As for having an interest in guns, he owned an AR-15, so must have had some interest there.
He was wearing a Demolition Ranch Tshirt. It's a popular YouTube gun channel.
Personally, I want Jon Stewart. He’s not perfect, but there’s not a single person on the planet better equipped to take down Trump.
Stewart would be terrible for it.
Smart guy, great at calling BS, but he's continued to preach understanding and cooperation in the post Trump world in a way that, plainly, isn't possible when the American right operates in pure bad faith at basically every turn.
Take all the issues Obama had getting walked all over because he tried to work with the GOP and amplify it.
Zitron's newsletter Where's Your Ed At is generally worth the read.
He also has the Better Offline podcasts. Most weeks it covers largely the same material as the newsletter if that's more your thing.
As somebody that's a paying Kagi user and generally happy with the service, it is interesting seeing exactly where the tradeoffs are.
While I'd say Kagi pretty much universally returns better results for technical information or things like recipes where it deprioritizes search spam, it's also pretty clear that there are other areas where the absence of targeting hurts results. Any type of localized results, e.g., searching for nearby restaurants or other businesses tends to be really hit or miss and I tend to fall back to Google there.
Of course, that's because Kagi is avoiding targeting to the point where they don't even use your general location to prioritize results. It's an interesting balancing act and I'm not quite sure they've hit the sweet spot yet, at least for me personally, but I like the overall mission and the results for most searches so I'm happy with the overall experience currently.
Searches are supposed to be fast at giving you the answer you're looking for. But that is antithetical to advertising.
And we have evidence that this is exactly why it happened, too:
https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/
While I'd highly recommend giving either the article a read or the companion podcast a listen because Ed Zitron did some fantastic reporting on this, the tl;dr is that a couple of years ago, there was direct conflict between the search and advertising wings of Google over search query metrics.
The advertising teams wanted the metrics to go up to help juice ad numbers. The search team rightly understood that there were plenty of ways they could do so, but that it would make for a worse user experience. The advertising team won.
The head of the advertising team during this was a man named Prabhakar Raghavan. Roughly a year later, he became the head of Google Search. And the timing of all this lines up with when people started noting Google just getting worse and worse to actually use.
Oh, and the icing on the cake? Raghavan's previous job? Head of Yahoo Search just before that business cratered to the point that Yahoo decided to just become a bing frontend.
Zitron is fond of saying that these people have names and it's important that we know who's making the decisions that are actively making the world of tech worse for everyone; I tend to agree.
Fleet yaw is a different phenomenon that impacts terminal ballistic performance. It's essentially a way of describing why some projectiles tumble and fragment after impact while others will tend to remain more stable and pass straight through for longer.
The projectile AoA being described in that context is only a couple of degrees. It's enough to change how the round behaves after hitting something, but it's not the type of in-flight wild tumbling that results in keyholing on a target.
Already happening. Required training hours were roughly doubled a couple of weeks ago effective Jan 1:
That said, this was a state trooper. GSP have long been known for a culture of cowboy recklessness and special treatment codified into law. They report up directly to the Governor and are explicitly excluded from many of the restrictions put on local police (the moniker God's Special People has been around for decades for a reason). They are one of the few major agencies in the state that still refuses to use body cameras, for example.
Institutionally, it's a group set up to be and that views itself as special enforcers that are above the restraints put on others. GSP is routinely involved in high speed pursuits that end in either a fatal accident or a shooting.
More training is always a good thing, but I'll just say I was unsurprised a trooper was involved here.
Tracking, arrival timer and an easy app.
The fact that they would actually show up.
Where I live, before Uber you needed to call the cab company at least an hour before you wanted to get anywhere (in a city that you can get pretty much anywhere in 15 minutes). The dispatcher would tell you someone will be there in 20 minutes and, if you were lucky, somebody might show up in 45. Before Uber, there was more than one occasion where I ended up stranded downtown until 4 or 5am after the bars had closed at 3:00.
Being able to request a ride, having someone reliably show up, and show up reasonably close to when they said they would was an absolute game changer at the time.
Also worth noting: 2K is incredibly toxic and regular paint filter masks are useless for preventing it from getting into your lungs. It's supposed to be used while wearing positive pressure ventilated PPE.
Probably not the best choice for redecoration on the move.
They had several cases along these lines involving several agencies, and I feel like people don’t understand the underlying legal idea - rule making power belongs to Congress. Federal agencies under the executive branch that have rule making powers receive those powers by Congress delegating it to them in a limited fashion through legislation.
Nitpick: rule making power does belong to executive agencies (at least until this SCOTUS decides to reverse Chevron deference). Law-making power resides solely with Congress.
What this means, as you suggest, is that Congress sets up statutory bounds within law, then the responsible executive agencies create rules interpreting them and defining how they'll be enforced. Where cases like this one go wrong is when the agency oversteps the bounds of the law as passed by Congress. At that point, the agency has engaged in creating new law rather than rules, which is why the courts swat them down.
I agree with your overall gist, just feel that's an important distinction to understand the situation.
That excellent quote of the text you provided spells out that any modifications to a gun that allows any more than a single shot is to be prohibited.
Incorrect.
It prohibits any conversion to a machine gun. The previous sentence has just defined a machine gun. The "by a single function of the trigger" language is what's critical to this case and you're completely ignoring it. When reading laws, you use words however they're explicitly defined if a definition is provided, not how you think they should be defined or would be used in common speech.
Like I said, Gatling guns are pretty highly analogous. They produce what most people would consider automatic fire. They've also consistently been ruled to not meet the definition of a machine gun going back to at least the 1950s because they don't meet that single function of the trigger requirement.
The solution is to change the text of the law.
view more: next ›
commandar
joined 1 year ago
USSS details are heavily supplemented by locals for events like this. Even if the USSS team was relatively small, somebody -- whether it was USSS, local, or state police -- should have had a location that blindingly obvious secured. That building was literally the only real elevated position with clear line of sight in the vicinity of the stage. The fact that somebody could get up there without immediate security response is really almost unfathomable if it weren't for the fact that it happened.