the time, but in hindsight, are terrible, no good, very very bad ideas that later on you wish you could send someone back in time to prevent.
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-gets-backing-in-fbi-iphone-case-from-aclu-privacy-groups-tech-titans/#ftag=CAD590a51e
[Originally posted on Google+]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Suspended by the Baby Boss at Twitter
Well! I'm now suspended from Twitter for stating that Elon's jet was in London recently. (It was flying in the air to Qatar at the...
-
Well! I'm now suspended from Twitter for stating that Elon's jet was in London recently. (It was flying in the air to Qatar at the...
-
We're doing a lot of daily meetings these days. Often they're a waste of time; sometimes they're alifesaver. I think they'...
-
Clay Shirky recently wrote up some thoughts on algorithmic authority, well worth reading: http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/11/a-speculativ...
